Military service as a "poll tax".

[Lefty 0]

Each time I read Starship Troopers, my appreciation for Heinlein's proposed system of politics grows. For those who haven't read the book, the only way to earn the right to vote (or become a politician at all) is to serve a term in the military. No one can be turned away if they wish to serve; it's a constitutional right...which is a very important point.

Part of the dialogue in the book deals with why this is a good idea. It's not because military members are smarter or even because they have a stronger moral sense, per se. Rather, it's because they've put themselves through the rigors of a military term and have thus demonstrated their willingness to put the good of the society before themselves; swearing an oath to defend the society with their lives if necessary. Heinlein refers to this as "a unique 'poll tax'".

It all sounds like a great idea to me. I would have a lot more confidence in politicians and even voters in general if I knew they placed a high enough value in the political process to risk their lives in order to participate.

Your thoughts?

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[lawrocket 3]

Most of the duded in the military I have been around were not in it for the betterment of society. They were in it for the money, retirement, etc. I was one of them. I joined the military because of what I could get out of it. It turned out they got plenty out of me, too.

Some kid who looks at joining the military as a better alternative than working at a Winchell's for the foreseeable future gets financial benefit from it. These guys join the military as a way to get themselves OUT of their world and into a new one.

Not to say that there aren't soldiers who join for the reason you suggest. There are loads of them, too. It's just - what would you think about those that join the military for other reasons?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Lefty 0]

I don't think any less of them...since I shared some of those motives when I joined. However, the selflessness or selfishness of their motives does not diminish in the least the danger they put themselves in, or the service they provide to society.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[kallend 2,151]

Tha fallacy in the argument is the implicit assumption that miltary service is the only valid way to serve society, which is complete BS.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Nightingale 0]

I think a high school diploma (including classes in critical thinking, the scientific method, constitutional law, and history of the founding of our nation) would be a better qualification. That way, we can be sure that people can read and understand our constitution and the intentions behind it. Military service, while noble, doesn't mean that someone is capable of looking at a law, examining the effects it may have, and making a rational (rather than emotional) decision whether or not to vote for it.

[quade 4]

You do realize that it was commentary on one party systems such as the Nazis and Facists where the ONLY way a person can ensure they have any sort of future whatsoever is to comply and join the party and the only way to join the party is to join the military; no?

If not, perhaps you should re-read the book.

It's a horrible idea!

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[shropshire 0]

Should a military cook or QM have the same voting rights as a front-line grunt?

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[mnealtx 0]

Actually, the franchise was extended to civil service as well, not just military service.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[shropshire 0]

You have people in the WH, who can read and write but still dont seem to get the constitution.


Just because one is dylexic [sic] should not devalue their vote..... or should it?

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Lefty 0]

Quote

You do realize that it was commentary on one party systems such as the Nazis and Facists where the ONLY way a person can ensure they have any sort of future whatsoever is to comply and join the party and the only way to join the party is to join the military; no?

Wrong. The protagonist's father was a very wealthy businessman although, at the point when the book began, he had never served.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[Lefty 0]

Quote

Actually, the franchise was extended to civil service as well, not just military service.

Ah, correct.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[Lefty 0]

Quote

Tha fallacy in the argument is the implicit assumption that miltary service is the only valid way to serve society, which is complete BS.

The argument does not assume that. It's simply saying that in the military, the risks to yourself are so high that the "service" you provide should have a payoff besides money.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[Lefty 0]

Quote

I think a high school diploma (including classes in critical thinking, the scientific method, constitutional law, and history of the founding of our nation) would be a better qualification. That way, we can be sure that people can read and understand our constitution and the intentions behind it. Military service, while noble, doesn't mean that someone is capable of looking at a law, examining the effects it may have, and making a rational (rather than emotional) decision whether or not to vote for it.

Having a high school diploma with study in those classes doesn't mean they can make rational decisions either.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[Lefty 0]

Quote

Should a military cook or QM have the same voting rights as a front-line grunt?

Yes.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[Zipp0 1]

I've got the DVD. Denise Richards is fucking hot! But I digress.....

I did join the military out of a sense of duty and service. I think every American should take some time to serve in one form or another - but not necessarily in the military. There are lots of people I would rather not have in the same foxhole.

As far as voting goes, we need a national initiative to get people to give a shit about voting at all.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[jakee 1,596]

Quote

Actually, the franchise was extended to civil service as well, not just military service.

No it wasn't.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[airkid 0]

wow... well i disagree....

first off.. i never graduated high school... i left my senior year when i was old enough to join the military and sought to defend my brothers at war. but throughout my years in the Marine Corps, i have been to many nations and have seen the products of poor decisions of the leaders of nations and of the civilian populous. I also take great pride in knowing more than most of my government and the Constitution, the ideas they were founded and the contrasts with the constitutions of of other governments and nations. although it is a major achievement and a benchmark in most everybody's life, a high school diploma is not a gauge to determine intelligence or eligibility for voting status.

[Zipp0 1]

I'm with you. Even dumb people know when they don't like the way a government is operating(NOT calling you dumb!!). When the policies directly affect your life in a negative way, you don't need any classes in critical thinking to know it fucking pisses you off.

I do think we need a draft by lottery in this country. That would motivate people to learn about the issues and vote.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[airkid 0]

nice save

[Nightingale 0]

I think education is a better indicator, but not the only one. However, I think that having requirements other than just being a citizen is pretty stupid, because, like you point out, there are so many factors.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Actually, the franchise was extended to civil service as well, not just military service.

No it wasn't.

Yes, it was - not all federation service was military.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Lefty 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Actually, the franchise was extended to civil service as well, not just military service.

No it wasn't.

Yes, it was - not all federation service was military.

Well, it may not have applied to all civil servants. However, there is a scene where Rico meets a cop that seems to imply that the police force is as highly regarded as the military.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[Amazon 7]

My feelings exactly.


If you have put something into the system then you have more of a vested interest in the direction it is taking.

Personally I would it extend it to mandatory service of some kind AFTER high school. You give your country 2 years.. either military or civil service. The point is YOU put something back into the country.. ALL OF US.... and for that you get 2 years of free college.. period.
From there what YOU make of your life is up to you.

[BIGUN 1,488]

Quote

The fallacy in the argument is the implicit assumption that miltary service is the only valid way to serve society, which is complete BS.

Agreed.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[nerdgirl 0]

It's an interesting argument (as well as a fantastic book, even if not my favorite of Heinlein's).

Two counter-arguments immediately come to mind:
(1) What about firefighters? They willingly put themselves in danger in service of society.

(2) What about those opposed to war or who serve the state or society through non-military service? A couple dozen (or more) countries have mandatory service - both traditional or a "home guard" (somewhat akin to full time National Guard or Coast Guard); many have exemptions for conscientious objectors who are required to engage in some sort of civil service. e.g., Norway, Greece, Switzerland. Or Ameri-Corps or un-armed Peace Corps volunteers (see http://www.daytondailynews.com/projects/content/project/peacecorps/index.html)? My recollection from reading Starship Troopers (probably >10y ago) is that Heinlein's federal service went beyond traditional military.

My reading of Heinlein is more holistic - stressing the importance and value of service, community, and society.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying