I assume you're referring to the service statement... if so: yeah, it did. I could see the ideal in it, even if my first reaction was, "No." It reminds me of a comment made on a previous thread...
I assume you're referring to the service statement... if so: yeah, it did. I could see the ideal in it, even if my first reaction was, "No."
It reminds me of a comment made on a previous thread here (no time to search for it at the moment, but would appreciate anyone else finding it). It was on a thread asking what people do to find out connect with community, and the response given actually started by defining what they thought the word "community" meant. I'm going to paraphrase, so fair warning that the details here aren't quite right: the poster described how a community to them is not meeting for a purpose (i.e., a hobby, a faith, etc) and included at least 3 of 5 people from different groups they listed (e.g., old/young, rich/poor, urban/rural). By that definition, I would posit that many people don't have a lot of community in their lives and that hard turn is trying to push that sort of aspect across a broader audience. He refers to it as "connective tissue," and I could understand why he used that term.
(edit to add a missing space that was bugging me on reread)
As a ....sort of.... pacifist, I think I see what he's talking about. He's talking about artificially creating an environment where people of all kinds are basically forced to interact and get to...
As a ....sort of.... pacifist, I think I see what he's talking about. He's talking about artificially creating an environment where people of all kinds are basically forced to interact and get to know one another, to do something. Not because any of them chose to or the task is fun or whatever, but because they have to. I have my skepticism, even beyond the military aspect of it --- maybe it can be national volunteering.
I will continue to be skeptical until I see the young of the rich and powerful scrubbing toilets alongside the poor during national service years. None of this opting out from bone spurs or being assigned cushy bullshit internship business.
Fact is, we've dismantled the connective tissues that sat rich next to poor. Public schools were supposed to let us raise our kids alongside like that. University was supposed to be when the best of the rich and poor did the same work and saw the same prospects and look how that's turned out.
Re: community
I think perhaps I was involved in that conversation about what is a real community vs hobby / family / neighborhood group. Perhaps my stance was a little too harsh. Hobby groups are not communities, but they are not the opposite either. They're not fake communities --some of them can transcend into the real thing -- but most of the time they are a facsimile of the real thing.
Example metaphor: in Fiddler On The Roof, the main character had an arranged marriage when he was young. The marriage had the outward appearance of a loving marriage, and legally it is in fact a marriage. But is it in fact and substance, a real marriage, a union of souls, a loving relationship with another woman? He had to do some hard thinking on it.
So perhaps I was too hard on hobby groups. Maybe many true communities arise from such, and maybe they're a good nurturing greenhouse for budding real communities. But I guess the point I wanted to make was that many people mistake it for equivalence. Hence the expression fair weather friends: they might come visit once if you're hospitalized, but they're not bringing soup and stocking your freezer and scrubbing your toilets while you're released home for recovery.
Edit: bringing it back to national service front, I'm highly skeptical that an air dropped facsimile of a community for two years or whatever would really change anything. Perhaps it can. But you can air drop every single trapping of what communities look like and force fit people into them, but what comes out of the mold won't always be a real community. There's some human magic that happens. In some ways that's what the internet has done: it's connected some people together into real honest to goodness communities despite wealth and race and orientation and gender. So.....national service seems to be a ton of work and risk over just another possibility for real connectedness and community. For my money's worth I would rather see every single private education opportunity abolished: either y'all pay for every single kid in the country to ride a pony over summer, or else your precious butterball ain't gettin to pony camp either.
I'm with you on the sort-of-pacifist perspective, and think that the service would need to be non-military to truly connect. Having done that for a few years, I can say it's not for everyone. I...
I'm with you on the sort-of-pacifist perspective, and think that the service would need to be non-military to truly connect. Having done that for a few years, I can say it's not for everyone. I have yet to find anything that is, and I think that is a tiny bit of evidence for your thought on the subject.
I'm not educated enough to lay out a list of potential issues or opportunities, but my optimism wants me to see the net benefit despite the problems that might need to get resolved along the way.
You mean you did military service for a few years ? That's why I was leaning towards "school". Kids are there for so many darn years! Half of their waking hours during their most formative! Any...
You mean you did military service for a few years ?
That's why I was leaning towards "school". Kids are there for so many darn years! Half of their waking hours during their most formative! Any benefits that forced national non military service can bring, it can surely be replicated at school plus extra curriculars. The rich kid also needs to learn how to clean, how to mend a rip and how to fry an egg. The poor kid also gets to learn how to solder, use Blender, evaluate what makes a quality power tool, play an instrument, and fly on school trips.
If all of that is too expensive, I'd sooner see two years of forced eSports than military service: mingle using a almost the same avatar, do team activities as equals.
The thing is that schools are small, and aggregate kids within fairly small socioeconomic bundles. If people got called up to national (non-military) service all across the country and were...
The thing is that schools are small, and aggregate kids within fairly small socioeconomic bundles. If people got called up to national (non-military) service all across the country and were randomly distributed, you'd get experience with the true breadth of society.
Correct: I served in the Air Force. Thankfully I had an older brother who had gone the Army route and got out before I enlisted. He was there to guide me through selecting which branch and what...
Correct: I served in the Air Force. Thankfully I had an older brother who had gone the Army route and got out before I enlisted. He was there to guide me through selecting which branch and what jobs to condor. In short, he helped set me up to get skills I could translate into post-military work.
I take your point on all the things to be learned, and agree there's a myriad of ways that it could be done.
Honestly, compared to the original TED talk, the guy sounds a little glib. When asked about a practical solution to the issue it's "make smart investments and someday YOU will be the boomers." Yes...
Honestly, compared to the original TED talk, the guy sounds a little glib. When asked about a practical solution to the issue it's "make smart investments and someday YOU will be the boomers." Yes he does mention that we need to shift power toward youth but in the same breath it sounds like he isn't confident we can change the flow of wealth. It's an easy way to relate to the cultural zeitgeist of the terminally online to spout his ethos.
that took a HARD turn at the end
I assume you're referring to the service statement... if so: yeah, it did. I could see the ideal in it, even if my first reaction was, "No."
It reminds me of a comment made on a previous thread here (no time to search for it at the moment, but would appreciate anyone else finding it). It was on a thread asking what people do to find out connect with community, and the response given actually started by defining what they thought the word "community" meant. I'm going to paraphrase, so fair warning that the details here aren't quite right: the poster described how a community to them is not meeting for a purpose (i.e., a hobby, a faith, etc) and included at least 3 of 5 people from different groups they listed (e.g., old/young, rich/poor, urban/rural). By that definition, I would posit that many people don't have a lot of community in their lives and that hard turn is trying to push that sort of aspect across a broader audience. He refers to it as "connective tissue," and I could understand why he used that term.
(edit to add a missing space that was bugging me on reread)
As a ....sort of.... pacifist, I think I see what he's talking about. He's talking about artificially creating an environment where people of all kinds are basically forced to interact and get to know one another, to do something. Not because any of them chose to or the task is fun or whatever, but because they have to. I have my skepticism, even beyond the military aspect of it --- maybe it can be national volunteering.
I will continue to be skeptical until I see the young of the rich and powerful scrubbing toilets alongside the poor during national service years. None of this opting out from bone spurs or being assigned cushy bullshit internship business.
Fact is, we've dismantled the connective tissues that sat rich next to poor. Public schools were supposed to let us raise our kids alongside like that. University was supposed to be when the best of the rich and poor did the same work and saw the same prospects and look how that's turned out.
Re: community
I think perhaps I was involved in that conversation about what is a real community vs hobby / family / neighborhood group. Perhaps my stance was a little too harsh. Hobby groups are not communities, but they are not the opposite either. They're not fake communities --some of them can transcend into the real thing -- but most of the time they are a facsimile of the real thing.
Example metaphor: in Fiddler On The Roof, the main character had an arranged marriage when he was young. The marriage had the outward appearance of a loving marriage, and legally it is in fact a marriage. But is it in fact and substance, a real marriage, a union of souls, a loving relationship with another woman? He had to do some hard thinking on it.
So perhaps I was too hard on hobby groups. Maybe many true communities arise from such, and maybe they're a good nurturing greenhouse for budding real communities. But I guess the point I wanted to make was that many people mistake it for equivalence. Hence the expression fair weather friends: they might come visit once if you're hospitalized, but they're not bringing soup and stocking your freezer and scrubbing your toilets while you're released home for recovery.
Edit: bringing it back to national service front, I'm highly skeptical that an air dropped facsimile of a community for two years or whatever would really change anything. Perhaps it can. But you can air drop every single trapping of what communities look like and force fit people into them, but what comes out of the mold won't always be a real community. There's some human magic that happens. In some ways that's what the internet has done: it's connected some people together into real honest to goodness communities despite wealth and race and orientation and gender. So.....national service seems to be a ton of work and risk over just another possibility for real connectedness and community. For my money's worth I would rather see every single private education opportunity abolished: either y'all pay for every single kid in the country to ride a pony over summer, or else your precious butterball ain't gettin to pony camp either.
I'm with you on the sort-of-pacifist perspective, and think that the service would need to be non-military to truly connect. Having done that for a few years, I can say it's not for everyone. I have yet to find anything that is, and I think that is a tiny bit of evidence for your thought on the subject.
I'm not educated enough to lay out a list of potential issues or opportunities, but my optimism wants me to see the net benefit despite the problems that might need to get resolved along the way.
You mean you did military service for a few years ?
That's why I was leaning towards "school". Kids are there for so many darn years! Half of their waking hours during their most formative! Any benefits that forced national non military service can bring, it can surely be replicated at school plus extra curriculars. The rich kid also needs to learn how to clean, how to mend a rip and how to fry an egg. The poor kid also gets to learn how to solder, use Blender, evaluate what makes a quality power tool, play an instrument, and fly on school trips.
If all of that is too expensive, I'd sooner see two years of forced eSports than military service: mingle using a almost the same avatar, do team activities as equals.
The thing is that schools are small, and aggregate kids within fairly small socioeconomic bundles. If people got called up to national (non-military) service all across the country and were randomly distributed, you'd get experience with the true breadth of society.
Correct: I served in the Air Force. Thankfully I had an older brother who had gone the Army route and got out before I enlisted. He was there to guide me through selecting which branch and what jobs to condor. In short, he helped set me up to get skills I could translate into post-military work.
I take your point on all the things to be learned, and agree there's a myriad of ways that it could be done.
Honestly, compared to the original TED talk, the guy sounds a little glib. When asked about a practical solution to the issue it's "make smart investments and someday YOU will be the boomers." Yes he does mention that we need to shift power toward youth but in the same breath it sounds like he isn't confident we can change the flow of wealth. It's an easy way to relate to the cultural zeitgeist of the terminally online to spout his ethos.
Relevant critque of him, from Money and Macro