cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/1338851
Archived version: https://archive.ph/yDjTx
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20230811193345/https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-fire-all-regional-military-recruitment-chiefs-zelenskiy-2023-08-11/
deleted by creator
Making education so expensive that the only way for some to pursue education is to die for their country is a crime. If majority of your citizen view being part of army is only for poor people, your country does not deserve to be protected because obviously not enough people willing to fight for it. Turning your citizens into slaves and sending them into the meat grinder makes you a monster.
deleted by creator
kind of the same issue really
The problem is that it isn’t a separate issue, it’s the same body (Congress, with WH support) that imposes these problems and then offers “solutions” to the impacted population in exchange for acting as a jackbooted thug overseas.
I have the opposite view. A country at war should have the draft, and there should be no exceptions, so that the politicians who send other people’s children off to fight also have to send their own.
Most soldiers in a “professional” army are there because their families are poor and they have few other options to make a living.
There will always be exceptions, for example for disabilities or medical conditions. Most of those exceptions will be more accessible to wealthy or influential families that can afford to pay off doctors than poorer families.
deleted by creator
Politicians didn’t send their own children when there was a draft in the US. Trump AND Biden are evidence of this
Trump and Biden both avoided the draft with “1-Y” (medical) exemption. Keep in mind that more than half the 27 million eligible males were exempted or disqualified for some reason, so it’s not as if this was something only politicians did.
I would wager there was a higher percentage of the wealthy that somehow got an exemption
Make declaration of war a mandatory vote for every citizen. Anyone who votes “yes” (or illegally abstains) gets registered for the draft. Anyone who votes “no” is unregistered.
I know it’s not really feasible because governments need to be able to react swiftly in times of war. But these days with computers and cell phones, there’s very little reason that the government couldn’t push a “go download our secure voting app/visit this link to cast your vote” notification via the emergency alert broadcasting system.
Ukraine didn’t decide to go to war.
They were invaded.
After the US set the stage and created the environment to start a war.
How do you reckon it would work when it comes to age? Is the vote limited just to people of military age? Does this mean that whether or not to declare war effectively falls in the hands of ~18 - 30 year olds?
Or is it open to everyone and even some old warhawk could be drafted? Are handicapped people not allowed to vote? Women that don’t meet combat standards?
There is always the option to draft them into some sort of non-combat role. But if you knew you were only going for a non-combat role, it could be a lot easier to vote “yes”.
I’m not sure there are no situations in which draft’s are permissible. If we were in a socialist society and a fascist government invades and I were Commissar of War you bet your ass the ex-bourgeois are getting drafted.
I see your point, but that’s a topic that should be up for discussion among your hypothetical Party/legislature. I don’t think it has a clear answer.
100% agree. Me presenting it as a choice by a single Commissar for War is more tongue-in-cheek. The answer whether or we should do it is contextual but my point is that there are clear cases which I can imagine in which drafting would be clearly justified, even if of only certain groups.
But responding to a question of whether or not we should do something by saying it would be decided democratically is evading the actual question of what you would put forward or support as appropriate policy in such a scenario. If everyone one responded that way then nothing would be decided.
In this hypothetical wouldn’t the boogies and Kulacks would be in Gulags already? A bunch would be willing to sign on if it meant they might get an early release after the war. No draft necessary.
I’m really not convinced that they would normally prefer to fight fascists on the front lines than to stay in a gulag, uncomfortable as the latter might be.
draft is precisly because of that necessary , its put a general price on “Imperial adventure” while proffessional army will recruit itself from the lower classes and can be spend easly (they choose soo ) , its a bad as its forces the underprivledge to die for an empire whos fruits the privledge eat , while avoiding the blood…
deleted by creator
Volunteer service means wars are waged outside of public consciousness now. The Afghanistan war went on for 20 years and was essentially invisible to most people in the US. The Fed openly trying to increase unemployment is at least partially motivated by the military recruitment issues going on right now. Volunteer wars are fueled by the lives of desperate poor people.
Lack of a draft is almost directly and solely responsible for the current quagmire of the US military - when we had a draft, normal people were pulled and had to serve with other normal people. They had real lives to go back to. They had family and friends who would listen to them and write their representatives to complain if the use of those human resources was inappropriate. Seeing body bags flying home and a televised razing of a foreign jungle turned a lot of people off from war. And they made their voices heard.
Now, the only people being asked to pay attention are career military professionals. They often do not have a job or life outside of the military to tie them to normal life. They’ve also gotten smarter about where they fly corpses in, so the news can’t provide a solid day-by-day count of the wasted lives. These folks aren’t pushing back against the worst excesses of the military, because their college benefit or their pension require them to shut up and just do what they’re told.
There’s a great documentary called Sir! No, Sir! about the vibrant protest movement from within the military, driven mostly by draftees during Vietnam.
I don’t disagree with your initial reasoning, but there’s a different take that says that what we have allowed is for the worst of us to control the policy for all of us, with nearly no external oversight.
deleted by creator
This is a difficult problem to solve for a society though. The army is needed, because it’s what allows your country to exist. In time of peace, draft is really not optimal, because people are taken a year of their life for absolutely nothing. But the army need to keep its structure alive and functioning, or there’ll be nothing when it’s needed.
The army of professionals is a good solution, and they do a hard job to keep an important piece of the state alive when no one cares about it.
Ultimately I think it’s better if poor people make the core of the army because it means ultimately the safety of the nation is in their hands. Still, culture of the military men should be better taken care of, and elitism of the command structure should be fought.
Being in a country with a very high population means you have the privilege of enough volunteers to protect your borders.
I would be more likely to go the other way starship troopers style only those with the character to defend their country should have the right to vote in that country. Those leeching off the system and letting others doing the difficult things shouldn’t be rewarded
Oh hey, an actual Fascist.
Absolute state of the world that the view that people should defend their country is facism. I’m sure the allies didn’t see themselves as fascist in WW2
The allies didn’t have a ‘service guarantees citizenship’ model, dipshit.
You don’t think the allies out people in jail for not helping with the war effort?
Right tell me how every example of “you need to do something for your country to get citizenship” is fascism? Plenty have people have argued that you need to be educated to vote or to have land to vote or whatever. They are shit systems yes but they aren’t fascism.
You’re just using an over used internet buzzword. It’s going to lose all meaning eventually.
deleted by creator
Yes they are
yeah uh, nationalism is usually bad. imagine fucking dying for lines on a map. Imagine killing for them.
Yea what the Russians are doing is fucked. People just trying to live their lives and they come in and start killing and controlling.
lol yeah bud history started the day putin ordered the invasion and nothing happened between then and oh i don’t know, 2014
Some of them should have.
A bit fascist to assume that the only way to contribute to society is military service.
I didn’t say that.
You did though
First thing was that no draft is stupid and even something like starship troopers needing to serve the country in some way to be worth of a vote isn’t the worst idea in the world so it’s better than that. You don’t think there is anything at all in having some means of people that are willing to do more for their country be it military or otherwise should have more of a vote than those that do nothing and would leave it the second it isn’t doing enough for them? Some people want to make their country and the world a better place, why should they get less than someone that does nothing.
I’m not arguing that Turing should have been on the front line or that the Bevin Boys weren’t serving their country and willing to do everything possible to help their country and should have equality. Just those trying to escape when things go bad shouldn’t have the same rights when things go well off the backs of others.
Dude “You should have to provide service to the abstract idea that is ‘the nation’ in order to get your human rights” is just fascism, no matter how you try to spin it.
To be protected by that country yes.
See how long you get to have your rights when you stop paying taxes or ignore the laws of the state
This nerd thinks that countries are real, and not just a legal fiction invented basically yesterday in historical terms.
LOOKS LIKE FEUDALISM IS BACK ON THE MENU, BOYS
starship troopers the movie was a literal send-up of fascism and you are sitting here arguing that we should do fascism so absurd it is the realm of actual parody
or you’re advocating for the book’s straight up fascism. either way, you should eat a bullet, nazi.
I’m on about the book.
It’s militaristic but it isn’t fascism.
Heinlein was a fascist, full stop. Verhoeven didn’t even finish the book before he directed the movie because he hated the fascist ideology in it and tried to satirize it in the movie but both the actors involved and a lot of audience members missed the satire.
https://www.indiewire.com/features/general/paul-verhoeven-slams-starship-troopers-remake-fascist-update-perfect-trump-presidency-1201747155/
If you hate people leeching off the government, just wait until you hear about every single CEO and “Captain of Industry”.
deleted by creator
So essentially install a military dictatorship, because only the military gets any votes?
Mate, the Starship Troopers movie was a satire, not a fucking checklist.
I was on about the book.
The film is great but philosophically it’s a shadow of the book.
So only able bodied men and women. Big yikes. Also people who aren’t soldiers are leeches. Even bigger yikes.
Obviously not read starship troopers thet make it very clear that anyone can serve and will be accommodated. And they make it very clear that being in the military isn’t the only way to serve.
It’s just above providing for your country and earning the right to vote.
Oh well if starship fucking troopers says it. You do realize that’s satire right. Jesus fuck you fascists are so fucking oblivious it isn’t funny.