4 ms·

On the other hand, violent conflict is terrible and contributing to these conflicts is, from at least my moral standpoint, not a good thing to do. And then afte

by snek 8y ago

On the other hand, violent conflict is terrible and contributing to these conflicts is, from at least my moral standpoint, not a good thing to do. And then after you deal with the morality of this, you get to the horrible causes of all these conflicts which can usually be traced to either rich people/companies and their {oil, gas, gold, etc} or religious conflict. Count me out of this tyvm. Some sort of motivation for civil service would be pretty sweet though.

rayiner 8y ago
Violent conflict is one of the most fundamental interactions between living creatures. It is terrible in the same sense that death and taxes are terrible, but that is no reason to shield people from the social customs surrounding death, or the payment of taxes.
- throwawaymath 8y ago
  Yeah but...taxes don't kill people. Warfare is pretty clearly not like taxes.
  - rayiner 8y ago
    No, but taxes, like killing people, are unavoidable in any society of non-trivial size and complexity. You can’t have a country without taxes, just as you can’t have a country without a military. And once you have a military, why shouldn’t everyone participate at some level for the common good, just as everyone is forced to pay taxes for the common good?
    - throwawaymath 8y ago
      Isn't there a pretty vast gulf between something that's unavoidable and something that should be actively encouraged? Without making any further analogies to litigate, isn't it pretty straightward that we shouldn't encourage a thing just because it frequently happens? Responding to your edit...I'm not really following anymore. Taxes are necessary and mundane. Warfare is mundane, but it's not obvious to me that it's necessary. Therefore why not get all the individual benefits of military service without joining the military?
      - rayiner 8y ago
        Mandatory military service doesn’t encourage more war, which is the bad thing you want to discourage. It encourages broad participation in preparing for and participating in war when it happens.
      - dctoedt 8y ago
        > Warfare is mundane, but it's not obvious to me that it's necessary. Warfare's not strictly necessary, but your adversary gets a vote as to whether it's desirable.
  - LyndsySimon 8y ago
    Taxes don't kill people in the same way that an aggressively expansionist country doesn't cause wars - if you resist, then force is applied to at at least the level necessary to ensure your compliance, up to and including lethal force. A person pays their taxes and they aren't arrested. If they don't resist that arrest, they'll "only" be imprisoned. A country gives up land to their stronger neighbor and they aren't attacked. If they don't resist that annexation, they'll "only" become a vassal state.
    - throwawaymath 8y ago
      I can't tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me?
- crimsonalucard 8y ago
  Unlike other creatures humanity can control the course of evolution and change our very natures. I say if we can control it we should aim for betterment rather than let the natural outcome dictate our path. Civilization goes through a form of natural selection the natural outcome is for our civilization to die and a another one to take its place. Betterment is not a criteria for natural selection, survival is... and if cavemen replace a technological civilization because of survivability then we have lost from a cultural standpoint. Aim for something better.
- mrob 8y ago
  If conscription is analogous to tax, then it's analogous to a poll tax, which is equally immoral, and rightly resisted by many people. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax_riots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax_riots
mabbo 8y ago
On the contrary: what politician in their right mind would vote in favor of a senseless, needless war? No matter what district or state you're from, the people voting would remember that you sent their kids into a war zone. In a generation, most voters would have served and be able to recognize a bullshit war. Iraq would have been a political impossibility.
- snek 8y ago
  Maybe? A lot of people at the time believed that the war in iraq was bullshit. There were major protests almost a full year before we actually sent troops in.
- gotocake 8y ago
  Do we really need a Vietnam for every generation before you learn the damned lesson?! People protested, people ran to Canada, people shot themselves in the foot, and the unlucky ones died in a jungle for literally nothing. If you want to wax rhapsodic about a pure fantasy at odds with thousands of years of history, maybe this isn’t the site for it. At the very least please at act like you’re aware of more than a few decades of history. History is full of conscription, and far from leading to less war it correlates with endless warfare. The term “cannon fodder” isn’t new!
crimsonalucard 8y ago
The modern military doesnt really contribute that much violence nowadays as society has never been more at peace than ever before. If you look at the numbers there has literally never been a time when the number of conflicts have been so low. The military nowadays is more of a subsidized project building unnecessary war machines to help the economy keep moving and to show off. I mean look at the f-35. If you truly want to contribute to killing and violence the special forces arm of the military is where it happens.
- snek 8y ago
  Some violent conflict is still a nonzero amount of violent conflict... And seeing as the f35 has been used in active combat, I wouldn't feel comfortable being forced to be an engineer at Lockheed either.
  - crimsonalucard 8y ago
    People who make cars are responsible for more deaths than the F-35. There's more blood on their hands. If you make an F-35 you are making a tool to further the machinations of the military industrial complex not a killing machine as everyone knows the F-35 is a complicated disaster of engineering.
badrabbit 8y ago
A different perspective: maybe there can be less violence if you and everyone has to take part in the military. Maybe unneccesary wars can be much more politically difficult to start if everyone knew what the military is like and they could be called upon to take part. You can be counted out but someone else will be counted in to start those conflicts. Soldiers are not mindless but if only those who like soldiering join then you have mostly soldiers that follow most orders.

by snek 8y ago

rayiner 8y ago

Violent conflict is one of the most fundamental interactions between living creatures. It is terrible in the same sense that death and taxes are terrible, but that is no reason to shield people from the social customs surrounding death, or the payment of taxes.

throwawaymath 8y ago
Yeah but...taxes don't kill people. Warfare is pretty clearly not like taxes.
- rayiner 8y ago
  No, but taxes, like killing people, are unavoidable in any society of non-trivial size and complexity. You can’t have a country without taxes, just as you can’t have a country without a military. And once you have a military, why shouldn’t everyone participate at some level for the common good, just as everyone is forced to pay taxes for the common good?
  - throwawaymath 8y ago
    Isn't there a pretty vast gulf between something that's unavoidable and something that should be actively encouraged? Without making any further analogies to litigate, isn't it pretty straightward that we shouldn't encourage a thing just because it frequently happens? Responding to your edit...I'm not really following anymore. Taxes are necessary and mundane. Warfare is mundane, but it's not obvious to me that it's necessary. Therefore why not get all the individual benefits of military service without joining the military?
    - rayiner 8y ago
      Mandatory military service doesn’t encourage more war, which is the bad thing you want to discourage. It encourages broad participation in preparing for and participating in war when it happens.
    - dctoedt 8y ago
      > Warfare is mundane, but it's not obvious to me that it's necessary. Warfare's not strictly necessary, but your adversary gets a vote as to whether it's desirable.
- LyndsySimon 8y ago
  Taxes don't kill people in the same way that an aggressively expansionist country doesn't cause wars - if you resist, then force is applied to at at least the level necessary to ensure your compliance, up to and including lethal force. A person pays their taxes and they aren't arrested. If they don't resist that arrest, they'll "only" be imprisoned. A country gives up land to their stronger neighbor and they aren't attacked. If they don't resist that annexation, they'll "only" become a vassal state.
  - throwawaymath 8y ago
    I can't tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me?
crimsonalucard 8y ago
Unlike other creatures humanity can control the course of evolution and change our very natures. I say if we can control it we should aim for betterment rather than let the natural outcome dictate our path. Civilization goes through a form of natural selection the natural outcome is for our civilization to die and a another one to take its place. Betterment is not a criteria for natural selection, survival is... and if cavemen replace a technological civilization because of survivability then we have lost from a cultural standpoint. Aim for something better.
mrob 8y ago
If conscription is analogous to tax, then it's analogous to a poll tax, which is equally immoral, and rightly resisted by many people. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax_riots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax_riots

mabbo 8y ago

On the contrary: what politician in their right mind would vote in favor of a senseless, needless war? No matter what district or state you're from, the people voting would remember that you sent their kids into a war zone. In a generation, most voters would have served and be able to recognize a bullshit war. Iraq would have been a political impossibility.

snek 8y ago
Maybe? A lot of people at the time believed that the war in iraq was bullshit. There were major protests almost a full year before we actually sent troops in.
gotocake 8y ago
Do we really need a Vietnam for every generation before you learn the damned lesson?! People protested, people ran to Canada, people shot themselves in the foot, and the unlucky ones died in a jungle for literally nothing. If you want to wax rhapsodic about a pure fantasy at odds with thousands of years of history, maybe this isn’t the site for it. At the very least please at act like you’re aware of more than a few decades of history. History is full of conscription, and far from leading to less war it correlates with endless warfare. The term “cannon fodder” isn’t new!

crimsonalucard 8y ago

The modern military doesnt really contribute that much violence nowadays as society has never been more at peace than ever before. If you look at the numbers there has literally never been a time when the number of conflicts have been so low. The military nowadays is more of a subsidized project building unnecessary war machines to help the economy keep moving and to show off. I mean look at the f-35. If you truly want to contribute to killing and violence the special forces arm of the military is where it happens.

snek 8y ago
Some violent conflict is still a nonzero amount of violent conflict... And seeing as the f35 has been used in active combat, I wouldn't feel comfortable being forced to be an engineer at Lockheed either.
- crimsonalucard 8y ago
  People who make cars are responsible for more deaths than the F-35. There's more blood on their hands. If you make an F-35 you are making a tool to further the machinations of the military industrial complex not a killing machine as everyone knows the F-35 is a complicated disaster of engineering.

badrabbit 8y ago

A different perspective: maybe there can be less violence if you and everyone has to take part in the military. Maybe unneccesary wars can be much more politically difficult to start if everyone knew what the military is like and they could be called upon to take part. You can be counted out but someone else will be counted in to start those conflicts. Soldiers are not mindless but if only those who like soldiering join then you have mostly soldiers that follow most orders.