Comment by piloto_ciego | Hacker News Reader

Comment by piloto_ciego | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I read this whole article and I think it’s missing the point.

I had a sky-high asvab score and was planning on using the GI Bill for my education. Then I received a scholarship and weighed the time commitment against what they were offering and my sense of morality. It wasn’t worth it. The loans I got (which were ultimately a lot) were far cheaper than the years I would have spent in uniform.

For me, I decided on following my conscience. I ultimately chose not to go to the military because I wasn’t sure we were the good guys after the invasion of Iraq and by the time I was graduating high school in 2006 we’d been at war nearly 5 years already. “Is it moral for me to participate in violence in exchange for money or an education? Even if I’m not directly carrying it out?” No. And looking back I feel this was a good decision.

I wasn’t (and still am not) a pacifist, but I did not want to subject myself to a machine that didn’t care about me and would force me to commit violence against people I didn’t think necessarily deserve it. Especially not for nearly a decade.

I imagine there are lots of people like me out there. People who could have but chose not to for one reason or another. I would like to think that in a world where people are better educated, that number is higher every year.

I think this is a testament to how close the US is to losing its place of power in the world. People don't believe in the country, they don't want to risk their lives defending it, because they think going into the military is the same as signing your life away to a corporation. Of course, the US might be on the verge of a civil war, if it happens in February or November or January, regardless people are tired of what "democracy" has given them.

You know, I remember maybe a decade ago, maybe more recently I can't quite remember, there was this idea out of the Incel community that was treated as ridiculous at the time: that the state should force men and women into couples to make families, so that nobody would be alone. And as terrible as that sounds, it sounds like a better social model than what America has today, and is probably why states that are closer in form to that model (far-right islamic nationalist) are gaining so much power. It just shows how terrible things have gotten because there used to be real sexual freedom, alongside social mobility and an egalitarian society, but no longer, and people are so dissatisfied they'd be willing to allow a dictator to come to power.

> they don't want to risk their lives defending it

Well, defending it is something else entirely. Being sent to a remote outpost in Afghanistan without even a broad objective for any US soldiers being there to complete is only arguably "defending" and quite a poor argument at that. The country, itself, is well defended without me.

While I can understand your concerns here, there is something profoundly damaging about thinking a democratically-led military is no longer serving the public interest. Essentially it's a no-confidence vote in the political system, which if you really consider from a moral perspective, requires correcting the system. What's wild to me is that people can essentially have no confidence in their political system, but do almost nothing to change it.

It seems deeply wrong to continue to participate and to pay taxes into a system that one has no confidence in. What seems more likely is that morality never played a role in this decision, and instead its a scapegoat for not taking personal responsibility for one's role in the system.

Well, right now, I'm more than happy to pay it because the existence and defense of Ukraine is worth way more to me than that money. I was just referring to the attitude that would arise from the public that was fatigued by conflicts prior to Ukraine. It's not that I oppose the existence of the military, especially not under the current circumstances. But I'm saying it was more than understandable how many would have viewed it only a few years ago. "Defending freedom" was just an empty tagline back then that lacked even a tenuous case.

> It seems deeply wrong to continue to participate and to pay taxes into a system that one has no confidence in. What seems more likely is that morality never played a role in this decision, and instead its a scapegoat for not taking personal responsibility for one's role in the system.

I have a moral responsibility not to participate in unjust wars, it absolutely was a moral decision. I assume there are very many like me.

Who says I'm paying taxes or participating?

Give unto Caesar...

Recent polling suggests half of one of the parties would flee rather than defend.

And if Russia were the invader, we both know that more than half of them would join them as collaborators. Truth is that flag-worship has always been a piss poor indicator of actual patriotism.

You know that I know that you know that you don’t really believe that.

The last time that model was in America, the Puritans were running Massachusetts

Reply on news.ycombinator.com