Now here’s an idea whose time hasn’t come, and is unlikely to come, from Edward Boches (Creativity_Unbound). (Boches is “Chief Innovation Officer” at a relatively prominent advertising agency, though he writes the blog on his own behalf, not the agency’s.) The plan:
Here’s my idea for saving America in case the Occupy Movement doesn’t work. It’s an idea that could help us increase empathy. It takes full advantage of social media’s true potential. It’s a program that steals from the military and juries — practices that do work — when it comes to creating interdependency.
Mandatory social media service
- We require every 18-year-old in America to participate in mandatory social media service as part of a daily or weekly routine for one year.
- We assign our young adults to a racially diverse online social group comprised of 12 people from different regions, backgrounds, income brackets. (Google+ is a potential platform.)
- We present each group with a social challenge -– obesity, jobs, poverty, high cost of education, even the problem of young men getting their sex education from watching online porn — and we ask them to solve the problem.
- We give them benchmarks, goals, and require an outcome in the form of an idea, a program, a new policy or maybe just a video.
- Finally we aggregate all of the solutions on one public website where the press, our legislatures, businesses and educators can access, rate and maybe even implement the ideas.
And when some of the 18-year-olds — resentful of being forced to hang out with people they didn’t choose, and not faced with the normal social pressures that make us be polite to people right around us — start saying nasty things to each other, I take it we’ll just charge them with cyberbullying (perhaps with a hate crime sentencing enhancement), right? Or perhaps the “official moderator, someone to coach and keep track” in case “partisan differences challenge collaboration” (two of the possible implementation options that the column suggests) will just work it all out.
Actually, I agree that a sense of community and common citizenship is pretty important for our democracy. I just think that legal coercion is a pretty poor way of trying to arrange it — poor as a matter of respecting 18-year-olds’ rights, and poor as a matter of actually accomplishing something worthwhile. And even if such legal coercion is sometimes justified when military service or jury decisionmaking are involved, that hardly supports slipping down the slope to thinking that the government should be free to order citizens to speak and to listen for the sake of “increas[ing] empathy” or “creating interdependency.”
And I say that even assuming that — God forbid! — “the Occupy Movement doesn’t work.”
Vogon says:
MTV tried this in the ’90s. “Road Rules” and “The Real World” aren’t exactly shining examples of how to move society forward.
October 25, 2011, 6:06 pmCan't find a good name says:
Did Boches mean this as a serious proposal, or was he just advertising for Google+? (I note that when he mentions Google+ in the same sentence as Twitter and Facebook, Google+ gets a link to highlight it, plus the separate reference quoted above.)
October 25, 2011, 6:13 pmSisyphus says:
When can we be free of the tragic liberal mistake of thinking that practices they think are a good idea (especially if they really are a good idea) should be imposed on people by government force?
While I actually don’t think this is that well-thought out an idea, there is something to the idea of young people going on something like a mission or an internship to experience the world before truly being out in it. But even if it’s a good idea, a great idea, or even a provably superior idea, that doesn’t mean it should be forced on people.
October 25, 2011, 6:17 pmRoscoe says:
I kind of like the idea. But this plan to use mandatory social service to effect societal change needs a snazzy name. Maybe something like “Cultural Revolution.”
October 25, 2011, 6:27 pmCrunchy Frog says:
This summer my teenager went on his third mission trip with his high school youth group from church (this year they built a house on an indian reservation in Arizona – in August). I would wager that he has done more good in those three trips than this idiot and his ideas have ever done.
October 25, 2011, 6:28 pmLaura(southernxyl) says:
AS USUAL, science fiction got there first.
Frederik Pohl, “In the Problem Pit”, 1973. It’s included in 13 Short Science Fiction Novels, edited by Isaac Asimov, Martin H. Greenberg, and Charles G. Waugh.
October 25, 2011, 6:34 pmSoronel Haetir says:
Sex ed from online porn is probably better than the alternative.
October 25, 2011, 6:34 pmDon says:
Or “Conscripted Military Service”
October 25, 2011, 6:36 pmSteve says:
Some people would have gone for the quick and easy Nazi comparison, but you went above and beyond to devise a creative and completely apt Mao analogy instead, for which I hope people give you the plaudits you deserve.
October 25, 2011, 6:37 pmJoe says:
Here’s my idea for saving America in case the Occupy Movement doesn’t work. It’s an idea that could help us increase empathy.
Don’t kids already get that empathy education from our public schools?
October 25, 2011, 6:39 pmjosh says:
I was going to say, “Cue attribution of this idea to the entirety of politically liberally thought in 3, 2, 1 …”, but Sisyphus got there in the third comment!
October 25, 2011, 6:50 pmbyomtov says:
This is a seriously stupid proposal.
October 25, 2011, 6:50 pmCalderon says:
It’s a program that steals from the military and juries — practices that do work — when it comes to creating interdependency.
Neither of these “practices” is currently mandatory. We have no draft, so people in the military ask to be there. Getting out of jury duty is easy enough that people who don’t want to be there do not have to be. Also, I’m skeptical that most judges or attorneys would say that the jury system “works” in the sense of working well enough to be emulated in other areas.
Finally, limiting this “mandatory” service to 18 year olds seems utterly bizarre. Why would we want to have a group composed solely of the least experienced adults try to solve society’s problems? Or is the idea that the solutions are irrelevant and the process of having 18-year olds interact with each other is all that is important?
October 25, 2011, 6:53 pmL says:
I’d almost like to implement this, just to see Boches’ reaction when the first solution to come from a racially diverse group of young adults messing around on Google+ is to end the Mandatory Social Media Service.
October 25, 2011, 6:54 pmRose says:
This Lord Of The Flies stuff is kinda scary when you realize they have the full force of the presidency behind them, complete with all his underground “community organizer” stormtroopers, using these dweebs, these People’s Temple grade dupes as window dressing.
They all love the idea of drafting everyone into their command structure. “It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible.”
October 25, 2011, 6:56 pmArthur Kirkland says:
It’s an authoritarian tendency, not a liberal one (at least, no more than a conservative one). The drug warriors, anti-abortion advocates, and homophobes could explain.
October 25, 2011, 6:58 pmSarcastro says:
Own it Libs!
October 25, 2011, 6:59 pmArthur Kirkland says:
Rick Perry pinpricked the balloon on this type of argument when he admitted that the birth certificate issue is just a way for conservatives to antagonize President Obama and his supporters.
Next: He lets the cat out of the bag with respect to the Tea Partiers.
October 25, 2011, 7:02 pmOpher Banarie says:
Reminds me of the old saying “Hire teenagers now – while they know everything”. I agree with the other commentators about not using government force. I’ll add that 18 year olds in general don’t have the world experience to develop useful ideas. But a program where they could select from a variety of ‘hands on’ volunteer projects certainly wouldn’t hurt in their development of that experience. How about calling it “Volunteers in Service to America”? Oh, taken already….
October 25, 2011, 7:07 pmjack burton says:
The mandatory volunteers will be beaten daily until morale improves.
October 25, 2011, 7:26 pmRogue Elephant says:
I love any solution that begins with “We require”.
Who’s we? Does he mean the government.
What’s the penalty for non-compliance? Jailtime? Or will we take people’s children from them as unfit parents.
What if someone still resists? Do we kill them?
Sounds all very empathetic.
October 25, 2011, 7:26 pmSteven Zoraster says:
That is the way the draft worked way back during the wars in Korea and Vietnam. Twelve men to a squad in basic training. And the same number in a infantry squad after advance training. If you were in the infantry you would find yourself in an integrated environment. If you were unlucky enough to end up in Asia fighting a brutal enemy you would do it with people who you might not meet in ordinary life.
Maybe Mr Bosches thinks we should bring back the draft? If only for one year?
October 25, 2011, 7:28 pmOwen H. says:
Just like the idea lifted from Heinlein, that full citizenship and franchise should only go to those that serve in the military, this is a spectacularly bad idea. Good citizenship can be taught, but not forced.
October 25, 2011, 7:31 pmThe Drill SGT says:
LOL
Look at my moniker. To the extent that the military basic training model serves as a melting pot for class/race/region/religion/culture it’s because the Army/Marines has been at it a long time and distilled some fundemental truths in molding young men (well it works best on them)
1. clear mission(e.g. Listen up Son, if you want to live when metal meets meat…)
October 25, 2011, 7:34 pm2. strong traditional values(e.g. duty, honor, country, etc)
3. Placing your best young combat veterans back in those units to serve as role models (and as the focus of group hatred from the trainees, an interesting dichotomy)
4. and ultimately having adult supervision in the room, at least 18-20 hours a day (40 years ago, when I actualy did that, during a training cycle, 2 Drill SGTs pretty much worked overlapping 12 hour shifts 6-7 days a week for 8 weeks. Grueling, but rewarding work. Hard on families….
Steve says:
The paranoia never stops. Do you realize that, in reality, this idea is backed by the full force of Some Guy With A Blog?
October 25, 2011, 7:35 pmDavidka says:
An idea so disgusting and anti-liberty that only a liberal could have come up with it. Here’s a better idea. Groups of young people can read useful thinkers, such as Thomas Jefferson and Ayn Rand. Based on what they learn, they can discuss how to root out stupidity like the above proposal. My proposed Freedom Discussion Groups, however, unlike the above proposal, would be voluntary rather than racially-based.
October 25, 2011, 7:45 pmHere come the Judge: says:
But Steve, you seem to be protecting the idea. What part of involuntary servitude appeals to you?
October 25, 2011, 7:49 pmSteve says:
If someone points out that this idea is not, in fact, one of Obama’s presumably countless Maoist fantasies, but rather just something some guy posted on a blog, they are “protecting the idea.” Gotcha.
October 25, 2011, 8:00 pmdeenk says:
Coming from a marketer, I think it’s a great idea. What he’s describing are captive focus groups that can be used by marketing companies to test new products. And you don’t have to pay them or go to the trouble of corralling a bunch of people together. Our taxes will pay for it.
October 25, 2011, 8:16 pmyguy says:
For the uninitiate, “empathy” in this context is code for “socially inculcated guilt”.
Yeah, brilliant. Let’s keep America’s youth busy producing endless reams (or gigabytes) of gobbledygook that can provide cover for beetle-like bureaucrats to insinuate themselves into every aspect of our lives.
October 25, 2011, 8:45 pmMark Field says:
One of these things is not like the other.
October 25, 2011, 8:51 pmDave N. says:
I like the consensus here. Everyone, including me, thinks that this is a monumentally idiotic, batshit crazy proposal.
October 25, 2011, 8:53 pmShelbyC says:
Lay off Jefferson. He did some pretty useful stuff.
October 25, 2011, 8:58 pmHere come the Judge: says:
Steve,
No need to get defensive. And please stop erecting and knocking down straw men. Where did anyone say that this idea is
You really have to stop being so paranoid.
October 25, 2011, 9:03 pmI merely noted that you have made two comments that implied that people who ridiculed the idea, or were repulsed by it, were over the top. May I quote you? In response to Roscoe you snarked: “Some people would have gone for the quick and easy Nazi comparison…” and in response to Rose you commented: “The paranoia never stops.” From this I conclude you are siding with the person who came up with the idea of conscripting 18-year-olds for purposes of mandatory social media service. Which brings me back to the question that you never addressed: What part of involuntary servitude appeals to you?
Here come the Judge: says:
Not everyone (cough … Steve…cough).
October 25, 2011, 9:06 pmleo marvin says:
Steve,
Play your cards right and Here come the Judge (aka “Moneyrunner“)’s next blog post may be, Volokh’s “Steve” Urges Repeal of the Thirteenth Amendment.
October 25, 2011, 9:25 pmPJens says:
I am just relieved that I am not 18 years old! Next thing you know, the government will require everybody to purchase health insurance of their design. Oh, wait…
October 25, 2011, 9:26 pmSteve says:
Since you disagree that those two people were over the top, I can only conclude that you’re a kook as well.
October 25, 2011, 9:37 pmBlaspheme says:
Perhaps these “Boches Youth” could collectively empathize on the best location to establish “the Boches Temple” movement. Maybe call it “Bochestown”. Possibly they could empathize on the best flavors of kool-aide. The sky’s the limit when you act collectively (and compulsively) it’s not like it’s a cult or even one mans narcissism to suggest it if it’s sanctioned by law. Besides, a whole generation of chineese youth were collectively “sent down” to empathize in the steppes back in the 70′s, it built character.
October 25, 2011, 9:41 pmJohn David Galt says:
Excuse me if this is a dumb question, but isn’t it unconstitutional for the law to compel a person to speak (or even to pay for speech) if he disagrees?
(If the answer is yes, I’d like to be allowed to file class actions to put a stop to various kinds of tax-funded speech, including those funded by the EPA, the Violence Against Women Act, the DEA, and various profs with tenure at public universities. But certainly it should mean that this proposal would quickly go down in flames.)
October 25, 2011, 9:49 pmDonM says:
Perhaps we could have “de Boches” invade France?
October 25, 2011, 9:54 pmNickM says:
Something tells me that if you asked 12 18-year old men how to solve the problem of boys getting sex ed through online porn, the solution would be free broadband.
Nick
October 25, 2011, 9:55 pmDebrah says:
Probably a bit of both.
Google+ is fantastic; however, it’s presently overridden with some great photographers and digital designers constantly pushing and posting their work.
For a few weeks that’s OK, but after a while you want and need good commentary. Something like an endless blog in addition to all the other facets of entertainment that Google+ offers.
The only thing that’s keeping Google+ from instantly leaving Facebook in the dust is that one element. They need to draw people daily as a go-to destination for their news, entertainment, as well as posting. More commentary is needed.
Boches is attempting to do his part to create a sense of “community”. Although, after reading Eugene’s analysis, it does seem lame. LOL!
However, I love Google+.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I just think that legal coercion is a pretty poor way of trying to arrange it — poor as a matter of respecting 18-year-olds’ rights, and poor as a matter of actually accomplishing something worthwhile. And even if such legal coercion is sometimes justified when military service or jury decisionmaking are involved, that hardly supports slipping down the slope to thinking that the government should be free to order citizens to speak and to listen for the sake of “increas[ing] empathy” or “creating interdependency.”
And I say that even assuming that — God forbid! — “the Occupy Movement doesn’t work.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Eugene Volokh: ever the disciple of reason and freedom of expression!
I guess it’s back to the drawing board for Boches.
October 25, 2011, 10:31 pmElliot says:
I think it’s a wonderful idea and Boches should organize a demonstration model of a few hundred thousand volunteers. And I hope we can all watch in realtime as these brilliant minds thrash out all our problems. It would be like watching Snookie and all her Jersey Shore friends solve the Greek debt problem.
October 25, 2011, 10:35 pmkoolbob says:
Why not just encourage 18 yr olds to get jobs, or educations? They pretty well invented social media, and don’t need any instructions in getting along with their racially diverse friends. That idea is a construct with their illiterate parents and teachers. Leave the kids alone, and let them find their own way. Let them become real people instead of lock-step lemmings torturing themselves over contrived concepts of social justice.
October 25, 2011, 10:38 pmkarrde says:
Echoing a connection to the discussion on the Justice Kagan Goes Hunting blog-post, perhaps the teens could go to a gun range with a law-professor who is proficient at shooting or hunting?
Failing the finding of a suitable law-professor, any net-savvy citizen who has access to firearms and a range?
They would learn a the basics of firearms handling, and socialize with someone they might not normally meet.
However, this whole idea smacks of the draft. Is Boches sure that he wants it?
October 25, 2011, 10:40 pmKendall says:
This is, of course, a terrible idea. But isn’t giving this person attention because he said something outrageous the equivalent of ignoring, say, conservatives’ concern about the debt and focusing on the people saying “get gov’t out of my Medicare?”
October 25, 2011, 11:12 pmDave says:
Everyone who’s commented has expressed their revulsion at this idea, so I suppose it wouldn’t really be contributing for me to echo all that’s been said.
But, when I was 18, if I’d been compelled into a group like this, I would have declined (regardless of whether it was mandatory or not). If that meant I had a criminal record, I would be much less averse to committing additional criminal acts (since the damage would already be done; I’d have to check the box that says “Yes, I have a criminal record” when applying for jobs.)
…so I think this idea would be a spectacularly good way to make crime rates skyrocket.
October 25, 2011, 11:18 pmGiant Frog says:
We require every 18-year-old in… : Slavery
We assign our young adults to a racially diverse…: and racism …
We present each group with a social challenge … and require an outcome…: …for busy-work.
Must be a liberal.
October 26, 2011, 12:14 ambee says:
It appears that Eugene has discovered the charms of “nutpicking”.
October 26, 2011, 12:36 amCharlie Mack says:
I don’t think he should demean Internet Porn.
October 26, 2011, 1:26 amNM Kerr says:
Something like Barb with her idea that laws exist to teach.
October 26, 2011, 1:29 amCatoRenasci says:
It seems to me that this might well run afoul of the 13th Amendment as involuntary servitude.
Both jury service (which has been traditional in common law countries since Time whereof the Memory of Man runneth not to the contrary ) and military service (based on the militia and war powers in the Constitution, based on the English tradition running back (again) to Time whereof the Memory of Man runneth not to the contrary) are different and cannot be seen as slavery or involuntary servitude under the 13th Amendment.
October 26, 2011, 7:49 amThe Drill SGT says:
Isn’t this a no cost version of the proposal from the 2008 Obama campaign that we ought to have a universal public service activity for 18 y/o’s. Something PC of course, oriented on the right political goals, led by community organizers, no guns involved.
October 26, 2011, 8:02 amDebrah says:
LOL!
I read somewhere recently that an unsettling percentage of people are getting their sex from the internet, as opposed to having a living, breathing human in the room beside them.
This is a startling development.
What will romancers do? Will the guy be sending his sperm through the mail in a vial …. while falling in love with his right (or left) hand?
I also think this is one reason many are so very inept, socially.
October 26, 2011, 8:18 amAaron G says:
What a ridiculous idea. First, solution by consensus is a bad idea (for the same reason democracy should be limited by republican mechanisms). Second, asking 18 year olds to solve our problems? Even worse idea. Third, the great thing about a non-compulsory political process is that it weeds out a lot of the people we don’t want to help in finding a solution because either a) they don’t care or b) they aren’t educated enough to contribute any meaningful, helpful solution to a complex policy problem.
We put lawyers and businessmen in charge for a reason.
October 26, 2011, 8:22 amcaptcrisis says:
Sure, it’s a bad idea, but the fact remains that white conservative kids don’t interact with people of color, or poor people, unless you force them.
October 26, 2011, 8:31 amDavid says:
Is it too cynical to see this is as a way to increase Google+ numbers and page rank?
October 26, 2011, 8:40 amBL1Y says:
Let’s just have everyone go through the University of Delaware’s resident indoctrination program.
On the porn issue, the only solution is for more girls to put out.
October 26, 2011, 8:46 amJohn Stephens says:
Are you willing to consider the idea that BOTH sides prefer it that way, and would object to forced socializing?
October 26, 2011, 8:48 amrob bob says:
Surprised at how many people are taking this seriously. This is either an elaborate joke or a guy who doesn’t merit attention.
Edit: I will acknowledge that Obama himself has generated inklings of this kind of idea, so perhaps it’s worth noting on that basis.
October 26, 2011, 9:00 amDebrah says:
Just learned some new trivia on Google+ this morning.
Someone posted “nurvd” in response to Dowd’s Wednesday column on Steve Jobs (yes, another one!).
NURV is apparently “Never Underestimate Radical Vision”.
Ugh.
October 26, 2011, 9:00 amrumpelstiltskin says:
newsflash: ad agency guy has retarded idea. film at 11.
October 26, 2011, 9:29 amShelbyC says:
I suspect it’s time for many on the left to stop calling themselves liberal. And of course, being a homophobe has nothing to do with authotarianism.
October 26, 2011, 9:31 amrumpelstiltskin says:
So what’s your excuse?
October 26, 2011, 9:33 amDebrah says:
If I knew who you were behind the ankle-biting pseudonym we might discuss the topic.
And we’d do it face-to-face ….. to see how you would fare during an authentic tête-à-tête.
You see, it’s always better to delve into the details of commentary and discover exactly what animates unprovoked barbs.
What’s your hidden culture war issue that’s eating away at you?
About which there might be disagreement?
Your inept way of scratching that itch will provide only fleeting relief.
October 26, 2011, 9:58 amcaptcrisis says:
John Stephens:
I’m just channeling George Will here. White kid meets a black kid for the first time. They don’t have to like each other, but at least you got them into the same room.
Many conservatives badly, badly need to get to know black people.
October 26, 2011, 10:33 amAnother guy named Dan says:
@DrillSgt – Another reason the infantry squad model works in the military is that there is a fine gentleman such as yourself who can offer counselling to the products of our pulic schools on the order of “If you two knuckleheads don’t learn to get along, I’ll stomp both of you into something that needs to get hosed off of the sidewalk (or parade deck, depending on the service)”
October 26, 2011, 10:42 amMDT says:
captcrisis,
Sure, it’s a bad idea, but the fact remains that white conservative kids don’t interact with people of color, or poor people, unless you force them.
Newsflash: A lot of “white conservative kids” are poor people.
October 26, 2011, 11:02 amkarrde says:
Either my parents are not conservative, or I am not white.
Explanation:
Although I am more libertarian than conservative in my policy preferences, I would probably be called conservative by most leftist/liberals. My skin tone is typical for someone whose ancestors came from London to the Colonies in the 17th Century. I had a handful of non-white friends via a religious group during high school, and my parents regularly socialize across racial lines to this day.
(Currently, my work situation has more people from the Indian sub-continent than people of African descent, and that is most of my cross-racial socialization at this point. )
Which means I did hear a story of someone who got pulled over a couple of times for Driving While Black in a suburban town that he was working late shifts in. It was a shame. Neither he nor his parents had the inclination to make it a front-page-lawsuit.
However, I was happy that both the young man and his family expected success to come through working for a living, rather than depending on Uncle Sam (or the Govt. of the Great State of Michigan).
Back to my comment: how many conservatives do you know personally? How many libertarians?
Would you know it if they were in-the-closet conservatives?
And if they were in-the-closet, would they likely come out of the closet to you?
October 26, 2011, 11:11 amkarrde says:
Then you support the Presidential aspirations of Herman Cain?
October 26, 2011, 11:16 amcaptcrisis says:
I came from an all-white town, basically a working-class factory town (think South Boston, though a little better off). The adults around me were unanimously conservative. It was only my liberal urges that got me out of there and into contact with non-whites in a variety of settings. Conservatives rarely have that urge.
October 26, 2011, 11:36 amcaptcrisis says:
P.S. As for Herman Cain, if he gets to be President I don’t think the conservative establishment will take him seriously. On the rare occasions when they put black people into positions of power, they tend to be buffoons (Michael Steele), puppets (Condoleeza Rice), or not-listened-to (Colin Powell).
October 26, 2011, 11:40 amMDT says:
captcrisis,
Are you saying then that your unanimously conservative all-white “working-class factory town” didn’t have any poor people in it?
October 26, 2011, 11:52 amrpt says:
I remember the hysteria here during that campaign regarding this non-existent plan. Curious why a “Sgt” would dis military service.
October 26, 2011, 12:04 pmrpt says:
Quite true, which makes the desired interaction more important. See Alabama.
October 26, 2011, 12:12 pmDebrah says:
Yikes! This could be dangerous.
A Social Network That Wants to Know Exactly Where You Live
“Nextdoor launches publicly on Wednesday, and it takes the real-name approach to social networking, championed most recently (and unsuccessfully) by Google+, to a new level. Your account is attached not only to your actual identify but also your physical address. This sounds dangerous.”
October 26, 2011, 12:17 pmkarrde says:
Does your experience mean my memory is faulty?
Or are you talking about a “True Conservative”, and not conservatives like me? (One which I may not care about. I said that I lean libertarian, though that is often misconstrued as ‘conservative’ by people trapped in a single-axis political spectrum.)
I will not claim that your memory is false; merely that it gives you an incomplete view of modern conservatives.
I will also hint that you might want to learn the differences between ‘conservative’ and ‘libertarian’.
October 26, 2011, 12:40 pmgasman says:
Do white liberal kids interact with those unlike themselves to any greater degree? Do the poor folks of various colors associate with each other to any meaningful degree, or do their various fraternal organizations pretty much align along racial divisions?
October 26, 2011, 1:01 pmPeople tend to associate with people ‘like’ themselves. Which kind of likeness they choose may vary, whether skin color, religion, ethnicity, or dialect of speech.
Sitting on a dime dangling my legs says:
Gosh, I dunno how those proposals are gonna replace the occupy gang…but I guess it beats the hell out of shovel ready.
October 26, 2011, 1:50 pmMori says:
While destroying the family, they offer new technology to replace the family. How thoughtful.
October 26, 2011, 3:21 pmOne Internets says:
Wow, that’s a pretty well done troll there. USENET veteran, perhaps? +1 Internets to you!
October 26, 2011, 3:29 pmMDT says:
rpt,
[me: a lot of "white conservative kids" are themselves poor]
Quite true, which makes the desired interaction more important. See Alabama.
captcrisis said that “white conservative kids” don’t interact with poor people. You and I have just agreed that this is not true.
gasman,
Do white liberal kids interact with those unlike themselves to any greater degree? Do the poor folks of various colors associate with each other to any meaningful degree, or do their various fraternal organizations pretty much align along racial divisions?
No, and no, and yes. But here’s a story for you. I lived for several years in a corner of Emeryville, CA (it’s sort of the extreme Bay side of Berkeley and Oakland, and my bit was two or three blocks from the Oakland border in three directions). This was a lower-middle-class/poor neighborhood, where the corner store was called “Bottoms Up Liquors,” and the large operations in the vicinity were a Berkeley Farms processing plant (giving off interesting odors), a bus yard for the local public transit, and the Oaks Club (Emeryville has legalized gambling; this was the big poker place).
Our street was about 1/3 each white, black, and Indian subcontinent. And it was the friendliest place I ever saw in the Bay Area. Total strangers (of all races) wished me good morning from across the street. I’ve since learned — after moving to Oregon — that this is the norm, not the exception; but, believe me, it’s pretty rare in the Bay Area.
The moral is: Never mind the “various fraternal organizations”; they are all designed to pit people against one another. Look instead at how folk live when that poisonous polarization isn’t constantly being stoked and inflamed, and you’ll find the large majority decent, and eager to protect one another from the few who are not.
October 26, 2011, 3:33 pmHasdrubal says:
Is he aware that the military is one of the strongest OPPONENTS of the draft? Yes they’re good at forcing people to work together. They are also keenly aware that it’s vastly more effective when those people want to be there in the first place.
October 26, 2011, 3:34 pmRandy says:
Shelby: “And of course, being a homophobe has nothing to do with authotarianism.”
Great! Then we expect you to decry all efforts to keep gays in the closet or adjust their behavior to your expectations.
October 26, 2011, 4:16 pmShelbyC says:
OK, I hereby decry them. Not sure what your point is though.
October 26, 2011, 5:26 pmToday in Whiskey Tango Fucktrot « Blunt Object says:
[...] “In case the Occupy Movement doesn’t work” — let’s legally require … (The Volokh Conspiracy, providing your daily requirement of snarky-quotes) [...]
October 26, 2011, 5:48 pmUno Hu says:
I would be unable to restrain my enthusiasm for this damnfool idea if he who proposed it had just included a few more details required for the proposal:
After being assigned to a “diverse group”, what is the penalty for refusing to participate? How draconian a penalty are you willing to assess for refusal to participate – loss of student loans? fines? incarceration? the firing squad?
What is the penalty for limiting your online posts to this diverse workgroup to suggestions that the other participants go and have acrobatic intercourse with themselves?
Is the [sarcasm]wise man[/sarcasm] who proposed this at all conversant with just how recalcitrant and perverse some of us libertarians can be in the face of of being shanghaied into a project that we don’t agree with from the beginning?
October 26, 2011, 5:54 pmAbelard Lindsey says:
This is the kind of crappola that makes me glad that I am not having kids at all. Who comes up with this kind of BS? Is this guy for real?
October 26, 2011, 6:36 pmAbelard Lindsey says:
A most fundamental right of an individual is that of free association. The idea that people should be forced to associate with others that they have no interest in is the worst kind of fascistic batcrap.
October 26, 2011, 6:37 pmDan Parker says:
As stupid and ill-informed as are the blogger ramblings that are the subject of this thread, you’ve managed to one-up them. Congratulations.
October 26, 2011, 6:42 pmleo marvin says:
Wait just one minute. Jim Lindgren assured us with virtual certainty Obama would conscript Americans into mandatory national service. I’ve been hunkered down in my bomb shelter for nearly three years waiting for a safe moment to pop my head up. Getting careless now just because unknown Internet commenter “rpt” claims the plan is “non-existent” sounds like exactly the kind of blunder Obama is waiting for us to make.
October 26, 2011, 6:52 pmDan Parker says:
Non-existent? Well, not anymore, apparently. But such a proposed plan certainly existed during the 2008 campaign. Then-candidate Obama himself explicitely titled it the “Universal Voluntary Public Service” program. Try a Yahoo! search usign the following terms…
…and the very first result is the following link to a PDF document from barackobama.com:
National Service Plan Fact Sheet
The document has since been removed from that location, and is no longer cached either. But it existed, and contained, among other things, the following:
His change.gov/americaserves web page also originally contained the following pledge:
But it was later changed to:
The previous version also appeared on the change.gov/agenda/service page, but that page has since been eliminated completely.
October 26, 2011, 7:30 pmAbelard Lindsey says:
I have plenty of diversity in my life. I worked with Japanese people in developing thin-film process technology, worked in a photonics start-up with Chinese people in Taiwan, and do an import/export business with a Malay/Indian guy in Malaysia. I can find plenty of diversity in my life without having to waste my time in some underclass neighborhood in the U.S.
October 26, 2011, 7:46 pmDan Parker says:
With further regard to the “non-existent” Obama plan for compulsory public service, here’s Rahm Emanuel on the idea in 2006 (Ignore the commentary and value-adds from the site itself, as it’s irrelevant and clearly biased, and focus on Rahm’s own words.):
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kerry-picket/2008/11/11/ben-smith-interview-rahm-emanuel-compulsory-service-plan-will-media-ig
October 26, 2011, 8:03 pmElliot says:
Isn’t this a racist idea? If Blacks need affirmative action to get into college, is it reasonable to presume their writing skills are not as proficient as Whites’ and Asians’ skills? (If they are, why affirmative action?)
So the Black kids would be at a disadvantage in a setting where proficiency in writing is an advantage.
October 26, 2011, 9:37 pmLarryA says:
Isn’t that what we have in D.C. now?
Starship Troopers postulated government service, including but not limited to the military.
Something tells me that if you asked 12 18-year old men how to solve the problem of boys getting sex ed through online porn, the solution would be free women.
FTFY.
October 27, 2011, 2:02 amKen Arromdee says:
Asian people are considered honorary whites when receiving racial spoils.
October 27, 2011, 11:14 amroystgnr says:
I’ve never understood all the hate for the Starship Troopers voting model. “You can’t vote until you voluntarily offer to serve” is almost the exact same model that the USA uses for men, via Selective Service, right now. The primary two differences are that the US government is currently much less likely to take you up on your offer, but infinitely more likely to punish you for failing to offer, since in our system it’s not voluntary.
October 27, 2011, 6:33 pmjosh says:
Me thinks you need to work on your reading comprehension a bit then.
October 28, 2011, 11:25 amClark says:
Oh come on. I am sure EV has a point and he and Lindgren are, as we speak, furiously combing through web page meta tags and rubbish in back alleys trying to find INCRIMINATING! evidence linking this to Obama. Otherwise, the post is tenuous bs trying to link a random webpage to OWS/progressives, or worse, just bizarre obsession with the ramblings of some random guy with a webpage. Or maybe I am mistaken and this is the first in a many part series where EV critiques every page on the Internet.
October 28, 2011, 12:07 pmCrisisEraDynamo says:
This proposal is indeed daft. It forces young adults together against their will, then forces them to write propaganda intended to buttress leftist busybodies’ desires to control our lives. These proposals, of course, will be monitored by the leftists who forced them together, and proposals that do not align with their thinking will be thrown out.
Look at how college campuses treat non-leftist speech in a public forum. This will be that, king-sized.
Here I thought liberals were for freedom. The authoritarian mask slips.
My $0.02
October 28, 2011, 6:22 pmChris Travers says:
It seems to me that if you want to increase empathy and increase interdependency, the best things to do are to get rid or Social Security (thus ensuring multi-generation households become the norm very quickly) and get rid of Section 8 Housing, thus ensuring that the less well off share living spaces, and work together in that.
Somehow these don’t seem in line with OWS……
October 31, 2011, 6:52 am