This question was inspired by a post on lemmy.zip about lowering the minimum age to purchase firearms in the US, and a lot of commeters brought up military service and training as a benchmark to normal civilians, and how if guns would be prevalent, then firearm training should be more common.

For reference, I live in the USA, where the minimum age to join the military is 18, but joining is, for the most part, optional. I also know some friends that have gone through the military, mostly for college benefits, and it has really messed them up. However, I have also met some friends from south korea, where I understand military service is mandatory before starting a more normal career. From what I’ve heard, military service was treated more as a trade school, because they were never deployed, in comparison to American troops.

I just wanted to know what the broader Lemmy community thought about mandatory military service is, especially from viewpoints outside the US.

  • justhach@lemmy.world
    58·
    6 hours ago

    Just imagine if instead of millitary service, it was compulsary public service that actually benefitted society. Nursing, construction/infrastructure, farming, teaching/childcare, etc.

    Its astrounding how much money is pumped into the military industrial complex when it could be used to fund to many other programs for public good.

    But that would be sOciALiSm.

    • lennybird@lemmy.worldEnglish
      33·
      6 hours ago

      More hilarious when considering the US Military is an inherently socialist institution.

      My sister and brother-in-law will go to the commissary, stay on base housing, get their paycheck from the US Govt., receive public Healthcare, and the GI Bill, then promptly go home and post on Facebook about how socialism bad.

    • hinterlufer@lemmy.world
      5·
      4 hours ago

      This exists in Austria. Males have to choose between 6 months of military or 9 months of public service. Interestingly enough the existence of the public service option has been a strong reason why people voted against removing the mandatory service some years ago.

        • hinterlufer@lemmy.world
          3·
          2 hours ago

          Driving ambulance cars and doing first aid, helping in kindergarten, retirement homes, homeless shelters, institutions for people with disabilities,…

          The ambulance is probably the most popular position, you can also choose what you want to do to a certain extent.

    • LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works
      4·
      4 hours ago

      I fully support this. It would help on so many levels. Provide a cheap workforce to help with currently in demand stuff and fix shit, help young people get away from home, get a new view on life and get some starter cash, and mix people from all walks of life. I genuinely see no downside.

    • seven_phone@lemmy.world
      7·
      6 hours ago

      That’s too good of an idea to be usable, the powers that don’t want it would tell the nurses, construction workers and farmers their livelihoods were being undermined by slave labour.

    • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
      4·
      4 hours ago

      I don’t think that would be any better. It is still compulsory service and a violation of people’s individual freedoms to choose how to live their lives.

      (and many countries do allow that as an alternative e.g. for conscientious objectors)