• LeniX@lemmygrad.ml
    0·
    6 months ago

    It’s hard not to despise the Baltic states these days. Fucking yapping pieces of snot

        • ghost_of_faso2@lemmygrad.ml
          0·
          6 months ago

          Why would I ever play along with being forced to fight for a country and government that has provided me with no material assets and has been actively trying to repress me and my class my entire life?

          Im not kidding when I say day 1 they give me something lethal id be fragging the highest up in the chain of command that I can reach lmao

          • invalidusernamelol [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
            0·
            6 months ago

            Im not kidding when I say day 1 they give me something lethal id be fragging the highest up in the chain of command that I can reach lmao

            That’s actually why so many revolutions came out of conscripted forces. It’s terrible, but giving a bunch of people who don’t want to fight weapons and training makes it hard for you to control that when they come back home.

            Conscripting forces (under capitalist or imperial systems especially) will almost always lead to some form of domestic revolution or civil war either after or during the imperial war the conscripts are fighting in.

            Exceptions seem to exist in predominantly settler colonial states or states with massive existing racial/ethnic underclasses. Since the way to quell the revolutionary intents of conscripts is concession at the social underclass’ expense.

            See the GI bill and redlining in America, Palestinian relations in Israel, North Koreans in South Korea, etc.

            So a conscript force in NATO states would likely result in a fascist/socialist dialectic reforming as the old liberal states slide into reaction.

            Without conscription, there can’t really be a large scale violent revolution, but it’s also less likely to literally consume the world in hellfire overnight as the old guard clutches to power in the most violent ways possible.

            Also former conscripts made up the majority of revolutionary leftist parties, fascist paramilitaries, and organized criminals. So there isn’t really a positive to conscription beyond just heightening contradictions and forcing more people from passive political life into active political life.

      • Red_Scare [he/him]@lemmygrad.ml
        0·
        6 months ago

        Thank you very much for asking nicely. I’m not in the right headspace to type out my thoughts so I asked chatgpt to organise my points for me, hope that’s ok…

        1. Historical Context of Anti-War Movements:

        Point: The abolition of conscription in the West coincides with the decline of notable anti-war movements.

        Explanation: The absence of a draft reduces personal stakes in anti-war activism, as individuals are less likely to mobilize against conflicts that don’t directly threaten themselves or their loved ones.

        Example: During the Vietnam War era, widespread conscription led to significant anti-war organizing, including acts of soldier disobedience within Western armies. The lack of a draft in contemporary “professional” militaries has diminished this internal dissent.

        1. Equality and Social Justice:

        Point: The poverty-to-war pipeline perpetuates inequality and injustice.

        Explanation: Universal conscription ensures that military service is not disproportionately borne by socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals, who may enlist out of economic necessity.

        Example: Wealthy individuals are often able to avoid military service through exemptions or alternative paths, exacerbating class disparities in both civilian and military sectors.

        1. Preventing War Crimes and Protecting Civilian Populations:

        Point: Conscripted soldiers are less likely to commit war crimes compared to volunteer soldiers, as they have not chosen to participate in overseas conflicts and may harbor moral reservations about engaging in violence against foreign populations.

        Explanation: Universal conscription reduces the likelihood of individuals joining the military with the explicit intent to engage in combat abroad, thereby minimizing the risk of atrocities and human rights abuses during wartime.

        Example: Volunteer soldiers, driven by motives such as adventurism, financial gain, or ideological fervor, may exhibit less restraint and empathy towards civilian populations in conflict zones compared to conscripted soldiers, who may view their deployment with reluctance or disapproval.

        1. Citizen Empowerment and Resistance:

        Point: In the event of a communist revolution, a well-trained citizenry would be better prepared to resist government repression and uphold revolutionary ideals.

        Explanation: By providing military training to all citizens, universal conscription equips them with the skills necessary to defend themselves, their communities, and democratic principles in the face of potential threats.

        Example: Currently, far-right militias actively engage in armed combat training, giving them a tactical advantage in conflicts and undermining the ability of left-leaning individuals and groups to effectively resist authoritarianism or repression. Universal conscription would level the playing field by empowering all citizens with the means to participate in self-defense and collective action.

        1. Military Solidarity and Revolutionary Potential:

        Point: A communist revolution depends on military support or at least non-cooperation from armed forces.

        Explanation: A conscripted military is more likely to sympathize with revolutionary movements, as soldiers have personal connections to civilians and may refuse orders to suppress popular uprisings.

        Example: Drafted soldiers are more likely to have friends and family among the civilian population, making them hesitant to use force against fellow citizens during times of political upheaval.

        • LeniX@lemmygrad.ml
          0·
          6 months ago

          The abolition of conscription in the West coincides with the decline of notable anti-war movements

          Something something correlation something something does not imply causation. There are many factors at play. Also - this is just accelerationism.

          Universal conscription ensures that military service is not disproportionately borne by socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals

          I’m sorry, are you delusional? Have you seen a single big capitalist, their offspring or their politician puppet who went to actual combat? No? There’s a reason for that. In the country I come from, politicians and their families are shielded AF - no press gang comes close to their house, while ordinary people get snatched off the streets.

          Wealthy individuals are often able to avoid military service through exemptions or alternative paths

          You refuted your point here.

          Conscripted soldiers are less likely to commit war crimes compared to volunteer soldiers

          Proof? Didn’t Nazi Germany have conscription? Didn’t US army have conscription until the end of the Vietnam War? If you asked the Koreans, they’d disagree on the “war crimes” part - US soldiers bombed the living hell out of Korea in the 50s. Also, you know PTSD is a thing, right? Again, take Ukraine as an example - we now see tons of reports about people just going on the streets and shooting at random people and things. We see demobilized soldiers going on rampages, we see a significant spike in domestic violence, alcoholism, drug abuse, the whole shebang.

          Universal conscription reduces the likelihood of individuals joining the military with the explicit intent to engage in combat abroad

          Funny you should say that, because it doesn’t apparently reduce the likelihood of your country becoming a concentration camp where men are prohibited from leaving and are forced to be literal cannon fodder for the US empire.

          Currently, far-right militias actively engage in armed combat training, giving them a tactical advantage in conflicts…

          Conscription would give the far-right the same benefits. What’s the point? Are they going to selectively conscript all the communists? It’s nonsense.

          In the event of a communist revolution, a well-trained citizenry would be better prepared to resist government repression and uphold revolutionary ideals.

          You do not need conscription for that

          A communist revolution depends on military support

          I repeat my point - you don’t need conscription for that.

          As a communist who comes from a literal Nazi-infested fascist country, where people are afraid to go out because the press-gangs can push you into a minivan, take you to a “recruitment” center, proclaim you are eligible even if you only have one hand, you are legally blind or you have Down Syndrome (there’s videoproof of that, btw), give you at most 3 weeks of training and then send you to your death, I tell you this - you have zero fucking clue what you are talking about.

          • Red_Scare [he/him]@lemmygrad.ml
            0·
            6 months ago

            It is causation, “my kid isn’t in the army so what do I care” vs “my kid is reaching the draft age so I don’t want a war”. Nothing accelerationist about that

            Proof?

            Not a proof but I think it’s not a coincidence Azov and the like are always voluntary units.

            Didn’t US army have conscription until the end of the Vietnam War?

            Yes they did: https://www.warhistoryonline.com/vietnam-war/anti-war-resistance-vietnam-war.html Now find similar stories from Iraq war, I’ll wait.

            What’s the point? Are they going to selectively conscript all the communists?

            No, they will draft everyone so entire society will have combat training. It is better for popular uprisings, that much is irrefutable. Right now only nazis are preparing for armed conflict and you’ll never convince regular people to waste time and resources to join militias and train.

            You do not need conscription for that

            You need conscription for that: https://socialistworker.co.uk/features/how-troops-refused-orders-and-joined-the-russian-revolution/

            • LeniX@lemmygrad.ml
              0·
              6 months ago

              “my kid is reaching the draft age so I don’t want a war”…

              Did it help people in Ukraine?

              Not a proof but I think it’s not a coincidence Azov and the like are always voluntary units.

              The original Nazis weren’t. And they were also not known for their kind treatment of the POWs and the locals in general, you know. Also - your point was that “conscripts are less likely to commit war crimes”. Do I need to remind you what the US soldiers did to Korea? To the Vietnamese? Hey, here’s a good example - the “Israelis”. They are draftees too, remember?

              No, they will draft everyone so entire society will have combat training.

              Oh, god, the naivete… Yes, they will draft Elon Musk and his children, I am sure of it. Along with Billy Gates and Jeff Bezos. What are you smoking? I’ll ask again - how is that going to help? Do you really think conscription makes good soldiers - professional, motivated, experienced? No it doesn’t. It makes cannon fodder.

              You need conscription for that: https://socialistworker.co.uk/features/how-troops-refused-orders-and-joined-the-russian-revolution/

              No you don’t. You need the material conditions deteriorating so badly that people will be forced to go against the state. The war helped, but it wasn’t the primary factor. The soldiers were extremely unmotivated in the first place.

              Again, one word for you: Ukraine.