Conquer Club

... This is frightening stuff here, folks.

... Not being discussed on the news, again, is a huge shift away from the US Constitution, creating mandatory "voluntary" public service from our kids, complete with uniforms.

... Our youth are to be uniformed and "educated" at Federally created "campuses" (campi?).

... This passed the House. Now goes to the Senate.

... Germany's SA (aka Hitler Youth) started this way, as did the Soviet Youth Pioneers.

...

http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com/2009 ... he-senate/

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2210468/posts

http://www.weaselzippers.net/blog/2009/ ... house.html

...

The SA and Hitler Youth were different organisations. Although the SA were crushed by Hitler the Hitler Youth were unaffected by this.

Yeah and they even had SCHOOLS! (talk about indoctrination!)

Give us all a break! Having kids volunteer is a good thing. It helps the community and is one of the most effective tools for building self esteem. A lot of schools and towns have similar programs already, but making it a national program opens it up to kids who would have a hard time participating else.

Should we watch the program, make sure it is doing good things and not turning into something else? OF COURSE! Cmparing this program to Hitler Youth is OK only as a warning of what to avoid. We can distinguish... and that is the key!

I think the kids in my neighborhood shuold have to pick up trash, or mow the park etc. No problem in a little hard work. Now if I could just find a cute 18 yr old to mix me martini's in a bikini while the rest of them work, I would enjoy this program a lot.

i pay extra money for my kid to go to catholic school, partially for the UNIFORMS that they wear. as a kid, i attended private schools with mandatory uniforms, and you truly learn the measure of a person by their words and actions, and not by who has the fanciest jeans and snazziest Trapper Keeper (i just dated myself). i know they are discussing uniforms for all public schools in dallas. the former superintendent of schools in austin was from new orleans and he tried to make mandatory uniforms, but failed. i think they are a great thing for kids self esteem and a load off of a parents pocket book. my mom had three sons that were able to lighten her work load at home by being able to simply seperate the dark pants from the light shirts and wash them accordingly. community service is a wonderful thing, and i applaud the efforts.-0

The problem I have is the verbage of parts of the bill. The requirement for public schools taking certain grant money, that makes all students perform manditory service, is WAY beyond the Federal Governments scope. AmeriCore and other groups already got increased funding in other legislation, this bill opens the door to major oversteps by the Feds.

Encouraging community involvement, and rewarding it is one thing. Requiring all students or schools receiving grant money to serve (guess what, they won't be rich schools....), while funding a project to study the feasability of implementing it on a national level, that would require manditory service by ALL youths. That is WAY beyond what our government should be doing.

The issues I have with this bill, is not the service, nor the idea of getting our youth involved. It is the opening of means to which the government can mandate forced service by every person in the country.

It is the funding from the gov that they are cutting. This is the same as when the gov threatened to pull highway funding for states that wouldn't abide by the speed limit laws or drinking age standard. It isn't like they are fining the schools. Well within the federal scope, as opposed to the AIG bonus debacle.

... It's to be mandatory, folks. I think you're missing that (most serious) point.

... Read the links.

... Funny how a Republican doing this would be met with calls of "FASCISM!", while the left gets a free pass on MANDATORY schools of indoctrination (?).

... Screw choice, that only applies to abortions for the left.

...

The U.S. House of Representatives has approved a plan to set up a new “volunteer corps” and consider whether “a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people” should be developed.

The legislation also refers to “uniforms” that would be worn by the “volunteers” and the “need” for a “public service academy, a 4-year institution” to “focus on training” future “public sector leaders.” The training, apparently, would occur at “campuses.”

in terms of a simple question of ideology, do you have a problem with mandatory civic or military service? I mean i know they do it with males in korea here, it doesnt seem to be a huge point of contention, at least from what i gather.

Having said that Im not really a fan of what this seems to be doing in terms of spending and potential scope of operations either. It also seems like a sketchy move in terms of political strategy as this is bound to be widely unpopular for many in the intial stages.

I wouldn't have a problem with mandatory military service.

Nobunaga wrote:... It's to be mandatory, folks. I think you're missing that (most serious) point.

If its not mandatory, then you lose one of the main benefits and ethics, that is, that everybody HAS to do it.

My school comparison was because we already do believe in mandatory, universal education and for very good reason. Without education, there is no democracy. This is an extention of that education. Our job, our legislators job is to see that this is done in such a reasonable manner.

This part:

Nobunaga wrote:The U.S. House of Representatives has approved a plan to set up a new “volunteer corps” and consider whether “a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people” should be developed..”

confirms that the legislator's intent IS to be sure it IS a good program.

Nobunaga wrote: The legislation also refers to “uniforms” that would be worn by the “volunteers” and the “need” for a “public service academy, a 4-year institution” to “focus on training” future “public sector leaders.” The training, apparently, would occur at “campuses.”

As for the uniforms, again, if you allow kids to wear their own clothes, then it becomes far more about who someone is, instead of what they can do. You can say all you want about "choice". We simply cannot afford to buy my son the clothes that other kids wear. At third grade, for a boy, it is not a huge issue yet... but I also have 2 older sons and know full well this will not last.

As for the "academies" ... are you saying you don't think we should be training our future leaders? Seems to me this is just another name for a specialized college or secondary school.. things we have for other purposes. Again, we need to watch what is been taught/done, but to dismiss the whole thing is extreme.

got tonkaed wrote:Having said that Im not really a fan of what this seems to be doing in terms of spending and potential scope of operations either. It also seems like a sketchy move in terms of political strategy as this is bound to be widely unpopular for many in the intial stages.

Now this is a legitimate question/criticism. I will hold off on opinion until I see a few more details, but any expenditure, even very good ones, need to be questioned in today's world.

Nobunaga, you really are an idiot.

Nobunaga wrote:
The U.S. House of Representatives has approved a plan to set up a new “volunteer corps” and consider whether “a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people” should be developed.

The legislation also refers to “uniforms” that would be worn by the “volunteers” and the “need” for a “public service academy, a 4-year institution” to “focus on training” future “public sector leaders.” The training, apparently, would occur at “campuses.”

"Why "is" the "article" so full of "quotation marks"?"

I mean, it's like uniforms and campuses are sinister words that don't mean what you think they mean.

Snorri1234 wrote:I mean, it's like uniforms and campuses are sinister words that don't mean what you think they mean.

I was going to say the same thing, but you did so far more succinctly.

I mean, uniforms are kind of important, if kids are out doing public service work in public. It identifies them on being in a particular place on official business.

This is the purpose of uniforms.

Plus, one could argue that the Boy Scouts already fit the mold for all of the fear mongering Nobunaga is looking to achieve, but since Obama didn't start it, well...

I, personally, do not like the idea of having mandatory "volunteer" work for all minors. I mean, it is a good thing to do public service, but it should be by choice of either the parents or the kid. There are just some things that the government does not need to control. Let us do good on our own!

Jennybh wrote:I, personally, do not like the idea of having mandatory "volunteer" work for all minors. I mean, it is a good thing to do public service, but it should be by choice of either the parents or the kid. There are just some things that the government does not need to control. Let us do good on our own!

An interesting sentiment, but children are already required to do mandatory "homework" as well as report to mandatory "school", already.

The idea of mandatory public service, therefore, should truly only be seen as an extension of homework. I honestly fail to see how this is some kind of nefarious evil plot, and not simply a good way to help provide supervision to kids often left alone by working parents, or other considerations.

The only reason to fight this is to maintain the status quo of being lazy.

pimpdave wrote:

Jennybh wrote:I, personally, do not like the idea of having mandatory "volunteer" work for all minors. I mean, it is a good thing to do public service, but it should be by choice of either the parents or the kid. There are just some things that the government does not need to control. Let us do good on our own!

An interesting sentiment, but children are already required to do mandatory "homework" as well as report to mandatory "school", already.

The idea of mandatory public service, therefore, should truly only be seen as an extension of homework. I honestly fail to see how this is some kind of nefarious evil plot, and not simply a good way to help provide supervision to kids often left alone by working parents, or other considerations.

The only reason to fight this is to maintain the status quo of being lazy.

Mandatory Public Service should be used for those that owe a debt to society (which it currently is), not those that have done no wrong. If people so choose to do Public Service, then by all means do so, but don't force people into it. That really does take individual freedoms away. The US was founded on the freedom of being able to choose what you want to do with yourself (as well as a few other key things), making it stick out from the rest of the Western World that seem to view Group Rights over that of the Individual.

It is interesting, mandatory public service for students would put them at the same status as convicts.

Public service could be a reasonable idea, but only if they do it durring school hours. Children already go to school for upwards of 7 hours a day and then have several hours of homework to do. This means that they have to work more hours than most adults which is ridiculous.

Frankly most of what they teach in school is useless and the time could be better spent on other things.

... Somebody please explain to me what training future Public Sector Leaders would entail.

... That is the stated goal. Perhaps more "community organization"?

....

GabonX wrote:It is interesting, mandatory public service for students would put them at the same status as convicts.

Public service could be a reasonable idea, but only if they do it durring school hours. Children already go to school for upwards of 7 hours a day and then have several hours of homework to do. This means that they have to work more hours than most adults which is ridiculous.

Frankly most of what they teach in school is useless and the time could be better spent on other things.

I believe you would be surprised how comparatively harder students are working in countries compared to the United States. Certainly your number doesnt count the many different extracurricular options US students have. The question isnt really if they can, because that answer is almost assuredly yes.

As per nobunaga, although certainly i think its vague on purpose, you could argue that any skills that were obtained to benefit in the public sector probably could (and should) have some adaptability to the private sector as well. If they did not it would likely be viewed as a failing in terms of the program.

GabonX wrote:Frankly most of what they teach in school is useless and the time could be better spent on other things.

Ironically, you just voiced a MAJOR reason why mandatory service is a good idea.

This gives kids much more of a taste of what real work entails, including dealing with various people outside of the confines of a classroom. Further, going out in uniforms, in addition to identifying them (as noted above) and providing and equalizer amongst themselves, also allows them to better see how it is to be treated as "just one of the group" instead of as single individuals.

This is a good thing to know. It is PART of becoming free and individual citizens. Remember, there is a huge differance between even a high schooler and a true adult. Just look through forum posts, for some good examples. How much more the case when you truly enter the "real world". For those who go on to college, the time to see that "real world" is even more removed.

I actually think one major reason some of you disagree is that you are not currently past that juncture yourselves. That and, of course, some of you are not in the US and just have a differant base from which you judge.

This is, as someone said more like homework. Perhaps a better analogy, though is to chores. Most kids get chores at home. This is "chores" on the national level.

Nobunaga wrote:... Somebody please explain to me what training future Public Sector Leaders would entail.

... That is the stated goal. Perhaps more "community organization"?

....

I have not seen the curriculum. However, off hand, I would say that you would need managerial skills, public relations skills (as in dealing with people, not advertising), conflict resolution skills, plus specific skills for various jobs.

I don't know the exact statistics, but many professions, such as natural biologists are almost exclusively public sector jobs. In many cases, universities already have programs somewhat tailored to meet those needs, but they don't usually meet all the needs of these positions, because they are training individuals to be able to fill any number of positions. The goals of a government biologist are very, very differant from that of, say a timber manager or commercial fish farmer. Having to sit beside each other in class can certainly be a benefit, but unfortunately, that often does not happen. Instead, folks headed toward specific fields often segregate themselves.

This seems to be just a more official and direct approach. I see the fact that it is given as a goal from the outset is a big advantage.