• maporita@unilem.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    On the contrary, a volunteer army allows the ruling class to prosecute wars without risk to their own families. Volunteer armies are primarily recruited from poorer and disadvantaged families, and the “volunteers” are serving because they see no other option to support themselves.

    If a war arrives that is necessary, justified, and also has broad support among the population there will still be those who avoid fighting because they know that others will do so for them. They will unjustly reap the benefits of victory without making any sacrifices.

    You can make a similar argument about taxation. By your logic payment should be optional, since a society that genuinely wants to be just and fair should also voluntarily want to give money to achieve that.

    • Rottcodd@lemmy.ninja
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      On the contrary, a volunteer army allows the ruling class to prosecute wars without risk to their own families.

      As does conscription, since there are always exceptions made for that explicit purpose.

      So that works out the same either way.

      If a war arrives that is necessary, justified, and also has broad support among the population there will still be those who avoid fighting because they know that others will do so for them.

      Yes - there will always be such people. The issue is how many of them there would be.

      I would say that a nation that’s unhealthy enough to have so many such people that they would make the difference between winning and losing deserves to lose.

      You can make a similar argument about taxation. By your logic payment should be optional, since a society that genuinely wants to be just and fair should also voluntarily want to give money to achieve that.

      Yes, and I in fact would. And with the same proviso - any society that would fail as a result deserves to fail.