7 ms·

> War is part of society War is part of society? To barbaric ones maybe. Civilized societies don't settle disputes by mass murder. > If society tells you to g

by gizmo 15y ago

> War is part of society War is part of society? To barbaric ones maybe. Civilized societies don't settle disputes by mass murder. > If society tells you to go kill somebody and you do, you can't be a sociopath. Are you kidding me? Society can't tell a person to go kill somebody. A person tells another person to kill somebody. It is this absurd respect for authority that makes these wars possible, combined with a lack of personal accountability. Didn't we learn the lesson of the second World War? > The United States made a huge mistake in moving to an all-volunteer army in the 1970s [...] As it is now, the vast majority of civilians have absolutely no idea what military service is like, as the author points out. That was the entire point of ending conscription! Vietnam became a huge PR nightmare because average kids from middle class families had to fight in it. That's why it got constant media attention. That's why people protested in the streets. The people don't mind war as long as it doesn't affect them personally, and poor people have no say anyway. So now poor kids with few options are recruited into the military. Problem solved.

cellis 15y ago
Politicians are the body and voice of society. I hate to expose an ugly truth to you, but it is not a single person deciding to go to war. It takes many people to nod in agreement before bombs start being dropped and troops start marching.
- cglace 15y ago
  That is the way it is supposed to work but how many people would say politicians are doing what their constituents really want.
spindritf 15y ago
> War is part of society? To barbaric ones maybe. Civilized societies don't settle disputes by mass murder. It's quite the opposite -- only civilized societies can have the kind of logistics, range, military culture, ability to support the warrior class (or standing armies), and numbers to engage in organized warfare. Conflicts between small bands of foragers can hardly be even called war. Not to mention mass murder which absolutely requires the kind of discipline, organization and leadership only a very cohesive and civilized society can provide. It just doesn't happen outside of civilization, no one has the means, or could benefit from it. Anything of the scale of holocaust is only possible in a highly industrialized country. > So now poor kids with few options are recruited into the military. Problem solved. Actually, poor kids seem to be enlisting at lower rates (relatively) to richer kids: > Enlisted recruits in 2006 and 2007 came primarily from middle-class and upper-middle-class backgrounds. Low-income neighborhoods were underrepresented among enlisted troops, while middle-class and high-income neighborhoods were overrepresented. This and much more on the topic: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/08/who-serves-in-the-us-military-the-demographics-of-enlisted-troops-and-officers http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/08/who-serves-...
- gizmo 15y ago
  I present to you: Ghengis Kahn. 40 million people died as a result of his campaigns. Civilized society? Not at all. Just organized tribal warfare. > Actually, poor kids seem to be enlisting at lower rates (relatively) to richer kids Huh. I stand corrected.
  - spindritf 15y ago
    > Civilized society? Yes, of course. It came to existence when Ghengis Khan united nomadic tribes but so did the countries in Europe -- Franks were a confederation of tribes, Poland was founded by a tribe subduing its neighbours, etc, etc. That is how civilization is born. If it wasn't for that they wouldn't be able to reach Europe. That is why we call them the Mongol Empire.
    - gizmo 15y ago
      Oh c'mon. If you define civilized society that broadly than anything capable of organized warfare is by definition a civilized society. It would be a pointless tautology. In that context my response that systematic murder is uncivilized (and that therefore a society that engages in systematic murder is an uncivilized society) becomes a direct contradiction in terms. So that's obviously not what I meant. When I speak of a civilized society it is in comparison to other societies. Not all countries violate human rights on the same scale, and therefore, not all countries are equally civilized.
      - spindritf 15y ago
        > When I speak of a civilized society it is in comparison to other societies. That's exactly what I did, I compared the Mongol empire to early medieval countries in Europe (Franks and Poland) which I definitely consider civilized, though as you mention not all are equally civilized. There is no tautology here.
      - deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
      - 15y ago
greedo 15y ago
War is the norm throughout history. Peace is really just an interval between the normal behavior of countries. And conflating war with mass murder is a tenuous argument. Was it mass murder when HMS Conqueror torpedoed the Belgrano in the Falklands killing 323? How about all the deaths resulting from NATO interceding in the Libyan civil war? Or during the Kosovo/Serbian confict? And that's just recent history. In Vietnam, you had Australia, France, and the US fighting a ruthless war. Are they all uncivilized? Careful when you sling epithets at countries; most have a history of engaging in this barbarism you deplore. And if you think that "we're all past that now," you need to do some reading of pre-WW1 literature and news. The idea tha t the Continent would engage in some of the most ruthless fighting was inconceivable. After all, it was a "civilized" time.

by gizmo 15y ago

cellis 15y ago

Politicians are the body and voice of society. I hate to expose an ugly truth to you, but it is not a single person deciding to go to war. It takes many people to nod in agreement before bombs start being dropped and troops start marching.

cglace 15y ago
That is the way it is supposed to work but how many people would say politicians are doing what their constituents really want.

spindritf 15y ago

> War is part of society? To barbaric ones maybe. Civilized societies don't settle disputes by mass murder. It's quite the opposite -- only civilized societies can have the kind of logistics, range, military culture, ability to support the warrior class (or standing armies), and numbers to engage in organized warfare. Conflicts between small bands of foragers can hardly be even called war. Not to mention mass murder which absolutely requires the kind of discipline, organization and leadership only a very cohesive and civilized society can provide. It just doesn't happen outside of civilization, no one has the means, or could benefit from it. Anything of the scale of holocaust is only possible in a highly industrialized country. > So now poor kids with few options are recruited into the military. Problem solved. Actually, poor kids seem to be enlisting at lower rates (relatively) to richer kids: > Enlisted recruits in 2006 and 2007 came primarily from middle-class and upper-middle-class backgrounds. Low-income neighborhoods were underrepresented among enlisted troops, while middle-class and high-income neighborhoods were overrepresented. This and much more on the topic: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/08/who-serves-in-the-us-military-the-demographics-of-enlisted-troops-and-officers http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/08/who-serves-...

gizmo 15y ago
I present to you: Ghengis Kahn. 40 million people died as a result of his campaigns. Civilized society? Not at all. Just organized tribal warfare. > Actually, poor kids seem to be enlisting at lower rates (relatively) to richer kids Huh. I stand corrected.
- spindritf 15y ago
  > Civilized society? Yes, of course. It came to existence when Ghengis Khan united nomadic tribes but so did the countries in Europe -- Franks were a confederation of tribes, Poland was founded by a tribe subduing its neighbours, etc, etc. That is how civilization is born. If it wasn't for that they wouldn't be able to reach Europe. That is why we call them the Mongol Empire.
  - gizmo 15y ago
    Oh c'mon. If you define civilized society that broadly than anything capable of organized warfare is by definition a civilized society. It would be a pointless tautology. In that context my response that systematic murder is uncivilized (and that therefore a society that engages in systematic murder is an uncivilized society) becomes a direct contradiction in terms. So that's obviously not what I meant. When I speak of a civilized society it is in comparison to other societies. Not all countries violate human rights on the same scale, and therefore, not all countries are equally civilized.
    - spindritf 15y ago
      > When I speak of a civilized society it is in comparison to other societies. That's exactly what I did, I compared the Mongol empire to early medieval countries in Europe (Franks and Poland) which I definitely consider civilized, though as you mention not all are equally civilized. There is no tautology here.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    - 15y ago

greedo 15y ago

War is the norm throughout history. Peace is really just an interval between the normal behavior of countries. And conflating war with mass murder is a tenuous argument. Was it mass murder when HMS Conqueror torpedoed the Belgrano in the Falklands killing 323? How about all the deaths resulting from NATO interceding in the Libyan civil war? Or during the Kosovo/Serbian confict? And that's just recent history. In Vietnam, you had Australia, France, and the US fighting a ruthless war. Are they all uncivilized? Careful when you sling epithets at countries; most have a history of engaging in this barbarism you deplore. And if you think that "we're all past that now," you need to do some reading of pre-WW1 literature and news. The idea tha t the Continent would engage in some of the most ruthless fighting was inconceivable. After all, it was a "civilized" time.