Reply #22: Thanks for the response - [View All]

[Selwynn]

No we're not going to convince each other other wise, but we can at least have honest argumentation instead of dishonest argumentation.

"Except everywhere along the line in that situation there is choice. You can choose to go to college or not. You can choose to go to a school that doesn't require internships. You can choose a major that doesn't require an internship. You can probably choose where you're going to work. Not to mention, interns get paid."

There is not always choice, no matter how much you want to believe that there is. In order to get a high school diploma, there are some things you have to do, period, in order to do that. If you want to get a collage degree, there are some things you have to do period, no matter where you go. No matter where you go, if your going into education with a degree for example, it requires forced field work in order to graduate. And your statement above is refuted on the following grounds:

1) There is choice in my system as well
2) You cannot escape all mandatory requirements in society, and cannot escape mandatory internship requirements for certain kinds of work already.
3) You are incorrect that internships are always paid. Some internships are paid positions, many (especially education internships, which I know from first hand experience) are not.

So the argument presented in that paragraph is refuted.

"I don't see how this compares. Plenty of people drop out of school. Plenty never get high school diplomas. Is there even a penalty for not going to school? How is this even an obligation to society?"

The obligation I was referring to is that society forces us to get an education until a certain age. We have no choice in the matter until that age. So society already forces us to do some things. At the beginning of this thread, your argument centered around your indignation that society forcing people to do something, but not I've pointed out the numerous examples of where society already forces us to do lots of different things.

"You don't pay taxes to society, you pay them to the government. Considering just how much tax money the government spends oppressing people at home and abroad, I don't have much of a moral objection to people that avoid paying them."

1) Government is part of/a function of society
2) You most certainly to pay taxes to society, insofar as you pay taxes to maintain society, improve society, etc.
3) Your moral objection or lack thereof to people who refuse to pay taxes is irrelevant. The only issue here was to point out the ways that we are forced to do many things to contribute to the society in which we exist, and paying taxes is one of those things.

"Which ones? Drug laws? Gun Laws? Sodomy Laws? Prostitution Laws? If you break these, are you breaking your obligation to society? Are all of these necessary to a functioning society? Are all of these core things of value in the Democratic Party?"

This argument is also irrelevant the question at hand. The issue at hand is that you began this discussion by acting as though the reason a service program is wrong is because government shouldn't force its people to do anything or infringe on individual freedom. And as I have consistently pointed out over and over again THAT PARTICULAR argument is just incredibly weak. That doesn't mean you have to support a national service program, it just means you need to find a different reason for not supporting it. The point about the law is that the government as a function of our given society already sets restrictions on your individual freedom - you don't get to go murder your neighbor and not expect there to be consequences. Trying to shift the focus of the debate from pointing out that there are laws that we are "forced" to follow (doesn't mean we can't break them, it means that there is "enforcement" behind them - we break them and there may be consequences) to a debate over which laws are good and which ones aren't is a straw man.

"I like this one. You force citizens into your national service program and teach them all about how they aren't being enslaved while they're getting their mandatory public education. Let's not forget to teach them that people who avoid their mandatory service are no better than any other law breakers out there, like murderers and rapists."

This isn't even a coherent argument. Again, I'm not challenging your right to oppose a national service kind of idea - I'm just challenging your ability to make a rational, reasonable argument in defense of that opposition. What's more, in my own argument I said that another option was preferable, so arguing against this is not even arguing against my actual position.

"Having said that, I personally feel the former option is the best one. And there are also alternative models, like the one suggested a few posts down, to encourage volunteerism by proving college tuition assistance based on service. That would also be viable."

So we'll just tack an extra year onto high school so kids can do their national service. Hell, why bother. It's not like kids are leaving high school knowing how to read these days anyway.

First of all, this is also not even an argument. The education system needs great important and no one is denying that. But I left high school knowing how to read, and every single person that I know today, and have known for the last 20 years has left high school knowing how to read. The point of that is not to say that the problem doesn't exist, its to point out that your all or nothing statement is logically unsound.

I think more disturbing than this weak argumentation is the fact that once again you completely (and I guess deliberately) IGNORE the larger point, even after I specifically stated what the larger issue is. You also ignore the many and multiple alternatives that promote public service that cannot be blindly refuted by running around crying "slavery" every where (by the way, news flash, the entire capitalist system is wage slavery.)

So once again, I restate what the larger issue is, from my earlier post:

Let's not loose the larger argument. I appreciate your rightfully expressed concern about over-forcefulness in demanding people do certain things. I even appreciate your point in asking, are you going to through people who refuse in jail? I'm not mocking your argument, however I do think pointing out all the ways in which our society already does require its citizens to do certain things whether they want to or not does refute an absolutist argument that a public service concept is wrong exclusively because it is forcing someone to do something. Our society forces people to do stuff all the time, and all all the things we are "forced" to do are wrong.

The larger argument I believe is this: our society has almost no concept of civil responsibility. We are the most self-centered, self-absorbed, corrupt, material driven consumers on the face of the planet, who use and use and take and take until we destroy society under the way of our own isolated selfishness. We have lost a sense of civil duty, community pride, relational compassion, a belief that we bear responsibility for the quality of our society. One of the best things that could ever happen to us is to begin to think seriously about changing those attitudes. How can we teach future generations to return to a more healthy valuing of society, a commitment to working not just for ourselves, but also for the betterment of our society, to contribute collectively as well as individually.

Now perhaps my idea is not perfect. But we need more and more people to be thinking seriously about how to made radical change in our society toward promoting greater civil duty and social responsibility. Otherwise, society will continue to deteriorate as it has been, and as it continues to do.

If you want to respond to the larger argument, with suggestions as to HOW we can renew and foster healthy spirit of social responsibility and community concern, civil duty and interrelatedness, by all means please do - I'm very interested in ideas. If you just want to reply to say "AAA slavery! slavery! force labor! Screw you I have my rights!" then don't bother.