What does 'serving your country' really mean?

[a_majoor]

As a civic nationalist, I would say the minimum is to be a productive, law abiding citizen.

The CF and Police are at the top of the civic virtue heap simply because they accept an unlimited liability contract, and are willing to lay everything on the line, even their lives, for their fellow citizens.

Other job descriptions like firefighters and EMS may not have explicit "unliited liability" contracts with their fellow citizens, but often operate under conditions of extreme personal stress and danger, hence their position.

Everyone else can lay a claim to being virtuous citizens, but for the most part, they do not operate under unlimited liability contracts, and it is foolish to pretend that they do. As an aside, there are plenty of citizens who, as individuals fall into this category; these are the people who, without hesitation, jump into rivers or burning buildings to save a someone else, taking an unlimited liability for a very short time to deal with an emergency. These good and brave people are a separate category, since they did not and do not accept unlimited liability for their entire careers.

 

[mariomike]

Really I am not trying to start a toast,roast or dog pile fight but the comment about adding correctional services got me thinking where does this " group" begin and end.  Please keep comments civil and lets see if we can expand on this line of thought.

This is the "family" of Exemplary Service Medals:
http://www.gg.ca/honours/medals/hon04-esm_e.asp
http://www.gg.ca/honours/search-recherche/index_e.asp?TypeID=esm

 

[Aerobicrunner]

It is a complex question, but for me it means putting Canada before myself. Service before self is, perhaps, the most important element of military life. The concept of unlimited liability is critical. By this I mean that a soldier/sailor/airman can be ordered into situations that could cost them their life. This makes military service fairly unique.

While a unit, squadron or ship should certainly develop the kind of teamwork and sense of belonging that is felt in a sports team (especially at lower levels like the section, vehicle etc), at the end of the day we must remember that serve Canada. The military is subservient to legal civilian authority and exists to serve and defend the interests of Canada. Individuals in the military must be able to execute legal orders regardless of their personal feelings or interests.

At the risk of sounding preachy I don't think that there is anything silly about patriotism. I am proud of Canada and I am willing to risk all to defend it.

...and I think your comments segue nicely into this excerpt I found as part of a sentencing statement in one of the Court Martial decisions in the JAG site:

"Discipline is that quality that every CF member must have which allows him or her to put the interests of Canada and the interests of the Canadian Forces before personal interests. This is necessary because Canadian Forces members must willingly and promptly obey lawful orders that may have very devastating personal consequences such as injury and death. I describe discipline as a quality, because ultimately, although it is something which is developed and encouraged by the Canadian Forces through instruction, training and practice, it is an internal quality that is one of the fundamental prerequisites to operational efficiency in any armed force."

 

[mellian]

As Heinlein himself stated in Starship Troopers....

While I have yet read book, I read lots about it and the concepts introduced by. I am fan of the idea of requiring to have done civil service to gain the right to vote, and in turn assume run for elections. As long civil service is not base only on military kind, and includes other forms and ways one can achieve it, to me anyway I believe it can work. Not everyone agrees with me of course, especially due to the potential of discrimination of certain sections of the populace and push towards a more militarize society.

As for whether one's activism or past of being disloyal to the country in some way, it is really a matter of perspective. Even with anti-war protesting or activism in general, one can still be nationalistic in their beliefs, as in they are fighting/pushing for better world and country for all of us to live in. Just that there is different ideas on what is best for the country and world. In the same vein, just because one is anti-war or has been does not mean they cannot be pro-military. It is something I had to point in some of the debates and discussions I had with fellow anti-war folks. Nothing in my experience is as simple as black and white.

 

[mariomike]

Nothing in my experience is as simple as black and white.

The army is the best thing ever happened to me.
I never asked myself why, but maybe you gave me the answer.
I was able to focus my energy on self-improvement and embrace the discipline.

 

[mellian]

You seem to me like a girl who likes to stir up things! Maybe you should go Armour... there isn't a worst kind of trouble than combat.  >

Online anyways, and mainly for constructive and devil advocate reasons.  

Of course, I tend to stir things up whether I want to or not in real life, as me applying and in being the CF potentially can be, especially with Armour in comparisons to my other choices.

Your values are in contradiction to the CF's; I question your motivations to join.

I question your knowledge of my values and what my motivations to join are.

I seem to remember that you want to join as an Officer ? There will be times (should you make it) when you will EXPECT your subordinates to follow your orders blindly; I hope when that happens you will remember what you wrote here.
Have you thought about the fact that you may end up a "very questionable person " yourself ? If I served beside you, I would very seriously question your loyalty and integrity.

You know what? Having anyone faithfully follow me blindly no matter what scares the crap out of me. Not just in terms of responsibility, but that I may eff things up and uselessly cost their lives or that of others. I am the sort that would seek feedback as much as reasonably possible and making sure they know what they are getting into...in the right time and place of course...while assuring as much as possible to assure their safety. I question any leader who do not factor in the welfare of their people and soldiers.

Whatever the case, due to financial issues with my university, I am unable to complete my education presently a long with getting an official transcript for the ROTP/CEOTP applications. I figured would be better to apply as NCM, and then later when I pay off my present school debt (not student loans), will determine then whether I should apply for CEOTP or not.

I respect that you want to fight for what you believe in, but make sure you do it from the right "moral ground"; in your case, I doubt the Military is the right place. I am not convinced you would be able to do that in the CF.

What is this 'right moral ground' you speak of?

 

[mellian]

The army is the best thing ever happened to me.
I never asked myself why, but maybe you gave me the answer.
I was able to focus my energy on self-improvement and embrace the discipline.

Basically part of why I would like to join the Canadian Forces help me better myself in terms of self-discipline and self-motivation, as well as a career and some kind of purpose. Essentially, seeking a group to help fulfill individual needs...yes, I am a fan of the Hierarchy of Needs. 

 

[helpup]

Personally I hate the whole hiegharchy of needs. but I do understand where it comes from. ................. with out trying to sound like a cheer leader I think she answered some questions. That were, in my opinion, unfairly put forward. Let loose the perspective of someones past and try and see them for who they can be.  If that is not someones quote then maybe it should be.

 

[Roy Harding]

While I have yet read book, I read lots about it and the concepts introduced by. I am fan of the idea of requiring to have done civil service to gain the right to vote, and in turn assume run for elections. As long civil service is not base only on military kind, and includes other forms and ways one can achieve it, to me anyway I believe it can work. Not everyone agrees with me of course, especially due to the potential of discrimination of certain sections of the populace and push towards a more militarize society.

As for whether one's activism or past of being disloyal to the country in some way, it is really a matter of perspective. Even with anti-war protesting or activism in general, one can still be nationalistic in their beliefs, as in they are fighting/pushing for better world and country for all of us to live in. Just that there is different ideas on what is best for the country and world. In the same vein, just because one is anti-war or has been does not mean they cannot be pro-military. It is something I had to point in some of the debates and discussions I had with fellow anti-war folks. Nothing in my experience is as simple as black and white.

I tend to agree with you regarding both points.

I have ALWAYS been an advocate of some type of compulsory "National Service" - whether that service is military, or in some type of Peace Corps outfit (probably controlled by DFAIT), would be up to the individual.  Those in the Peace Corps thing would do such things as assist those DFAIT initiatives in less "volatile" regions of the world.  Help with food distribution, irrigation projects, infrastructure construction - and so on.  I THINK such compulsory service (military or "Peace Corps") would eventually give rise to a much more aware and less self-absorbed citizenry.

As far as protesting various government decisions goes - that remains not only a RIGHT, but in my opinion a DUTY of all citizens.  How that protest is pursued (as long as it is legal) is a matter of supreme indifference to me.  Personally, I'm an inveterate emailer of various political folk - pointing out their mistakes in logic, and my displeasure with their various actions - and even occasionally complimenting their various actions).

I don't have a problem with legal protesters (even those whose position I disagree with) - and I don't understand why anybody would.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Jumping in a bit late, but I've given this a bit of thought in light of what others have posted.

After a bit of time in the military and other endeavours, when I think about my most satisfying times (mostly training and teaching of one sort or another), I think it comes back to this for me:

Serving your community (define it at will) means doing something that contributes to something bigger than yourself, the "greater good", if you will.  Your effort leads to some things being, eventually, better than you found them.

We can always argue the perfection (or lack thereof) of systems within which we work, but for me, I've felt best when I know I'm making a difference to the people I dealt with or the system as a whole (OK, sometimes it was only the bit of the system that I could see, but nonetheless...).  This is where "thinking in shades of grey" comes in.

I have ALWAYS been an advocate of some type of compulsory "National Service" - whether that service is military, or in some type of Peace Corps outfit (probably controlled by DFAIT), would be up to the individual.  Those in the Peace Corps thing would do such things as assist those DFAIT initiatives in less "volatile" regions of the world.  Help with food distribution, irrigation projects, infrastructure construction - and so on.  I THINK such compulsory service (military or "Peace Corps") would eventually give rise to a much more aware and less self-absorbed citizenry.

In general, I'd love to hope so, too, but like with compulsory military service, I wonder about the results on the system of people being forced to do something they may not want to do.

In Ontario, for example, there's been a requirement for a few years now that high school students do a certain number of hours of community volunteer service in order to graduate.  Even with that in place (and I stand to be corrected by those who deal with such populations), I don't believe it's led to an overall increase in moral fortitude in young people across the board.

As far as protesting various government decisions goes - that remains not only a RIGHT, but in my opinion a DUTY of all citizens.  How that protest is pursued (as long as it is legal) is a matter of supreme indifference to me.

Here, here - one thing among many that jumped out at me when I visited Arlington National Cemetery for my first time is this inscription, attributed to George Washington, in the Memorial Amphitheatre:

"When we assumed the soldier we did not lay aside the citizen."​

 

[Michael OLeary]

??? Is that what they call Chain of Command now?

No, may I suggest this link for more info.

 

[223ofDemocracy]

For me "serving your country" is anything that attempts to maintain our way of life of Canada. Attempting to better or maintain our standard of living, or our status of a free and democratic society. "Serving your country" may not be necessarily defined as a military aspect, something like volunteer work or voting could be considered serving your country.

 

[a_majoor]

For me "serving your country" is anything that attempts to maintain our way of life of Canada. Attempting to better or maintain our standard of living, or our status of a free and democratic society. "Serving your country" may not be necessarily defined as a military aspect, something like volunteer work or voting could be considered serving your country.

While you are correct so far as it goes, there is still a distinct heirarchy of service. Serving your country in a soup kitchen or foodbank is a low impact, low risk activity and many people who serve are motivated by "feel good" reasons rather than devotion to service (that is why I generally volunteer my time to church charity groups instead). The greater the personal risks you are willing to take, and the greater the expected payoffs generally equals the greater contribution you are making for the nation.

Military members explicitly volunteer with an unlimited liability contract, and well over 125 members have died in Afghanistan since 2002. We go where our government tells us, do what is asked and generally hope that our actions will have a great impact on Canada and the greater world. The fact that we are willing to fight and die to protect the ability of others to contribute in their own ways also makes military service a different order of serving your country than anything else.

 

[mariomike]

While you are correct so far as it goes, there is still a distinct heirarchy of service. Serving your country in a soup kitchen or foodbank is a low impact, low risk activity and many people who serve are motivated by "feel good" reasons rather than devotion to service (that is why I generally volunteer my time to church charity groups instead). The greater the personal risks you are willing to take, and the greater the expected payoffs generally equals the greater contribution you are making for the nation.

Military members explicitly volunteer with an unlimited liability contract, and well over 125 members have died in Afghanistan since 2002. We go where our government tells us, do what is asked and generally hope that our actions will have a great impact on Canada and the greater world. The fact that we are willing to fight and die to protect the ability of others to contribute in their own ways also makes military service a different order of serving your country than anything else.

Thank you for organizing my thoughts into words.