Comment by Shacklz | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Shacklz | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> mostly based on some outdated views on the role of the army

And this is where we differ - I think _your_ opinion is outdated ;) The services that you listed mostly do not require an "army", what exactly is camouflage gear & combat training good for with regards to helping with covid-related tasks (or any other "Katastrophenhilfe"-related endeavour)?

The "Swiss army knife" metaphor is exactly what I so despise about the Swiss army; it's their excuse for essentially being an eternal "Pfadilager" for adults. Actual participation in conflicts mentioned by GP aren't an option anyway thanks to Switzerland's neutrality.

Luckily, it seems the trend is clearly in my opinion's favor, as was evident once again with the results of the last referendum on fighter jets - the pro-army-folks are a dying breed, it is just a matter of time until the 'Wehrpflicht' is finally abolished (I estimate it takes another ~20 years or so until the cold war era generation starts to become a minority), and when that happens, it's just a matter of time until the rest of the army gets to boot too, as all the nostalgia-driven sentiments towards it will not exist anymore (currently, put 10 Swiss men in a room, and it will take at most half an hour until their army experience becomes a topic).

And you know what? It'll be for the better of the world, and Switzerland especially. Finally, we will be able to say "We do not participate in this barbarian head smashing anymore, we're civilized folks"; someone needs to make the start and Switzerland is in the best position to do so. We're already not participating anyway; but we're still training generation after generation to do so; and this needs to stop eventually. My hope is that this will be the case in the next 20-30 years or so, I wouldn't mind if it was earlier ;)

Si vis pacem, para bellum. "If you want peace, prepare for war"

I am not Swiss so my opinion might not matter to you but I would say that there are many skills that are taught with military service that help out in other circumstances. Organization, mindfulness and the ability to give and receive orders.

>currently, put 10 Swiss men in a room, and it will take at >most half an hour until their army experience becomes a >topic

What is wrong with having something that is common across generations and backgrounds that allows people to connect with each other?

In my opinion we should train people to have many skills or better put:

>A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an >invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, >write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, >comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act >alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch >manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight >efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. > >-Robert A. Heinlein

> I am not Swiss so my opinion might not matter to you but I would say that there are many skills that are taught with military service that help out in other circumstances.

Being Swiss, and having served in the army, I have a less optimistic view of its value. In particular, the professional officers it attracted tended to be mediocre at best.

> Organization, mindfulness

Armies in general have poor cost control, and an army at perpetual peace has even fewer repercussions to fear, so there is virtually no accountability. Your workforce can't quit because it's drafted, parliament sometimes gives you a higher budget than you asked for, because reasons, and you perennially plan for fictional wars that thankfully you never have to fight.

> and the ability to give and receive orders.

It's easy to give orders if your workforce can't quit and goes to prison if they don't follow the orders.

> What is wrong with having something that is common across generations and backgrounds that allows people to connect with each other?

This aspect, that (mostly) men of all backgrounds served together, was maybe the one positive thing about the army. But nowadays, a smaller part of each generation serves, so that seems to go away as well. And it should be possible to implement a common service for other purposes than an army.

I do think that mandatory service does not a good army make, I would rather have a mandatory Civilian Conservation Corps program that trained people in basic skills & trades as well as being a common experience for people to fall back on.

> Si vis pacem, para bellum. "If you want peace, prepare for war"

This quote is so out of date, really. Humanity progressed so far just in the last couple of decades, but we're still supposed to prepare ourselves to smash each others heads in like we're some brutish barbarians? At some point, we should start acting like civilized adults and solve our conflicts by discussion, not by smashing each others head in.

The things you mentioned with regards to skills and such - you're right, but you don't need to have training on the weapon and such. The army teaches you ultimately death and destruction; everything else is just a means to that end. After all, if it truly were about the skills you mentioned, we could just have an obligatory boy scout camp instead and learn all the stuff without the barbaric parts, no?

I look at how the world around me seems more polarized and divided with every passing day and I find I am unable to agree with you that we have progressed far.

But I do agree with you on the point that the training does not need to be with weapons, I would rather have some sort of mandatory Civilian Conservation Corp program than military service program.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_Conservation_Corps

Reply on news.ycombinator.com