Hacker News Reader

Comment by moomoo11 | Hacker News Reader

Mandatory military might be good for gen z imho.

Worst case scenario they can live out some gundam fantasy while having a sense of real purpose and duty.

People have been complaining about "kids these days" since at least 600 BC. [1] It's interesting that this illusion is so strong that people still do it, completely unironically.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6795513/

I just want more productivity. I don’t really care how we achieve it. I learned about “simps” and “e girls” from the article and discussions. I much rather these people were put to use doing research or labor or on some expedition military or exploration. I see them having much more positive things to contribute to society.

We should expect more from others. And it should be okay for people to disagree, but their options should be rich enough they naturally make a better decision.

There's a difference between "we should expect more from others" and "we should force them all into the military because I personally don't like how a few of them spend their time."

Maybe consider minding your own business? We're doing fine.

Lol

Just because it has been happening for a long time, doesn't mean that any specific instance is wrong. Maybe it does increase the burden of proof though.

This is the first generation in history having their brains significantly modified by being hyperconnected, though.

Again, a common excuse made by every generation. "<insert new tech here> is making them weak!!" There's a well-known xkcd about it. [1] They used to complain about bicycles.

[1] https://xkcd.com/1227/

There being an XKCD about it has zero value, it's like saying there's a Simpsons episode about it. While on the other hand, social media has a demonstrable impact on today's youth mental health, while bicycles... well.

You Americans (Russian accent) really play up generational differences and resentments by having these ready-made boxes for your arbitrary cutoffs (what’s Gen Z again, like 1998–?)

1997 is usually talked about as the start of gen z, I think. One good metric is that millennials usually remember 9/11, and gen z people usually don't.

I guess it depends on the country

These generation names are an American thing.

They're used everywhere(?) due to internet.

If you say so.

Oh yeah, Internet jokes and whatever. Calling a 22 year-old a “Boomer” is different from unironically yelling about how kids-these-days are too soft (see the start of this thread).

I've read that a mandatory civil service could be good. Could be helping the elderly, cleaning parks or waterways, etc. You get out there and meet your neighbors and community. Get involved in local society.

The country doesn’t own its citizens, it’s the other way around. Conscription is immoral and should be opposed.

For real, America already brainwashes its populace into worshipping the Armed Forces and the flag anyway (cue the anecdotes saying otherwise) so why not make everybody part of it? Tie that to free college education and a 2-4 yrs compulsory service would cover the vast majority of degrees seen around here (4yrs compsci). Might even teach discipline and teach people valuable skills regarding fitness and self sufficiency.

I'm serious. On the surface it seems like I would have hated it myself, but I can't help but agree that I might have learned discipline and having a clear path through college would have been so much simpler.

(Before anyone argues that sending all youth to fight is bad (tm), other countries with compulsory service typically do not deploy people during that period. They usually get the same training but only clerical or local work).

Most other countries don’t go around the world invading other countries though. If the US gave up that practice, I would have less qualms about it.

Some of us in gen z don't see much of a point to killing people in real life, but don't see the harm in video games. Neither have any "real purpose" other than making money.

Hence the recent army/navy/air force ads that imply that enlisting is just as fun and cool as playing CoD or Fortnite.

Most people in the military never kill anyone. In fact, most people in the army are never even in the opportunity to look at someone who they may need to kill. You're probably far more likely to be on a humanitarian mission helping out people in need than you are to be firing a gun or dropping a bomb on someone.

The purpose of the entire enterprise is killing people. I never sell anything, but that doesn't mean my job isn't making the company money, by way of making the stuff that the company sells.

That's not even necessarily a bad thing. WWII? Solid war, the Nazi's needed killing. And I like having people willing to do that on my behalf, so that I don't have to. But pretending the military is some lollipop guild that goes around spreading happiness and cheer is extremely disingenuous.

I never said it was a lollipop guild. I was pushing back against the implication that "in the military = killing people", as if it is a rite of passage or something. And no, the military actually isn't about killing people, it is merely about the threat of being able to kill people. Probably the best military in the world would be one so powerful that no one would even try to battle it.

The purpose of a country having a military is about the threat of killing people. The purpose the military itself is killing people. The military doesn't threaten, it is the threat. The same way I own a gun to defend myself, but the intrinsic purpose of the gun itself is to kill.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com