Compulsory National Service

Answer choices

1. A

   Wouldn't Oppose7% picked this

   the use of tax revenues to prevent the theft of national secrets

   At first, I would have rejected this answer, thinking "We don't have any idea what opinions the opponents of compulsory service have when it comes to tax revenue!" But then I would glance at all five answers and see that this rationale won't cut it, since they're all talking about tax revenues. So we'll have to apply what we know about compulsory national service to tax revenues: it's at odds with liberal principles and we should only do it to defend the nation. This answer is talking about "preventing theft of secrets by foreign agents", so this falls in to the category of "defending the nation". They don't oppose mandatory service to defend the nation as much as they oppose it for other reasons.

   7%
2. B

   Correct63% picked this

   the use of tax revenues to fund relief efforts for victims of natural disasters

   Why this is right

   We're trying to apply what we know about how these opponents feel about compulsory national service to tax revenues: it's at odds with liberal principles and we should only do it to defend the nation. So they would probably strongly oppose the "government overreach" of forcing its citizens to contribute to the well-being of people in other nations. They were tolerating mandatory service if we needed it to prevent Hitler from marching in, but not to do proactive goodwill stuff.

   Skill tested: Non-Author Opinion · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

   63%
3. C

   Wouldn't Oppose21% picked this

   the use of tax revenues to support the upkeep of the

   We're trying to apply what we know about how these opponents feel about compulsory national service to tax revenues: it's at odds with liberal principles and we should only do it to defend the nation. Since this answer is talking about "maintaining the army", it relates to defending the nation, so these opponents are more likely to tolerate it.

   21%
4. D

   Less Opposed6% picked this

   the use of tax revenues to fund programs for the maintenance of domestic

   In the 5th sentence of the last paragraph the author asks, "Can the opponent of national service truly claim that activities of the military such as quelling civil disorders, rebuilding dams and bridges, or assisting the victims of natural disasters, do not provide a similar benefit to the nation?" These are our author's words, but she is making it sound like an opponent of national service, who still makes allowances for tax money being rightly spent on some things that aren't strictly necessary for survival, would be forced to agree with this sentiment. Compared to the correct answer, spending tax money on bridges and dams at least provides a domestic benefit. That seems less objectionable than spending tax money on some other nation's benefit.

   6%
5. E

   Less Opposed3% picked this

   the use of tax revenues to aid citizens who are victims

   We're told in the 4th sentence of the last paragraph that "Even the most conservative politicians admit that tax money is rightly spent on programs that, while not necessary for the survival of the state, are nevertheless of great benefit to society". Since this answer is talking about helping citizens who are displaced by natural disasters, this would be of benefit to society, and thus these opponents would think it's okay to spend tax money on this stuff. Again, compared to the correct answer (where we spend tax money on foreign nations), at least this action provides a domestic benefit.

   3%