• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Britain's Conservatives planning to bring back compulsory national service.

gryphonv

Sr. Member
Reaction score
338
Points
780

Curious about people's thoughts on this.

AFAIK Germany abolished theirs in 2011 but with rumbings they plan on reinstating it. And it seems most nations in Europe that border Russia still have some form of it. Along with several nations around the world.

It seems like with world events currently it's starting to be viewed more favorable than it was a few years ago.

I personally am a fan of the idea. Though I do acknowledge there are pitfalls with it .

I feel it would be political suicide to impliment it here for any party. Though I think we would be better off as a nation if we did.

Thoughts?

Minor mod tweak to fix thread title spelling
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Curious about people's thoughts on this.

AFAIK Germany abolished theirs in 2011 but with rumbings they plan on reinstating it. And it seems most nations in Europe that border Russia still have some form of it. Along with several nations around the world.

It seems like with world events currently it's starting to be viewed more favorable than it was a few years ago.

I personally am a fan of the idea. Though I do acknowledge there are pitfalls with it .

I feel it would be political suicide to impliment it here for any party. Though I think we would be better off as a nation if we did.

Thoughts?
Not sure it would be political suicide to be honest. As long as there is a choice between military service and community service. Community service though should be properly defined.
 
Sure, but start with the oldest people - say, 75 - and work down through the cohorts (community service; military service would be too difficult for many).
 
The CAF doesn't have the schoolhouse capacity to meet current training throughput needs in either the Reg F or P Res.. This idea, which I'm sure Team Red and Orange would vigorously oppose, would only make that situation worse.

I'm all for the organized, structured and worthwhile community service model. And, once the CAF builds up it's training capacity, expand it.

The draw would be that, unlike volunteerism, there's a pay cheque in the military model.
 
To be even moderately successful, national service requires equipment. All the national servicemen in the world are of no value without proper equipment and a mobilization plan.

This appears to be a thin plan to deal with some major recruiting issues the UK is having and to get people with a better education in. That doesn't do much if they don't convert to regular service after their year of national service.

The Brits are studying some of the models in other countries - like Norway - that seem to show some results.

I'm a little averse to compulsory national service. Canada seems to have a visceral rejection of it, but I think you can meet many of the same objectives with a better model of reserve and regular force service.

🍻
 
  • Like
Reactions: ytz
Marooning people in a brief compulsory military service or community service would be a grave economic strategic error for a country reportedly suffering declining productivity and shortages of employees in all sorts of occupations. It's pretty much guaranteed to move a huge slice of people's productive time from higher-valued uses to lower-valued uses.

This is a serious contender for the Really Big Stupid prize. "Here, all you other countries seize the future; we don't want it. We're going to delay the entry of young people into the work force to make them clean bedpans rather than start a useful apprenticeship."
 

Curious about people's thoughts on this.

AFAIK Germany abolished theirs in 2011 but with rumbings they plan on reinstating it. And it seems most nations in Europe that border Russia still have some form of it. Along with several nations around the world.

It seems like with world events currently it's starting to be viewed more favorable than it was a few years ago.

I personally am a fan of the idea. Though I do acknowledge there are pitfalls with it .

I feel it would be political suicide to impliment it here for any party. Though I think we would be better off as a nation if we did.

Thoughts?

An interesting concept. Right down your alley @Kirkhill.

🍻

And another.



🍻


....


History meander....


Edmund Burke speaks of this “patriotism of small things” in his Reflections on the French Revolution. “To be attached to the subdivision, to love the little platoon we belong to in society, is the first principle (the germ as it were) of public affections. It is the first link in the series by which we proceed towards a love to our country, and to mankind.”

Tocqueville's description of associations is an enduring impact of Democracy in America . Tocqueville's extensive analysis of the role associations play in strengthening and moderating democracy are widely cited, and highly influential on the structure of American philanthropy. Tocqueville viewed the proliferation of associations as a unique response that was not only critical to the success of the experiment of democratic government, but also served to provide for the well-being of all of its citizens in accordance with a sense of equality that was previously unknown (Tocqueville 1840).

...

Wolf Cubs, Brownies, Boy Scouts, Girl Guides, Ventures, Sea Scouts, Boys Brigade.
St John's, Red Cross, Candy Stripers
Masons, Knights of Columbus, Shriners, Oddfellows, Rebeccas, Elks, Eagles, Lions, Kiwanis, Kinsmen, Kinettes, Imperial Order of Daughters of the Empire, Rotary, Women's Institute, the Guild
Church Socials, Community Drives, Telethons, United Way,
Parent Teacher Associations, School Boards, Hospital Boards...

....

All of the above were part of the background for those of us of a certain age in Canada and the US and, more broadly, in the English speaking countries. Everybody was a member, or participant in at least one of those organizations and many had multiple associations. One person could belong to a couple of clubs concurrently, or multiple clubs over time, or have family members who held different memberships. Those memberships tied people together across race, religion, age and sex. People got to know each other and learned to look out for each other.

....

To my way of thinking there has been a concerted effort to denigrate and undercut all of those groups and associations, those institutions. One common route to achieve this is to point out that these organizations fail to live up to their principles and that people are people and they act like people.
"We should expect more of them! We should demand more of them!"

Hell no.

We should expect people to be people. Good, bad and ugly. By all means punish the bad, and pity the ugly. But allowing Alinsky to win on point 4 has brought most of our institutions down.

  1. "Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have."
  2. "Never go outside the expertise of your people."
  3. "Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy."
  4. "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."
  5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. There is no defense. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage."
  6. "A good tactic is one your people enjoy."
  7. "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag."
  8. "Keep the pressure on."
  9. "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself."
  10. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition."
  11. "If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside; this is based on the principle that every positive has its negative."
  12. "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."
  13. "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."
The Canadian Forces is being given the same treatment given to the Catholic Priests and the Boy Scouts.

There needs to be a forceful contrarian effort. One that fights back an re-legitimizes those community associations, those clubs.

....

I intentionally left government sponsored associations, like Cadets, out of the list. They are top-down organizations that are built to serve the needs of the Government, or the Nation at Large if I am feeling generous. All of the other organizations are bottom-up efforts driven internally by the community.

People used to organize themselves to solve problems. They banded together to buy a fire truck, to bring a doctor into town, to build a two bed hospital and surgery, to hire a teacher. Those were community projects. Not government projects. They were Co-Op and co-operative projects.

Co-operation became a watchword and resulted in ever larger associations of associations. It eventually seemed to make sense to co-operate municipally, provincially, nationally and internationally. At which point you were looking at governmental level co-operation. But we lost local control over fire departments, doctors, hospitals and teachers. The price of not having to attend weekly meetings was authoritarian decrees on services, and curricula, union demands for compensation and voluntary dues and subscriptions became tax demands.

People got used to doing nothing other than bitching about the crap services the government supplies for the ridiculous taxes it demands to pay those bloody civil servants.

The fracturing that occurred became a shattering with Covid when everyone was incarcerated for two years.

Something needs to be done to pull the bits back together. To encourage people, especially youngsters now two and three generations removed from that society of societies that I opened with, to encourage people to get out, and associate and co-operate. There is already an evident demand for that type of association - crowds in the streets are surely evidence. The issue is how to manage those crowds and those impulses. How to direct them to build the community and not to destroy it.

....

National Service....

To most of us National Service connotes one thing - Conscription.
Conscription and being issued a rifle.

If I am understanding what I have read on the UK proposal military service is just one option offered to youngsters. And not all military service would necessarily entail carrying a rifle. Other options include working with other agencies, both governmental and potentially non-governmental. And not all options are full time. I think one option was 25 weekends a year of community service.

I know that in many European countries everybody is registered for conscription, just as the US registered everybody for the draft. The difference between the US Vietnam, UK Korea experience and the European experience is that currently the Europeans are not "hiring" all the people they register. The positions available are considered good jobs and people compete to be down-selected. Nobody is getting thrown into jail for not showing up or disobeying orders. And those that don't like the idea of carrying a rifle have multiple opportunities to support their community in other organizations.

....

The key element is voluntary association and not coercion.

...

From each according to their willingness. To each according to their effort.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QV
Marooning people in a brief compulsory military service or community service would be a grave economic strategic error for a country reportedly suffering declining productivity and shortages of employees in all sorts of occupations. It's pretty much guaranteed to move a huge slice of people's productive time from higher-valued uses to lower-valued uses.

This is a serious contender for the Really Big Stupid prize. "Here, all you other countries seize the future; we don't want it. We're going to delay the entry of young people into the work force to make them clean bedpans rather than start a useful apprenticeship."

Brad's rationale and thought processes often shift my thinking on these things.
 

Curious about people's thoughts on this.

AFAIK Germany abolished theirs in 2011 but with rumbings they plan on reinstating it. And it seems most nations in Europe that border Russia still have some form of it. Along with several nations around the world.

It seems like with world events currently it's starting to be viewed more favorable than it was a few years ago.

I personally am a fan of the idea. Though I do acknowledge there are pitfalls with it .

I feel it would be political suicide to impliment it here for any party. Though I think we would be better off as a nation if we did.

Thoughts?
They lack the capacity now. Much like us years of neglect mean they don’t have the pers or industry tire to process the intake.
 
This appears to be a thin plan to deal with some major recruiting issues the UK is having and to get people with a better education in. That doesn't do much if they don't convert to regular service after their year of national service.

I don't think they have thought it through even half that far, and I would question how much military advice went into the announcement.

To be even moderately successful, national service requires equipment. All the national servicemen in the world are of no value without proper equipment and a mobilization plan.

This depends on what you want to do with your national servicemen; as I've noted above, I don't think they have an actual strategy in mind. Without a larger concept for what they will be used for, it's hard to say what the personnel or equipment requirements would be.

If you want them to form conscript units/formations that are held at some state of readiness and can be deployed, then yes, they need equipment and they need to train on it. If the goal is to produce trained troops that can be mobilized in an emergency, they would need equipment but perhaps somewhat less.

But if it's just a scheme to encourage good citizenship with a taste of military life (which seems to be how they are advertising it), it wouldn't require much equipment at all. Probably the bigger problem would be finding enough NCOs to herd them around and deliver some sort of training.

Marooning people in a brief compulsory military service or community service would be a grave economic strategic error for a country reportedly suffering declining productivity and shortages of employees in all sorts of occupations. It's pretty much guaranteed to move a huge slice of people's productive time from higher-valued uses to lower-valued uses.

This is one of the best arguments against a conscript/compelled military - the total opportunity cost of pulling people out of the education system and workforce for a year or more is considerable.

It might make sense if youth unemployment was very high and it appeared unlikely to resolve itself, but otherwise the net economic effect is likely to be negative.
 
Wolf Cubs, Brownies, Boy Scouts, ... School Boards, Hospital Boards...
One very important one that you left out was the multitude of rifle and shooting associations that existed in the late 1800s - early 1900s where the government sponsored competitions and provided the ammunition for. Many involved in these (by the tens to hundreds of thousand) would migrate into the Militia. - can you see that happening these days?
To my way of thinking there has been a concerted effort to denigrate and undercut all of those groups and associations, those institutions. One common route to achieve this is to point out that these organizations fail to live up to their principles and that people are people and they act like people.
"We should expect more of them! We should demand more of them!"
Being judgemental is one of those things that beings become more of as they reach in themselves what they consider to be the perfection of human thought.

I intentionally left government sponsored associations, like Cadets, out of the list. They are top-down organizations that are built to serve the needs of the Government, or the Nation at Large if I am feeling generous. All of the other organizations are bottom-up efforts driven internally by the community.
They are right up there as an important citizenizing program that leads to military uptake.

People used to organize themselves to solve problems. They banded together to buy a fire truck, to bring a doctor into town, to build a two bed hospital and surgery, to hire a teacher. Those were community projects. Not government projects. They were Co-Op and co-operative projects.

Co-operation became a watchword and resulted in ever larger associations of associations. It eventually seemed to make sense to co-operate municipally, provincially, nationally and internationally. At which point you were looking at governmental level co-operation. But we lost local control over fire departments, doctors, hospitals and teachers. The price of not having to attend weekly meetings was authoritarian decrees on services, and curricula, union demands for compensation and voluntary dues and subscriptions became tax demands.

People got used to doing nothing other than bitching about the crap services the government supplies for the ridiculous taxes it demands to pay those bloody civil servants.
I think that there also arose a reluctance to accept liability for your volunteering efforts should they go awry; the demands for monetization of volunteer labour; and the tendency of governments at all levels wanting the certainty of paid labour rather than the unreliability of unpaid volunteers.
Something needs to be done to pull the bits back together. To encourage people, especially youngsters now two and three generations removed from that society of societies that I opened with, to encourage people to get out, and associate and co-operate. There is already an evident demand for that type of association - crowds in the streets are surely evidence. The issue is how to manage those crowds and those impulses. How to direct them to build the community and not to destroy it.
Better you than me mate. I'm to tired. Besides that this is now another generation's world. let them solve the problems - if they can.

If I am understanding what I have read on the UK proposal military service is just one option offered to youngsters. And not all military service would necessarily entail carrying a rifle. Other options include working with other agencies, both governmental and potentially non-governmental. And not all options are full time. I think one option was 25 weekends a year of community service.

I know that in many European countries everybody is registered for conscription, just as the US registered everybody for the draft. The difference between the US Vietnam, UK Korea experience and the European experience is that currently the Europeans are not "hiring" all the people they register. The positions available are considered good jobs and people compete to be down-selected. Nobody is getting thrown into jail for not showing up or disobeying orders. And those that don't like the idea of carrying a rifle have multiple opportunities to support their community in other organizations.
That's the way that I see it too. I see two big obstacles. The first are the civil service unions who will object to a loss of control over an element of "public service." The second is uniformity across the country. Since there is a military component associated with it I can see French-Canadian resistance to it. An important factor to me - and maybe some military leaders as well - is the short term of service. 1 year of service leaves you probably less than a year of useful service after DP1 training is completed. In my reserve models I look at obligatory terms of service that require a minimum of two years service after DP1 with a minimum of 46.5 days of annual mandatory training - plus generous re-enlistment bonuses - and a period of supplementary reserve service. You need to get decent payback on the investment made on each conscript.

🍻
 
But if it's just a scheme to encourage good citizenship with a taste of military life (which seems to be how they are advertising it), it wouldn't require much equipment at all. Probably the bigger problem would be finding enough NCOs to herd them around and deliver some sort of training.
And that's a key thing.

Back around the summer of 1971, 3 RCHA finished its brigade exercise in Wainwright in June and was tasked to run the SSEP5A program (if I have the title right) for western Canada. That entailed receiving about a battalion's worth of young high school students who had been recruited at local armouries around the four western provinces, given their basic personnel kit and shipped to Wainwright. Our job was to receive them and train them for some six weeks of basic recruit training and ship them back to their units where, hopefully, some would stick with the unit and go on to their corps training.

Long story short: it took the entire leadership of the regiment from MBdr on up to make it happen (considering we all had to do some rotations for annual leave and postings as well). On top of that we needed some 70 Bdrs/Cpls and below to fill in driver, GD, cook, storeman, clerk functions as well.

SSEP5A was dirt simple training yet took extensive manpower.

🍻
 
SSEP5A program (if I have the title right) for western Canada
I think you have that correct; among some other entry plans, there used to be a Student Summer Employment Program run by the CAF. I'm not sure of the start/end timelines but it was running in the 70s and into the 80s.
 
In order for this to be worthwhile, there would need to be 3-5 year commitments (presumably in the reserves) to make it worthwhile. Even if we offer multiple options for the completion of mandatory service, what happens when someone can't complete it anywhere?

Also, so much joy in the idea of integrating conscripts into a volunteer military.
 
I think you have that correct; among some other entry plans, there used to be a Student Summer Employment Program run by the CAF. I'm not sure of the start/end timelines but it was running in the 70s and into the 80s.
It went back even further. I first joined the army under the SSEP in 1965. There had been some name changes over the years but essentially the same program.

🍻
 
In order for this to be worthwhile, there would need to be 3-5 year commitments (presumably in the reserves) to make it worthwhile. Even if we offer multiple options for the completion of mandatory service, what happens when someone can't complete it anywhere?

Also, so much joy in the idea of integrating conscripts into a volunteer military.
Usually, conscript militaries have this built into the mobilization plan. A common arrangement is to put soldiers who have completed their active service into something like the Supplemental Reserves for at least five years. They don't normally train, but upon mobilization, they are legally obligated to report to a designated mobilization center where they will get kitted out and sent to a field unit.
 
I think you have that correct; among some other entry plans, there used to be a Student Summer Employment Program run by the CAF. I'm not sure of the start/end timelines but it was running in the 70s and into the 80s.
SYEP must still have been running in 1987, because a make-employment "course" called "SYEP Challenge" was run in Vernon.
 
Back
Top