Young adults have a right to be up in arms

The basis of student unrest, and the Occupy Wall Street movement, is the collapse of cultural and religious definition in the West. Even though the voices of dissent are ambiguous, with spokesmen unable to define precisely what they oppose, it is this very uncertainty that that lies at the centre of this malaise. It is that uncertainty itself that paradoxically has become the enemy.

Our myths and shibboleths are laid bare –exposed as empty promises and prohibitions. Competing faiths and religious doctrines simply accentuate the fact that clerics are propping up houses of cards. That Nothing dwells within.

Elections are shunned; choices blur becoming indistinguishable one from the other. Even when one governing party is replaced by another, the interests of the elites are entrenched, those of the majority ignored. Laws areseen to control rather than benefit. And, laws become tools of the establishment to deny the pleasures andpursuits of youth.

Seen everywhere are the excesses of a materialistic society that hurtles to environmental chaos, preferring to blind itself to its inevitable fate arguing any action would disturb its shabby entitlement.

So, what do youth do? Give in to that same pursuit of the material and demand their share immediately. Perfectly understandable.

gerryh said:

I think you need to rethink this Bear. What needs to be done is for society to stop pushing University as the be all and end all. Stop having the attitude that the "smart ones" go to University and the "dumb ones" go to trade schools. I'll tell you right now, it takes a hell of a lot of smarts, hard work, AND education to become a good auto mechanic these days. Welding is a lot more than arc welding 2 pieces of steel together, plumbing is more complicated than gluing abs.

Click to expand...

No doubt.

But you don't need the same over all education in higher mathematics or sciences to to turn a wrench.

The trades focus on specific elements of math, science, or what have you, that pertain to the trade. I know some trig and some metallurgical science, but I'm a fabricator, not just a welder. And what I know pertains specifically to the metals I specialize in. Furthermore, I may know how to get metal to do what I want or need it to do. But I don't fully grasp the whole of the science behind it like say Dex would.

I bet I know some of what Tonington knows about Salmonoids. But I wouldn't get the grades needed to take the same courses he did, or work in the field he does. But I could land a job as a fishing guide.

Which is my point.

This is where some kind of peace corps could come in handy. I wonder how many of those students would be willing to sing a contract whereby the government pays for their tuition in exchange for service to the province or country in return.

Machjo said:

This is where some kind of peace corps could come in handy. I wonder how many of those students would be willing to sing a contract whereby the government pays for their tuition in exchange for service to the province or country in return.

Click to expand...

Or a tour in the Armed Forces. With a clause exempting you from combat if you so wish.

CDNBear said:

Or a tour in the Armed Forces. With a clause exempting you from combat if you so wish.

Click to expand...

Honestly, I disagree with the notion of conscientious objection since sometimes conscription could be necesary in extreme cases. At least in the case of a peace corps they would not be required to sign such a non-combat agreement. On the one hand, they would not be trained for any combat role. On the other hand, in the event of a national emergency, they could still be transfered to military service if necessary since there would be no such contract.

The type of contract you're proposing could tie the government's hands in a serious way in the event of a national emergency.

Machjo said:

The type of contract you're proposing could tie the government's hands in a serious way in the event of a national emergency.

Click to expand...

How's that?

CDNBear said:

How's that?

Click to expand...

OK, I guess not that many people would necessarily sign up for a peace corps, so there would always be planty of others to conscript. But for the sake of argument, let's say we're in a recession, resulting in many more choosing to join that peace corps, and many of them among more able-bodied Canadians? You're right, it's not likely to be a major issue, but still, it's always better to play it safe, not to mention that as soon as tehre should be fear of conscription, suddenly every man and his dog might want to join the peace corps just to sign that contract. So it's probably best not to have such a contract.

Machjo said:

OK, I guess not that many people would necessarily sign up for a peace corps, so there would always be planty of others to conscript.

Click to expand...

Conscription is forced enlistment. How about voluntary service, and a GI Bill, with a non combat clause?

CDNBear said:

Conscription is forced enlistment. How about voluntary service, and a GI Bill, with a non combat clause?

Click to expand...

It just seems contradictory. How useful is a serviceman who can't be forced to fight? I suppse you could try to blackmail him by giving him the choice between mine clearing and combat service. Seeing the first option is more dangerous, I suppose it would be a good way to test his sincerity in avoiding a combat role I suppose!

Machjo said:

It just seems contradictory. How useful is a serviceman who can't be forced to fight? I suppse you could try to blackmail him by giving him the choice between mine clearing and combat service. Seeing the first option is more dangerous, I suppose it would be a good way to test his sincerity in avoiding a combat role I suppose!

Click to expand...

There vast segment of the Armed Forces whose MOS is non combat in theory, such as WFE techs.

FORCES.CA - Water, Fuels and Environmental Technician

There are also special services that do not necessarily require combat ready Troops to do. Such as DART.

CDNBear said:

Conscription is forced enlistment. How about voluntary service, and a GI Bill, with a non combat clause?

Click to expand...

I'm not so sure about that. I don't agree with conscription either, don't get me wrong. But I think if you're going to volunteer to serve, then you volunteer to serve, period. If non-combat is the only choice for some (and it's a very valid choice), then they don't volunteer.

I also, at times, think that some nations that have some sort of mandatory service requirement, not necessarily armed forces but some sort of service requirement, are definitely onto something. There's value in learning to be of service to the collective whole of society. Just a random thought.

CDNBear said:

There vast segment of the Armed Forces whose MOS is non combat in theory, such as WFE techs.

FORCES.CA - Water, Fuels and Environmental Technician

There are also special services that do not necessarily require combat ready Troops to do. Such as DART.

Click to expand...

Perhaps, but with all the equipment, salaries, training, etc. it can be expensive especially for an organization that guarantees employment for all.

for thzat kind of organization, you'd want:

1. salaries to be low enough to discourage sign-ups, since it would be intended more as a last resort for students graduating from high school in recessions and who feel uncomfortable borrowing for university for example.

2. Training and equipment costs might be unavoidable for them to do the work they need to do, but you might want it targetted more towards civilian purposes to contribute to the development of the economy, so it could include uran infrastructure construction and such too which the military doesn't do.

Sure the militaryu is an option too, but it is more specialized and so probably not ideal as an organizaiton which guarantees employment.

SLM said:

I'm not so sure about that. I don't agree with conscription either, don't get me wrong. But I think if you're going to volunteer to serve, then you volunteer to serve, period. If non-combat is the only choice for some (and it's a very valid choice), then they don't volunteer.

I also, at times, think that some nations that have some sort of mandatory service requirement, not necessarily armed forces but some sort of service requirement, are definitely onto something. There's value in learning to be of service to the collective whole of society. Just a random thought.

Click to expand...

West Germany did offer the option of military service or civilian service, though I believe civilian service was of a longer duration.

Machjo said:

West Germany did offer the option of military service or civilian service, though I believe civilian service was of a longer duration.

Click to expand...

Yep, I don't think that's a bad idea at all. Especially in today's world, my own generation has seen many 'career' changes in our lifetimes, the generation coming up has it worse. Which makes that often singular decision upon graduation from high school all the more important to get 'right'. I think service of some kind, military or civilian, would not only give a young adult the time that is perhaps necessary to really contemplate that choice but would give them a sense of purpose while they were doing so.

SLM said:

Yep, I don't think that's a bad idea at all. Especially in today's world, my own generation has seen many 'career' changes in our lifetimes, the generation coming up has it worse. Which makes that often singular decision upon graduation from high school all the more important to get 'right'. I think service of some kind, military or civilian, would not only give a young adult the time that is perhaps necessary to really contemplate that choice but would give them a sense of purpose while they were doing so.

Click to expand...

But I think Germany provides free education too, if not in university, then at least in some trade or professional school.

So the mentality was different (i.e. each individual is responsible for the development of not just himself but of the country). Canada is far more individualistic.

Machjo said:

But I think Germany provides free education too, if not in university, then at least in some trade or professional school.

Click to expand...

I'm a proponent of free education, I just don't think we can snap our fingers and make that a reality all of a sudden. Like I mentioned earlier, we have to build up to that and we need a solid plan to do so. Start small and aim high.

What we have is clearly not working because it keeps creating bigger and bigger divides.

So the mentality was different (i.e. each individual is responsible for the development of not just himself but of the country). Canada is far more individualistic.

Click to expand...

There are many who just want what they want and don't care about the rest, sure. But I'm not certain that it's really the majority of people that think that way. I think the majority care a lot about the collective, but we're just too damned busy trying to make both ends meet in the middle that we just don't have the time, or the energy, to really step up and do something about it. And so any kind of change ends up getting relegated to the more extreme or fringe aspects of the political spectrum and gets tied in with the more extreme rhetoric, thus change never really comes.

Machjo said:

Perhaps, but with all the equipment, salaries, training, etc. it can be expensive especially for an organization that guarantees employment for all.

Click to expand...

The Armed Forces guarantees employment for all?

1. salaries to be low enough to discourage sign-ups, since it would be intended more as a last resort for students graduating from high school in recessions and who feel uncomfortable borrowing for university for example.

Click to expand...

The salary is low. But the bulk of your necessities are provided.

2. Training and equipment costs might be unavoidable for them to do the work they need to do, but you might want it targetted more towards civilian purposes to contribute to the development of the economy, so it could include uran infrastructure construction and such too which the military doesn't do.

Click to expand...

It doesn't?

FORCES.CA - Construction Technician

Sure the militaryu is an option too, but it is more specialized and so probably not ideal as an organizaiton which guarantees employment.

Click to expand...

There is no employment guarantee in the Canadian Armed Forces, and the Forces are an extremely diversified organization.

CDNBear said:

The Armed Forces guarantees employment for all?

The salary is low. But the bulk of your necessities are provided.

It doesn't?

FORCES.CA - Construction Technician

There is no employment guarantee in the Canadian Armed Forces, and the Forces are an extremely diversified organization.

Click to expand...

What I meant was that it would be inapporpriate for an organization like the armed forces to guarantee employment for all, for various reasons, though the main one being the high salaries. Too many people would be willing to join, even among those not suited for the military. While the military is diversified to a degree, it's still specialized enough that it does not deal with all aspects of government services, such as education, health care, etc.

For an organization guaranteeing employment for all who wish to join, you'd want to offer salaries far lower than the private sector so as to discourage people joining it, the intention of course being that people would join it as a last resort. Secondly, since you might be dealing with people of a wide range of skills, abilities, intelligence, etc. to limit yourself to trades and professions which require more physical strength, etc. could be limiting, especially among those who are hard of hearing, with poor eyesight, out of shape, etc. in which case we may need to find them other types of work the military cannot provide. This could include everything from teaching and health care for the more capable to infrastructure construction, administration, tree planting, etc. etc. etc. for whatever might be needed.

CDNBear said:

It doesn't?

FORCES.CA - Construction Technician

Click to expand...

But then the military would need to be significantly redefined, whereby it would no longer be limited to work done on base, but also in civilian projects. Also, seeing that it's first and foremost supposed to be a fighting force, would you really want it to have to be bogged down by various civilian employment and training programmes, etc.?

Machjo said:

What I meant was that it would be inapporpriate for an organization like the armed forces to guarantee employment for all, for various reasons, though the main one being the high salaries. Too many people would be willing to join, even among those not suited for the military.

Click to expand...

It wouldn't have to offer employment for all, not even the Peace Corp offers placement for all. There are requirements that have to be met.

What high salaries are you referring to?

The pay is low. A GI bill would be applied to education only. But you still have to meet requirements to make it through basic and serve.

While the military is diversified to a degree, it's still specialized enough that it does not deal with all aspects of government services, such as education, health care, etc.

Click to expand...

Medical services...

FORCES.CA - Medical Officer

Paid Education...

FORCES.CA - Paid Education

Education in the field...

Operation ATTENTION

For an organization guaranteeing employment for all who wish to join, you'd want to offer salaries far lower than the private sector so as to discourage people joining it, the intention of course being that people would join it as a last resort.

Click to expand...

The salaries are low. Why does it have to be a last resort?

Secondly, since you might be dealing with people of a wide range of skills, abilities, intelligence, etc. to limit yourself to trades and professions which require more physical strength, etc. could be limiting, especially among those who are hard of hearing, with poor eyesight, out of shape, etc. in which case we may need to find them other types of work the military cannot provide.

Click to expand...

Nor can the Peace Corp.

This could include everything from teaching and health care for the more capable to infrastructure construction, administration, tree planting, etc. etc. etc. for whatever might be needed.

Click to expand...

Again, the Forces already do much of that.http://www.cefcom.forces.gc.ca/pa-ap/ops/attention/index-eng.asp

Machjo said:

But then the military would need to be significantly redefined, whereby it would no longer be limited to work done on base, but also in civilian projects.

Click to expand...

No it wouldn't. Those programs go beyond bases.

Also, seeing that it's first and foremost supposed to be a fighting force, would you really want it to have to be bogged down by various civilian employment and training programmes, etc.?

Click to expand...

Why would it be bogged down? They already do it.

Way back when, If my application for employment hadn't been accepted when it was in 08/'60 the army recruiting trailer was scheduled to come to town later that week..................?