The winning No case was not a rejection of shared purpose so much as a refusal to believe compulsion could manufacture it. The floor’s most-respected voice, an ex-soldier, argued that soldiers should stand together because they “wanted to be”.
That argument was reinforced by practical objections rather than grand theory. One No voter said, “Our armed forces need skilled professionals, not reluctant teens they have to babysit”, while another asked what taxpayers would gain by compelling people “who don't want to serve”.
Yes voters made the more affirmative case: a modern scheme could bring young people together where other institutions no longer do. Its strongest voice said “there is no longer a unifying element that encourages cohesion and community”; another pointed to a civilian alternative that “offered broad exposure to possible careers”.
The two sides often answered different questions. Yes was arguing for discipline, contact and opportunity; No was asking why the state should impose them before repairing the conditions that have damaged trust, with one voter insisting: “First you need to fix the problems causing people to feel that the social contract is broken”.
For a proposal about unity, the room’s own debate was revealingly divided over whether unity can be designed from above. In this self-selected online chamber, the more respected voices were not persuaded that shared purpose begins with an order.
22 Opinions
NO As an ex soldier one thing most British soldiers liked about HMF was we knew every soldier stood next to us in the line was there because they wanted to be. Whereas with some of the other European armies, the profession element could never be sure about the conscrpts dedication! I suspect the same is true of today service folk
Our armed forces need skilled professionals, not reluctant teens they have to babysit, and forced civic schemes breed resentment rather than unity.
There are many factors that influence the people of the UK, but there is no longer a unifying element that encourages cohesion and community. National service will create that point that creates that cohesion. Furthermore, by introducing it for those that are 16 to 21, it may help give then a greater perspective of the world and the options available.
Anyone suggesting that the best way to get young people engaged with the nation is to train them to fight and kill for causes they don't personally believe in is living in a fantasy land. Young people are disenchanted due to the cost of living, impossibility of getting on the housing ladder, AI sapping up careers left right and centre. Nothing that be solved with forced conscription.
The (now extinct) German system of "Bundeswehr" or "Zivildienst" aged 18 always struck me as imminently sensible - although it only applied to the chaps. The "Zivildienst" options ran the gamut from paramedic training to after school care assitants and offered broad exposure to possible careers in those diverse fields - time spent would usually have counted into subsequent training requirements. I don't see why this would not work applied to both sexes.
Compelling people to join organisations that reinforce class division is the worst possible idea.
A modern form of national service could bring people from different backgrounds together, build discipline and shared purpose, and strengthen community spirit.
I see reluctance to teach youngsters here. You will never get skilled or professional people if those that have the skills are too lazy to pass them on. This is the whole point. The military, discipline, some of our youngsters need that, sad but true. The cost, if they are in the military, they aren't getting benefits are they? Hopefully won't be getting into trouble, less strain on the justice system. I'm thinking of the practicalities.
Good idea when you actually drill down into the detail, most simply having to do 25 days community service over 7 years but hard to fund finacially in today's climate.
Though there's a lot of difference between 25 days volunteering and a year in the army. 25 days is too short to change or learn anything. Joining the army, even for a short while, needs non-pacifist beliefs which teachers have taught kids to refute, and fitness.