4 ms·

Conscientious Objectors in Their Own Words

35 points by zeristor 6y ago

pmoriarty 6y ago
I respect conscientious objectors far more than those who choose to kill.
- umvi 6y ago
  Not every soldier is a bloodthirsty Blackwater mercenary. I think it takes more courage to put your life on the line for your country than to avoid putting your life on the line with some moral justification you've come up with. Not all wars are the same, obviously. Perhaps I would respect the conscientious objector in the case of Afghanistan, but if there is a draft for WW3 and everything is on the line - our country, our freedom, I would respect the soldier who answers the call of duty more than someone who tries to get out of it (unless they just object to the killing part and still go as a medic)
  - jefurii 6y ago
    It takes a lot of willpower and courage to swim against the tide of your entire culture especially during wartime. My grandfathers were both COs. They didn't spend the war sitting around relaxing. One served as a smoke jumper (forest firefighter) in the Sierras and the other worked in a mental institution, which in those days was more like Bedlam than a hospital. They had to pay their own way and missed out on GI Bill benefits (fair enough).
  - jpmoral 6y ago
    >with some moral justification you've come up with >more than someone who tries to get out of it This sounds pretty dismissive of conscientious objection, regarding it as little more than a veil for cowardice. You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but I'm curious as to whether I've judged that correctly and how strongly you hold it.
    - gridlockd 6y ago
      Suppose I'm a millionaire who refuses to pay taxes because that is financing war. Isn't it a little bit too convenient that me not paying taxes makes me richer for "moral reasons"? If someone stands to gain from something, one must assume the least noble of all plausible motives.
  - belorn 6y ago
    During the second world war, only about 25% of the solider fired their rifle during the war. Among those few that did, the wast majority did so in response of a buddy getting shot or shot at. It takes a lot to get people to kill an other human being. A country and freedom sounds like a nice concept but in the battle field what actually count to push people over that edge is pseudo-kinship.
- gridlockd 6y ago
  You can join the war and not kill people. In fact it's very common that soldiers fail to pull the trigger on a live target. For most soldiers, in most battles, it's rather unlikely that they will (knowingly) kill someone, or that they even get in the situation where they could. I can make up all kinds of moral reasons on why I might object to being part of a war, but "I don't want to kill people" is bullshit. "I don't want to put my ass on the line" is a good reason, it just doesn't sound too good when everybody else is doing just that.
goblin89 6y ago
IWM is an great example of web design. Site is legible, accessible, responsive across viewport widths. Page layouts maintain clear visual hierarchy. It appears that designers took care to place as few as possible constraints on the content, ensuring their layout works with media of almost any dimensions and copy of almost any length without breaking overall consistency. I have some qualms with typography (use of dashes, quotes and apostrophes), but it is very well-thought-through. Also, the fact that it’s built with Drupal for me personally helps curb my stack snobbery.
- zeristor 6y ago
  I was impressed with the website, perhaps instantly relieved not having to wriggle out of any tracking cookies.
klenwell 6y ago
This statement by Nuremburg prosecutor Ben Ferencz has resonated with me: That's nonsense. That's nonsense. There's no Greatest Generation. Greatest Generation are the ones who have the courage to say that what the government's doing is wrong, and we'll not support it. That's the Greatest Generation. When they said, "Hell, no," in the Vietnam War, "Hell, no, Mr. President, we won't go." Stop war-making is the answer. Source: https://www.revealnews.org/episodes/take-no-prisoners-inside-a-wwii-american-war-crime/ https://www.revealnews.org/episodes/take-no-prisoners-inside... (Note: the transcript is mislabeled.)
- umvi 6y ago
  Not every war is "war-making". South Korea wouldn't exist if not for the US intervention. Who knows what Japan would be like if it weren't for the US declaring war on it. But before the US forced a new democratic government on them they were bullies and warmongers. Heck, there's a sister thread on HN with people calling for the US military to help Hong Kong. It's one thing to conscientiously object to Vietnam, quite another to conscientiously object to WW2. Some people may genuinely have moral objections, but surely some % are just plain scared of dying and want an out...
  - whatshisface 6y ago
    Where did you get the idea that conscientious objection was about disagreement with the government's evaluation of the benefits of the war? It's for people who think that it's wrong to kill, not people who think that the war won't be profitable.
    - umvi 6y ago
      Yes well, sometimes it's kill or be killed. How can you conscientiously object to WW2 when evil is at your doorstep threatening to destroy your country and kill you and your family?
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
Thorrez 6y ago
>None of the COs interviewed by IWM appeared to feel any bitterness about their treatment, but they seem to remain, through their First World War experiences, permanently set apart. So a lot of them were sent to prison, and they didn't feel bitter about it? That's impressively forgiving.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
jefurii 6y ago
Mostly fair coverage considering that this is coming from the Imperial War Museum. This bit at the end sticks out: "None of the COs _interviewed_by_IWM_ appeared to feel any bitterness about their treatment, but they seem to remain, through their First World War experiences, permanently set apart. [emphasis mine]"

35 points by zeristor 6y ago

pmoriarty 6y ago

I respect conscientious objectors far more than those who choose to kill.

umvi 6y ago
Not every soldier is a bloodthirsty Blackwater mercenary. I think it takes more courage to put your life on the line for your country than to avoid putting your life on the line with some moral justification you've come up with. Not all wars are the same, obviously. Perhaps I would respect the conscientious objector in the case of Afghanistan, but if there is a draft for WW3 and everything is on the line - our country, our freedom, I would respect the soldier who answers the call of duty more than someone who tries to get out of it (unless they just object to the killing part and still go as a medic)
- jefurii 6y ago
  It takes a lot of willpower and courage to swim against the tide of your entire culture especially during wartime. My grandfathers were both COs. They didn't spend the war sitting around relaxing. One served as a smoke jumper (forest firefighter) in the Sierras and the other worked in a mental institution, which in those days was more like Bedlam than a hospital. They had to pay their own way and missed out on GI Bill benefits (fair enough).
- jpmoral 6y ago
  >with some moral justification you've come up with >more than someone who tries to get out of it This sounds pretty dismissive of conscientious objection, regarding it as little more than a veil for cowardice. You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but I'm curious as to whether I've judged that correctly and how strongly you hold it.
  - gridlockd 6y ago
    Suppose I'm a millionaire who refuses to pay taxes because that is financing war. Isn't it a little bit too convenient that me not paying taxes makes me richer for "moral reasons"? If someone stands to gain from something, one must assume the least noble of all plausible motives.
- belorn 6y ago
  During the second world war, only about 25% of the solider fired their rifle during the war. Among those few that did, the wast majority did so in response of a buddy getting shot or shot at. It takes a lot to get people to kill an other human being. A country and freedom sounds like a nice concept but in the battle field what actually count to push people over that edge is pseudo-kinship.
gridlockd 6y ago
You can join the war and not kill people. In fact it's very common that soldiers fail to pull the trigger on a live target. For most soldiers, in most battles, it's rather unlikely that they will (knowingly) kill someone, or that they even get in the situation where they could. I can make up all kinds of moral reasons on why I might object to being part of a war, but "I don't want to kill people" is bullshit. "I don't want to put my ass on the line" is a good reason, it just doesn't sound too good when everybody else is doing just that.

goblin89 6y ago

IWM is an great example of web design. Site is legible, accessible, responsive across viewport widths. Page layouts maintain clear visual hierarchy. It appears that designers took care to place as few as possible constraints on the content, ensuring their layout works with media of almost any dimensions and copy of almost any length without breaking overall consistency. I have some qualms with typography (use of dashes, quotes and apostrophes), but it is very well-thought-through. Also, the fact that it’s built with Drupal for me personally helps curb my stack snobbery.

zeristor 6y ago
I was impressed with the website, perhaps instantly relieved not having to wriggle out of any tracking cookies.

klenwell 6y ago

This statement by Nuremburg prosecutor Ben Ferencz has resonated with me: That's nonsense. That's nonsense. There's no Greatest Generation. Greatest Generation are the ones who have the courage to say that what the government's doing is wrong, and we'll not support it. That's the Greatest Generation. When they said, "Hell, no," in the Vietnam War, "Hell, no, Mr. President, we won't go." Stop war-making is the answer. Source: https://www.revealnews.org/episodes/take-no-prisoners-inside-a-wwii-american-war-crime/ https://www.revealnews.org/episodes/take-no-prisoners-inside... (Note: the transcript is mislabeled.)

umvi 6y ago
Not every war is "war-making". South Korea wouldn't exist if not for the US intervention. Who knows what Japan would be like if it weren't for the US declaring war on it. But before the US forced a new democratic government on them they were bullies and warmongers. Heck, there's a sister thread on HN with people calling for the US military to help Hong Kong. It's one thing to conscientiously object to Vietnam, quite another to conscientiously object to WW2. Some people may genuinely have moral objections, but surely some % are just plain scared of dying and want an out...
- whatshisface 6y ago
  Where did you get the idea that conscientious objection was about disagreement with the government's evaluation of the benefits of the war? It's for people who think that it's wrong to kill, not people who think that the war won't be profitable.
  - umvi 6y ago
    Yes well, sometimes it's kill or be killed. How can you conscientiously object to WW2 when evil is at your doorstep threatening to destroy your country and kill you and your family?
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]

Thorrez 6y ago

>None of the COs interviewed by IWM appeared to feel any bitterness about their treatment, but they seem to remain, through their First World War experiences, permanently set apart. So a lot of them were sent to prison, and they didn't feel bitter about it? That's impressively forgiving.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

jefurii 6y ago

Mostly fair coverage considering that this is coming from the Imperial War Museum. This bit at the end sticks out: "None of the COs _interviewed_by_IWM_ appeared to feel any bitterness about their treatment, but they seem to remain, through their First World War experiences, permanently set apart. [emphasis mine]"