3 ms·
I think diversity for the sake of diversity ranges from neutral to positive in most cases. Diversity in stuff like this is mostly just used to distract from ins
by Kye 3y ago
I think diversity for the sake of diversity ranges from neutral to positive in most cases. Diversity in stuff like this is mostly just used to distract from institutional and systemic harms. We need fewer people killing other people for the government. I don't care if the person pulling the trigger is the most unique person on the planet.
- doubloon 3y agoit's used to give us the best snipers possible so if Russia invades Alaska we will be ready. Democratic governments tend to not have war with each other so if we really want to stop war, we have to defend democracy against all of the actors who would rather it did not exist. Ukraine shows that state-state warfare is not over and democracy is not guaranteed to win.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- woleium 3y agoSpoken from a position of privilege from freedom brought by the very people you seek to eliminate. I agree we need fewer people being killed, but maybe not fewer people who could kill if required.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- meepmorp 3y agoSi vis pacem, para bellum. The reality is every country needs to be prepared for military action, even if they don't initiate it themselves. The world is a hostile place, and wishing for peace is great, but it's not a substitute for being able to fight back.
- Kye 3y agoI'm not going to reply to each individually since they're all essentially the same. Isn't it interesting how someone always misreads (or misrepresents) a call for a smaller, more effective military as a call to abolish the military? I don't know how to tell a victim of the propaganda from a perpetuator of it. People who call for reforms are always portrayed as the enemy.