All we need to do is ditch capitalism, & then we'd have a worker paradise
like the old USSR, PRC or N Korea. Everyone would be working for the
common good. Who needs individual rights then, eh?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Conscription - good or bad?
- Thread starter Eddi
- Start date
like the old USSR, PRC or N Korea. Everyone would be working for the
common good. Who needs individual rights then, eh?
I'm not a Marxist, either.
Where does the article say "more"?
It was both. A lot of the objection to the draft was about not wanting to risk their lives to help black slaves.
I don't know when you think America's "golden age" was. Anyway, this is taking the thread off-topic. I gave my opinion on conscription and don't really have anything else to say.
That's right: your not-quite-totalitarianism doesn't seem to be focused on the common good.
Most of the article is about race issues! Geez!
"Marxist" is close enuf to the flavors of socialism & communism
which have real world examples. If you'd ditch capitalism, you'd
end up with their horrors, minor differences notwithstanding.
You think whatever you please. I didn't ask your opinion on my views.
You're ignoring violent opposition to the draft.
No, I'm pointing out the problem with a system that requires people to do their duty to their country, to obey their leaders and to just follow orders.Now you're comparing conscription with the Holocaust?! You better go tell the Swedes and the Swiss about their moral atrocity, then.
According to your authoritarian principle, all sides were doing their patriotic duty, all sides were honorable and in the right, all sides were the good guys.
Where?
No, I don't even think America should have been involved in Vietnam in the first place.
Because you obviously know more about my views than I do, even when I haven't talked much about my economic beliefs. In other words, stop making assumptions.
I agree, It was an illegal war; a war of choice. It was prolonged for years after the US realized it was hopeless.
But, as an authoritarian, I assume you'd condemn any who opposed the decisions of the leaders and opposed the war.
Think whatever you want. You and the other 2 who have been dogpiling me for multiple pages for simply saying I agree with conscription have been making all sorts of assumptions of my views and misrepresenting me all over the place. Who cares what I say when you have your wild imaginations instead? So think what you want. I don't give a **** anymore. My actual opinions here don't matter.
NYC during the Civil War.
The draft is all about violence.
Conscripts (the minority) are sent (by the majority) to kill or be killed.
Resisters are confronted with violence by government. Subject
oneself to prosecution & imprisonment, or have cops with guns drawn
to capture one.
What would you have done to those who refuse to serve the state?
You're the one who objected to capitalism.
I'm trying to tease out what you'd replace it with.
Giving ownership of the individual over to the state
sure sounds like what I proposed for you.
Btw, you denied being a Marxist without my
ever saying you were one. I only claim that
you're anti-capitalist.
Last edited:
I really don't have anything else to say. I gave my opinion already, and I'm not going to write a manifesto. We're not going to agree or change minds, so there's no point in going on about it. I already know your views and don't need to hear it all over again. Good day.
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
Maybe true. But we don't live in an ideal world. You get a choice -
fight for your country, or allow your country to be defeated - and
live (or die) with whatever that means.
If it's "slavery" then it begs the question - one man fights for his
country, the other reaps the benefits without the exertion or
putting himself in harm's way - is that just?