We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Abolition of the Draft
Details
Submitted by[?]: United Republics Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: November 2414
Description[?]:
| The policy of forced military or civilian service was put in place under the Nationalists, previously no national service was required. While both military and civilian national service are laudable, the URP believes forcing our young people to engage in this activity is unnecessary. However, the spectre of conflict always looms and we must ensure that we have the ability to raise an army in times of war, therefore the URP seeks to make military service required in times of war only. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change National service.
Old value:: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve either a term in the military or a lesser paid term of civilian national service, at their option.
Current: All adults upon completion of schooling can be required in times of war to serve a term in the military.
Proposed: All adults upon completion of schooling can be required in times of war to serve a term in the military.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 12:04:14, June 06, 2007 CET | From | Radical Nationalist Party | To | Debating the Abolition of the Draft |
| Message | What use is an untrained rabble in a war? This would be sending our young people on a suicide mission, whereas under the Nationalist Party our people would have the skills they need to survive. Also National and Civil service teach our young men and women skills that they will not learn in school, they will be able to defend the country and their homes against foreign invasions. They will learn respect for authority and dicipline. This is only healthy for our nation, there is very little plausible negative points of this policy. |
| Date | 17:53:34, June 06, 2007 CET | From | Free Lodamun | To | Debating the Abolition of the Draft |
| Message | I look at it like this: There are 2 things that destroy nations, complacency and a lack of a strong national ideal. Now, I agree with you that from a military standpoint this draft is unnecessary. However, it has some very good points that I shall go into. This draft creates a National Identity for every young man and woman coming into adulthood. Wether they want to or not, they have to spend a few months training and living with others for the good of their nation. This not only creates a more physically fit populace but keep in mind the age these people are being asked to do this. Its like being in a frat, you'll create friends and contacts that you'll keep your whole life. In addition, the only other modern country that I know of that does something like this is the Swiss. Who messes with the Swiss? Nobody messes with the Swiss. They aren't aggressive, but they are prepared; and with our gun laws, actually training people is by far our best option. If it will make everyone feel better, perhaps legislation could be passed that would limit this drafted term to say, 90 days? Just put the people through basic and get them started. Lodamun will not support a war of aggression, so think of this as a defensive act. Now granted, limited the time of a draft isn't official legislation, but we can still debate and vote on it. |
| Date | 18:14:37, June 06, 2007 CET | From | Radical Nationalist Party | To | Debating the Abolition of the Draft |
| Message | We prefer the term of service to be a minimum of 2 years, this builds it into the mindset for the long term and not just a phase which they can easily forget. Also Turkey have National Service. |
| Date | 00:29:42, June 07, 2007 CET | From | Free Lodamun | To | Debating the Abolition of the Draft |
| Message | Personally, I like the idea of having 2 years for exactely the reasons you listed but let's face facts, the NP's policies will more or less be on thier way out en mass simply for being the NP's policies. I'd just like to strike some sort of compromise where we keep many of the positives instead of just throwing them out and i think setting the term to be numbered with months and having generous compensation for staying longer is the way to make everyone happy. |
| Date | 01:46:27, June 07, 2007 CET | From | Radical Nationalist Party | To | Debating the Abolition of the Draft |
| Message | Do not forget serving is paid, its not like schooling where you are not paid. FL touched on, we in the NP have made Lodamun a better place but just because we have put these bills in places the URP want to remove them and destroy Lodamun in the process. NP has worked for the benefit of Lodamun, not for our own personal gain. |
| Date | 03:49:45, June 07, 2007 CET | From | Lodamun Distributionist Party | To | Debating the Abolition of the Draft |
| Message | On this topic specifically, we feel most comfortable with the idea of civilian service rather than military service, but would be willing to support the choice between the two. We disapprove of imperialism and preemptive war, but cannot find any fault in the argument for preparedness. As a side note, we agree with the last statement by the NP. We seldom stand behind the bills proposed by the NP because our respective opinions differ greatly, but we find it important to differentiate between voting that way and voting against a bill because of the party that proposed it. That's a big problem in American politics...it's dangerous and destructive. |
| Date | 05:43:43, June 07, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Abolition of the Draft |
| Message | The state should not FORCE people to participate in activities. It may be paid, but it doesn't really matter because the government decides how much. $1 a day? |
| Date | 17:12:35, June 07, 2007 CET | From | Free Lodamun | To | Debating the Abolition of the Draft |
| Message | If that's the case, you're the majority Party, why are you paying them only a dollar? You have to get through your head that the old regime is gone and some of the policies from the last regime have many many positives if used in the right context and by the right people. Also, no one in their right mind would force people to learn how to fight and then undercompensate them, that's like begging people for armed revolt. If you're going to be flippant all the time try and think things through. |
| Date | 21:24:12, June 07, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Abolition of the Draft |
| Message | I'm not prime minister, etc. So something MIGHTbe positive IF used by the RIGHT people. So it might also be negative if used by the wrong people. How can Free Lodamun claim to promote freedom if it cannot support young Lodamese being able to freely choose military or civilian service. The URP believes many will continue these paths. The nation will be stronger if those participating in national service want to participate, and those who want to put their skills to use in the private sector should be able to do so. Allowing people to seek private employment will make Lodamun a happier and more prosperous place. |
| Date | 00:44:26, June 08, 2007 CET | From | Free Lodamun | To | Debating the Abolition of the Draft |
| Message | "either a term in the military or a lesser paid term of civilian national service, at their option" See? civilian, and if we limit how long they spend there, we get the best of both worlds. We currently have the options you claim to want. So what's the problem here? All we need to do is agree on the chronological limits of the term they spend. Abolishing a policy that has and could continue in the future to do this country a lot of good would be reckless. |
| Date | 01:45:16, June 08, 2007 CET | From | Independent Republican Party | To | Debating the Abolition of the Draft |
| Message | We agree with the United Republics Party. Forced military service is bad for society, except in a time of war. What if someone doesn't want to serve in the military during peace time? Forcing them to do so contradicts the idea of democracy. |
| Date | 05:32:00, June 08, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Abolition of the Draft |
| Message | The URP thanks the MRP for its support on this issue |
| Date | 06:35:06, June 08, 2007 CET | From | Free Lodamun | To | Debating the Abolition of the Draft |
| Message | It isn't specifically military. It gives the option of serving in a civilian capacity. If we limit it to a service of a few months, I fail to see the problem. We can't create Utopia, every society that has tried to create a utopia breeds fanatacism and eventually crashes and burns. By requiring that the subjects of the 5 Kingdoms serve a small term in the service of their country (be it military or civilian [there IS a civilian option. Look at it, its right there]), we create a fitter populace and a populace with greater ties to their nation and to the people they serve with while preparing for any situation our nation finds itself in, be it natural disaster or war. This is far from forced service, since we are so rarely at war for %90 of recruits its a summer spent at camp, learning to defend their nation should they be called upon to do so. Don't misunderstand, I know both the URP's and the Moderate's concerns. The URP wont vote for anything the NP has touched for fear of... contaminationn, i guess and the Moderates see how this can very easily be abused. But please keep in mind that we have many more less militant voices in the Parliament of Free Peoples now. This is less training an army and more ensuring that we instill a strong sense of national identity in our youth while giving them discipline and in the case of those who choose civilian serivce, valuable on site job training. |
| Date | 15:06:49, June 13, 2007 CET | From | Lodamun Liberal-Conservative Party | To | Debating the Abolition of the Draft |
| Message | We prefer the status quo - we feel that maintaining a nation of citizens who have had at least some form of defence training, as well as an army, is better than having a small army and trying to drastically train the entire nation in times of war. Besides, one term is hardly too much to ask, and militairy training is a fantastic life experience for anyone. It might also serve to teach young adults some discipline. |
| Date | 16:06:33, June 16, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Abolition of the Draft |
| Message | the URP doesn't want to hEAR ANY PARTY VOTING AGAINST THIS BILL TO COmplain about "this is an unecessary government program" ever again. this is the definition of HUGE government |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 337 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 262 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players who consent to a particular role-play by acknowledging it in their own role-play cannot then disown it or withdraw their consent from it. For example, if player A role-plays the assassination of player B's character, and player B then acknowledges the assassination in a news post, but then backtracks and insists the assassination did not happen, then he will be required under the rules to accept the validity of the assassination role-play. |
| Random quote: "Those looking for ideology in the White House should consider this: for the men who rule our world, rules are for other people." - Naomi Klein |