Prompted by another thread about conscription in Ukraine.

  • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    None. If you weren’t willing to fight for your country, then it’s just the powerful forcing you to keep them in power.

  • RobotToaster@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    None, if the people won’t voluntarily defend a nation, then they have decided it isn’t worth defending.

  • TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    None. It is never acceptable imho.

    We do not choose where we are born or the social class we are born into. Forcing someone to sacrifice their life in the name of an entity they did not choose, likely have no/limited loyalty for, or might even be actively oppressed by - is wrong.

  • Kalkaline @leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I used to be against the draft or conscription, but someone made the argument that people are far less war hungry when they or their loved ones might end up on the front lines. In that case, I’m all for it as long as the rich, politically connected, and otherwise privileged are treated like the rest of us. Otherwise the next best option is an all volunteer military.

  • djsoren19@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s only okay when the alternative is “your entire population is killed.” If you’re not fighting a defensive war with high stakes, then it’s just a way to kill poor people and political dissidents.

  • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I guess when the people being drafted have a higher likelihood of being killed by an invading army without the draft than with it. Tough to assess though.

    • LesserAbe@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Thanks for your thought. What about a situation where you know everyone won’t be killed, but the defeated country will no longer be democratic/open? In other words, you’ll live, but the quality of life will be much worse for the foreseeable future

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s a tough one. There’s no obvious moral calculus to translate between lives lost and quality of life.

        I tend to think drafting is similar to slavery—it’s a grave violation of basic human rights and should only be considered under the most extreme circumstances where the alternative is clearly worse.

        It might depend on the exact nature of the authoritarian regime. Or maybe I’m just not comfortable with either outcome and so I don’t want to answer the question.

  • treefrog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    When everyone is being drafted. Including the children of the oligarchs and political class.

    Otherwise it’s never right. It’s just feeding the poor to the war machine.

    • LesserAbe@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      So if for example every person’s name goes in the hat, and then conscripts are drawn at random? I only clarify because in a situation where every able body is fighting you’ve already lost, there needs to be logistics, maintaining utilities, growing food, etc

      • treefrog@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Drafts usually are of young men for the logistic reasons you mentioned.

        So, if all men ages 18-24 are being drafted, the President’s kids should be first on the list.

        In other words, if you’re going to send my son to war and you are president you need to send your’s first. Otherwise I’m telling my kid to dodge because his life isn’t worth less than some rich assholes.