>>mostly because it's more egalitarian<<
Say the secret word and the duck appears! (Hope I am not the only one old enough to get that reference!)
Egalitarian is the operative word behind compulsory national service.
All the talk about how it's "for the good of the children" is bushwah. Don't tell it to a mother who pays thousands extra per annum to live in a "good" school district, and spends multo hours with her kids helping them with their homework in advanced classes, and teaching them living skills.
A friend of mine - single mom - worked two jobs to put her son through Georgetown Prep - now that's dedication.
Our kids don't need to live in a dorm with gangbangers and slackers, get paid a stipend, and learn how to be productive members of society from a half-educated counsellor. They are productive members of society now, being taught by successful men and women - their parents, very good school teachers, and employers.
If the only way to sell it is to make it compulsory, even for those who are already productive members of society, all you are doing is grinding my kids down to the least common denominator.
I realize that being an elitist is offensive to some, but that's the way it is.
In the free world, if something is worth having done, then someone ought to be willing to pay for it.
National security is a different question, of course. |
