3 ms·
It's more fundamental. First sentence in that link talks about "enemies" as a kind of axiom. In light of Sagan's quote, such concepts are absurd.
by kidme5 5y ago
It's more fundamental. First sentence in that link talks about "enemies" as a kind of axiom. In light of Sagan's quote, such concepts are absurd.
- sandworm101 5y agoA soldier does not pick their enemy. Politicians decide if an enemy exists and then points them out to the soldier. The existential concept of enemy has nothing to do with the soldier as they cannot create nor uncreate their enemy. Only politicians, and the people who elect them, control such things. Stalin actual toyed with the concept of a totally volunteer army, one where volunteer soldiers would elect their officers and only participate in actions with which they agreed. It didn't go well. Such an army is next to useless in the real world.
- amanaplanacanal 5y agoFor myself, I can't imagine putting myself in a position to give politicians the power to tell me who to kill. Just... no. Are there really people who put that much faith in politicians? I don't understand that kind of thinking at all.
- lamontcg 5y ago"just following orders" then.
- laszlokorte 5y agoI soldier could have choosen to reject the concept of „enemy“ by not being a soldier and not letting a gouvernment define distinct groups of people as „enemies“