3 ms·
>The people cannot blame the government...If the people are not willing to be part of that defense. What about a person who would fight and not desert if consc
by dropit_sphere 10y ago
>The people cannot blame the government...If the people are not willing to be part of that defense.
What about a person who would fight and not desert if conscripted, but would not volunteer?
Are they "willing to be part of that defense," or not?
I submit that most people fall in that category, and that conscription is aimed at them.
- Arizhel 10y agoThat's still slavery, because some fraction of them doesn't want to serve. So if there's any punishment for refusing to serve, or for deserting, then it's slavery. If there's no punishment, or if they're allowed to opt-out, then it's not really conscription.
- dropit_sphere 10y ago>That's still slavery, Sure, OK. Slavery is not the worst possible state of existence, you know. My dog is not only a slave, but a captive slave: she can't leave my property, and I punish her when she tries to leave. But, looking at her dozing off in the sun right now, she seems pretty happy. Most people prefer the soft slavery of possible conscription, to the expected outcomes of foreign invasion. It helps that when you get conscripted, a bunch of other people are getting conscripted---or in other words, part of the compensation for getting conscripted is a whole army to defend your homeland.
- zzzcpan 10y ago"to defend your homeland" That's actually a very typical war propaganda. In reality you are defending the order your state imposes on you and everyone. In slave terms you are defending your master's desire to control you from other masters. And that's it.
- dropit_sphere 10y agoSounds reasonable, I guess you're right.
- fjdlwlv 10y agoIn a democratic society, the people are the masters, enslaved to... themselves