User talk:Raptor007
July 2008
[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Your test on Terminator (character) worked, and has been removed. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Tom (talk - email) 23:32, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Answer: That wasn't a test, but thanks for the unnecessary revert I guess.
Conscription
[edit]What's your thing with the conscription page and slavery? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlpacaNoire (talk • contribs) 23:35, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Answer: It's literally slavery by the definition of the word. You aren't allowed to quit or refuse, and many forced into conscription died before regaining their freedom. The better question is why you consider conscription an acceptable form of slavery despite (I assume) being generally opposed to other forms of slavery.
Follow-up: I do not consider it slavery because by your definition a lot of other things would also be considered slavery. For example, mandatory community service teenagers have to take to graduate high school. Another example, your parents forcing you to do something is also slavery because you cannot quit or refuse, lest suffer punishment. Even if you are an adult child, if you do not do as they say, they will kick you out of the house. Which is why it's important to be independent. The only out-of-place statement is "many forced into conscription died before regaining their freedom". One, that is not true. Depending on your definition of "many", it is not in the interest of countries to have conscripts die because that is considered "spillage". Hazing (or the more lethal Dedovshchina) is a problem in conscript forces that countries try to stamp out. But that is an issue of inter-generational conflict within the conscript forces themselves rather than a problem with conscription a priori. Two, abuse is also experienced in voluntary forces. Three, as a soldier you do have rights subject to Military law. Yes, your rights are limited compared to a civilian but you also have more freedom than a civilian. For example you can access classified locations and information. Finally the fundamental reason I disagree with your statement is I do not believe coercion is the same thing as slavery. Slavery might be a subset of coercion but the two are different in scope and substance. You may disagree with me, but societies that effectively master coercion are more civilizationally developed than those that believe in the fairy tales of "freedom", because freedom is an illusion that can only become reality if you work hard at it, not when it falls out of the sky.
Answer: You're right, I disagree with you. If your idea of "freedom" requires the government to be able to yank you out of your ordinary life into military service without any say in the matter, you aren't as free as you think. It's nonsense to say this makes you "more civilizationally developed", whatever that even means.
Follow-up: I only disagree with your statement: "without any say in the matter". If you have some religious or philosophical objections, then you should be exempted because your hesitancy might become a liability. And a more civilizationally developed society is able to persevere despite adversity than a less developed society. The human equivalent is a person that underwent military training is more capable to experience: environmental stress, torture, hunger, emotional stress etc. than a regular civilian. I understand your libertarian origins and will not continue to push my line further. My final position is summarized by the US Supreme Court: "Compelled military service is neither repugnant to a free government nor in conflict with the constitutional guaranties of individual liberty. Indeed, it may not be doubted that the very conception of a just government and its duty to the citizen includes the duty of the citizen to render military service in case of need, and the right of the government to compel it."[1]
Answer: Good luck using a "philosophical objection" to say no to a draft. The only thing your Supreme Court citation proves is that Edward Douglass White who wrote the opinion was a less firm believer in personal liberty and bodily autonomy than I am. Considering he was born to plantation owners and served in the Confederate army, I'm not surprised he penned the opinion defending another form of slavery. It's just a shame he ended up in the position to do so.