4 ms·

This should not be necessary. By paying enough you can have a volunteer army, as the U.S. does.

by Bostonian 2y ago

seo-speedwagon 2y ago
The US military itself reports it’s experiencing a severe recruitment shortage.
- jeffbee 2y ago
  The US Army all-volunteer force only seemed like it was working well in the 1980s and 1990s because of persistently high unemployment, low opportunity, and general discrimination against African Americans in the civilian economy. With unemployment at or below 5% for all races, military recruiting must be effectively impossible.
  - readyman 2y ago
    Correct. The primary beneficiaries of conscription are the working class.
  - nitwit005 2y ago
    Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. The veterans for those conflicts often went in enthused, and came back entirely disillusioned. Pretty much created a machine for damaging their reputation, which ran for decades.
  - RACEWAR 2y ago
    This is an interesting take and it sounds sensible. I wonder what the labor market looks like in Germany. As far as the US goes, I'm also curious how the dawning changes led by AI technologies in the workplace and budding trends in the labor pool will affect their military's posture recruitment-wise. We've seen them attempt to appeal to more diverse crowds in the last few years, but I think that the particular demographic(s) in question are most likely to equate serving the armed forces in general as bad. A generation comprised of mostly men without college educations who are not satisfied with Door-Dashing or "Twitching" for a living may not feel the same.
skripp 2y ago
By giving up enough you can have the possibility of having the U.S. army help you. Unless they for some reason don’t want to.
catlikesshrimp 2y ago
Niccolò Machiavelli in The Prince talks about mercenary armies. Briefly, as everything in that book. Russia has a huge army. Its use of mercenaries is not brandishing the russian flag for invasions
- AlbertCory 2y ago
  "Mercenaries" in pre-modern times were people whose career was soldiering. They were available to any principality that would pay them. Not the same as volunteer military now who only fight for their own country. Russia is a different case altogether.
082349872349872 2y ago
A different way to think about it: if the army has to use everyone (in this case, an IDF-style gender-blind everyone?), it has an incentive to ensure that everyone gets educated. cf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_education_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_education_system EDIT: looking at non-Telegraph news, it appears there are three options on the table, going from completely volunteer to universal obligation: https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/von-optimierungen-bis-hin-zur-wehrpflicht-fur-alle-diese-drei-wehrdienst-modelle-liegen-pistorius-zur-entscheidung-vor-11644154.html https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/von-optimierungen-bis-hi...
- logicchains 2y ago
  Ultimately the Prussian education system did a pretty poor job at that, considering that the Prussian/German army lost two world wars.
  - 082349872349872 2y ago
    I'd read somewhere a hypothesis that Germany would've done better to have just kept the peace and (at least by pre-1914 growth paths) outcompeted the British economy. I guess (a) people at that time thought growth wasn't possible without colonies, and (b) people in all times seem to lose any commitment they might have had to free trade once a serious economic competitor emerges?
    - Beijinger 2y ago
      "outcompeted the British economy." This was why GB wanted the war.... it is called Thucydides Trap.
  - bruce511 2y ago
    True, they lost both times. Im no expert on ww1, so i can't comment there, but the German army of ww2 was (by far) the most well trained, and effective, fighting force of the war. Yes, their politics were terrible, and the leadership at times questionable, and losing is never going to win accolades, but the reasons for losing had nothing to do with skill, ability, or execution. They had world-leading technology and arms, well respected general officers, and a battle tested force that occupied all of Europe (and came within a whisker of invading the UK). But for the fairly obvious strategic error of invading the Soviet Union, the outcomes may have been very different.
cjpearson 2y ago
Pay might be motivation for some, but it's not the only source. People also join for reasons such patriotism, sense of duty, or family history of service. Boosting pay could certainly help, but I think its effect would be limited if it's facing cultural headwinds.
tokai 2y ago
It isn't working for the US. https://www.ausa.org/news/paper-recruiting-crisis-national-security-threat https://www.ausa.org/news/paper-recruiting-crisis-national-s...
dataflow 2y ago
https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/downloads/unfit-to-serve-062322-508.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/downloads/unfit-to-serv...
giantg2 2y ago
The US is struggling to maintain numbers. It does not pay that well in most circumstances.
servus45678981 2y ago
But the U.S. is spreading propaganda endlessly just like China. Remember, Germany is a real democracy with freedom of speech and press freedom.
- C6JEsQeQa5fCjE 2y ago
  > Remember, Germany is a real democracy with freedom of speech I don't know about that. https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2024/4/30/germanys-crackdown-on-criticism-of-israel-betrays-european-values https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2024/4/30/germanys-crackd... https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/4/1/we-jews-are-just-arrested-palestinians-are-beaten-german-protesters https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/4/1/we-jews-are-just-arr... https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/10/world/europe/germany-pro-palestinian-protests.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/10/world/europe/germany-pro-...

This should not be necessary. By paying enough you can have a volunteer army, as the U.S. does.

seo-speedwagon 2y ago

The US military itself reports it’s experiencing a severe recruitment shortage.

jeffbee 2y ago
The US Army all-volunteer force only seemed like it was working well in the 1980s and 1990s because of persistently high unemployment, low opportunity, and general discrimination against African Americans in the civilian economy. With unemployment at or below 5% for all races, military recruiting must be effectively impossible.
- readyman 2y ago
  Correct. The primary beneficiaries of conscription are the working class.
- nitwit005 2y ago
  Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. The veterans for those conflicts often went in enthused, and came back entirely disillusioned. Pretty much created a machine for damaging their reputation, which ran for decades.
- RACEWAR 2y ago
  This is an interesting take and it sounds sensible. I wonder what the labor market looks like in Germany. As far as the US goes, I'm also curious how the dawning changes led by AI technologies in the workplace and budding trends in the labor pool will affect their military's posture recruitment-wise. We've seen them attempt to appeal to more diverse crowds in the last few years, but I think that the particular demographic(s) in question are most likely to equate serving the armed forces in general as bad. A generation comprised of mostly men without college educations who are not satisfied with Door-Dashing or "Twitching" for a living may not feel the same.

skripp 2y ago

By giving up enough you can have the possibility of having the U.S. army help you. Unless they for some reason don’t want to.

catlikesshrimp 2y ago

Niccolò Machiavelli in The Prince talks about mercenary armies. Briefly, as everything in that book. Russia has a huge army. Its use of mercenaries is not brandishing the russian flag for invasions

AlbertCory 2y ago
"Mercenaries" in pre-modern times were people whose career was soldiering. They were available to any principality that would pay them. Not the same as volunteer military now who only fight for their own country. Russia is a different case altogether.

082349872349872 2y ago

A different way to think about it: if the army has to use everyone (in this case, an IDF-style gender-blind everyone?), it has an incentive to ensure that everyone gets educated. cf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_education_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_education_system EDIT: looking at non-Telegraph news, it appears there are three options on the table, going from completely volunteer to universal obligation: https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/von-optimierungen-bis-hin-zur-wehrpflicht-fur-alle-diese-drei-wehrdienst-modelle-liegen-pistorius-zur-entscheidung-vor-11644154.html https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/von-optimierungen-bis-hi...

logicchains 2y ago
Ultimately the Prussian education system did a pretty poor job at that, considering that the Prussian/German army lost two world wars.
- 082349872349872 2y ago
  I'd read somewhere a hypothesis that Germany would've done better to have just kept the peace and (at least by pre-1914 growth paths) outcompeted the British economy. I guess (a) people at that time thought growth wasn't possible without colonies, and (b) people in all times seem to lose any commitment they might have had to free trade once a serious economic competitor emerges?
  - Beijinger 2y ago
    "outcompeted the British economy." This was why GB wanted the war.... it is called Thucydides Trap.
- bruce511 2y ago
  True, they lost both times. Im no expert on ww1, so i can't comment there, but the German army of ww2 was (by far) the most well trained, and effective, fighting force of the war. Yes, their politics were terrible, and the leadership at times questionable, and losing is never going to win accolades, but the reasons for losing had nothing to do with skill, ability, or execution. They had world-leading technology and arms, well respected general officers, and a battle tested force that occupied all of Europe (and came within a whisker of invading the UK). But for the fairly obvious strategic error of invading the Soviet Union, the outcomes may have been very different.

cjpearson 2y ago

Pay might be motivation for some, but it's not the only source. People also join for reasons such patriotism, sense of duty, or family history of service. Boosting pay could certainly help, but I think its effect would be limited if it's facing cultural headwinds.

tokai 2y ago

It isn't working for the US. https://www.ausa.org/news/paper-recruiting-crisis-national-security-threat https://www.ausa.org/news/paper-recruiting-crisis-national-s...

dataflow 2y ago

https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/downloads/unfit-to-serve-062322-508.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/downloads/unfit-to-serv...

giantg2 2y ago

The US is struggling to maintain numbers. It does not pay that well in most circumstances.

servus45678981 2y ago

But the U.S. is spreading propaganda endlessly just like China. Remember, Germany is a real democracy with freedom of speech and press freedom.

C6JEsQeQa5fCjE 2y ago
> Remember, Germany is a real democracy with freedom of speech I don't know about that. https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2024/4/30/germanys-crackdown-on-criticism-of-israel-betrays-european-values https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2024/4/30/germanys-crackd... https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/4/1/we-jews-are-just-arrested-palestinians-are-beaten-german-protesters https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/4/1/we-jews-are-just-arr... https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/10/world/europe/germany-pro-palestinian-protests.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/10/world/europe/germany-pro-...