This is a great step forward for equality
Real equality is the state demanding you get in that fucking trench
I’m not sure if Denmark is one of those but for some states there’s unfortunately little choice. Not like we in Finland want to be next to Russia. But only men having to serve is an obvious equality issue.
But don’t you think only women being the only ones in charge of giving birth to the next generation is an obvious equality issue, too?
Well, we can’t change that with legislation but we can change who gets conscripted
Sounds like something a crazy dictator would do.
Everyone will now be able to have children for the glorious motherland
What a softie. A real dictator would say something like
Everyone is now required to give birth for the glorious motherland, and those that refuse will be shot as traitors.
Average Putin moment
I’m not sure if Denmark is one of those but for some states there’s unfortunately little choice.
There’s plenty of choice that doesn’t involve giving up your rights and become a slave to an authoritarian government. Such as voting for people who’s goal is to help people and not exploit them, or fight against and not support corrupted politicians.
How does me voting for “people who’s goal is to help people and not exploit them” going to make Russia any less of a shitty and threatening neighbor?
Rulers and governments don’t care about people, they care about profits and wealth. Pretty much all the west is in commercial partnership with countries arming russia like china. It’s more profitable for them to keep making business with dictatorships like Emirates and building weapons rather than working toward peace and against other corrupted governments
I really don’t understand what you are saying or offering as an alternative here.
Re read what i wrote I’ll also explain it to you again:
Politicians and rulers, the ones in charge of pretty much every government are mentally ill individuals devoured by greed and lust for power. They do not care about others if not strictly out of personal interest. They are professional liars. As you can see right now in Gaza and as you can read in any history book these corrupted mafiosi seek war and use it as a tool to gain more wealth and power. They do not want peace, if not once they have put their filthy hands all over the place and to make sure nobody challenge their authority. The alternative to war is to strip these criminals of power and seek justice. Not making more nukes, not dumping trillions on weapons, not invading other countries, not mass surveillance, not beating protesters, not putting in jail Whistleblowers and not forcing everyone to fight for a country. Russia and Israel both have mandatory conscription, that’s one of the really reason they can do what they are doing right now. Russians are chilling in dubai right now, next to western politician and billionares yachts. Building weapons, increasing their power and forcing everyone to be their slave is their dream, they don’t care about helping people.
Ever heard of “solidarity”? You can’t just live safe while your countrymen risk their lives to defend you. If you don’t like it, you have plenty of time to emigrate in peacetime.
If shit hits the fan, it’s too late. YOU made the choice to stay in a country where you were obligated to defend you neighbour if called upon. You can’t reap the benefits of collective protection and responsibility and then run off when it’s time to step up and do the dirty work.
Yeah ever heard of solidarity? Fucking up people daily like governments and politicians do it’s the opposite of that
YOU made the choice to stay in a country
So if you were a 17 years old russian you would buy a one way plane ticket and leave the country?
Sound like you are putting the blame on people rather than the corrupted politician criminals responsible for all of this.
I don’t see Russia, or other authoritarian countries mentioned in the thread I’m responding to. This is about conscription in a democratic country where only adults are conscripted.
Telle, what other choice do the Ukrainians have other than fighting? Or do you mean the Denmark government as authoritarian government?
Telle, what other choice do the Ukrainians have other than fighting?
The choice should be up to the people to begin with, instead their authoritarian government has decided that no man between 18-60 can leave the country. Ukrainians are not the ukrainian government.
What a step, everyone should be a slave with no discrimination of sex
Slave to the state
The best way to become a slave to a state is not to have a good defense. Just ask any neighbor af Russia.
Brainless serving in an army is not defense. People can defend themself better when they are free not when they are forced to obey corrupted rulers orders.
The step from “Denmark” to “Corrupted rulers” went a bit fast there.
You are aware that Denmark allows political parties and movements to oppose conscription, and that anyone strongly opposed can emigrate and denounce their Danish citizenship? Nobody is preventing anyone from doing those things. If you don’t do them, you are implicitly accepting the social contract in the country.
Yeah 17 years old about to be conscripted can just leave the country if they don’t like it, fuck them.
Have you ever been conscripted into a democratic army? I have been. We were very well taught which rights we have, what the rules of warfare are and when we are oblieged to disobey an order.
It’s true, a conscript has less freedom than a not conscripted citizen. But if you really believe a conscript (in a democratic army) is even remotely comparable to a chattel slave, you should try reality instead delusional ideology for a change.
Since you like it so much you should go ahead and try some reality in the ukrainian front, perhaps in the russian side where conscript gets send to.
Slaves are very well taught which rights they have too, when you don’t have many it’s easy to teach.
This is a barbaric practice.
But its nice that women are now included.
I mean at least they’re not sexist ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
But it’s* nice
ur brbaric
That’s not uncommon in countries with universal military service. Israel does this, and I think Finland and Singapore might as well. Sweden’s limited conscription (it’s a lottery, and you get to decline, though unless you have a strongly held conviction to do so, it’s a breach of jantelagen to do so) is also unisex, IIRC, which I suspect is more what the Danish model will look like than the IDF.
At least in Finland you can voluntarily join the army as a woman, but the military service is only mandatory for men, so it’s not equal.
Same for Denmark, at least back when I last checked in 2018.
In Denmark all women are invited to join the “Forces Day”. All men are required to go.
They recruited 4,700 last year, of which 100% were volunteers. They have the power to force you to join but if enough volunteers join they don’t use it. These conscripts then enter for a short 4 month stint, basically “basic training”. The aim is solely to create a recruitment pool for which they can recruit professional soldiers.
Now the government is proposing changing the number to 5,000 and the service length to 11+ months, enough to give you your “specialist training”, ie turn you into infantry, engineers, artillery gunner or whatever.
As the service length will go up dramatically they expect the volunteering rate to fall somewhat, which means they expect somewhere between 500-1000 will be forced to join, whether they want to or not.
You can always become a conscientious objector, which means you still have to carry out the same service length (11 months) but you go do it in a nursing home, library, kindergarten or similar.
Previously the objector rate was very low and I’d imagine it will continue to be so.
My platoon had about 10-15 who had been forced to join (this was back in the late 90s). All bar 1 (one) loved or at the very least accepted their time in there and couldn’t understand what they so rejected. The last one became a conscientious objector within the first month. My best soldier had been forced to join and he personally shook my hand when I sent him home on his last day.
As the service length will go up dramatically they expect the volunteering rate to fall somewhat, which means they expect somewhere between 500-1000 will be forced to join, whether they want to or not.
That’s fucked up. It’s one thing to talk about actual conscription if you actually need to enlist a lot of relunctant people, but if you can get 4000 voluntarily getting to 5000 should be easy by increasing the benefits (higher pay might work , or scholarships or …).
You’re depriving a thousand people of their freedom for a year to save maybe a hundred million kronor. That’s roughly the cost of a single modern tank.
I strongly disagree. This isn’t about “depriving people of their freedom” this is about the fact that everyone who lives in a free country, which will support them and give them benefits for life, has a responsibility and a duty to answer when called upon.
Nobody can expect others to defend them if they won’t do the same. An integral part of the social contract in countries with conscription is that everyone accepts that duty to answer when called upon, and to defend their countrymen when necessary.
Anyone who doesn’t like it is free to start a political movement to abolish it. I have yet to see such a movement in any of the Nordic countries.
This isn’t about “depriving people of their freedom”
No, but depriving people of their freedom is what conscription does. It can be necessary, just as depriving people of their money via taxation is necessary, but you should be honest about what you’re doing.
Nobody can expect others to defend them if they won’t do the same. An integral part of the social contract in countries with conscription is that everyone accepts that duty to answer when called upon, and to defend their countrymen when necessary.
Yeah, but you’re using the opposite of the solidarity principle here. As I said, it’s reasonable to use conscription if you actually need a lot of people. I very much see the point in what South Korea or Israel are doing with conscription (albeit that they’re a bit sexist with it). But if 98% of the birth year cohort (and 99.98% of the entire population) get to enjoy their freedom while a tiny minority is forced to join the army, then that’s a serious injustice. Imagine doing taxation that way. Next time the state needs more income: Don’t raise income tax by 1% for everyone, just you could pick 1% of the population and raise it by 100% for them.
As long as the army doesn’t need (almost) everyone to have served, incentives paid for by everyone should be used to get enough volunteers.
Dunno if you’ve grown up in a country with conscription? Back when I was conscription age, and there was actual conscription, it was just seen as this thing you had to get through when you were 18. The vast majority were proud to serve and planned accordingly.
Being conscripted isn’t a job. It doesn’t need to compete on market terms, why should it? We all live here, in peace. Do your bit, and all that. The alternative is a hell of a lot worse.
No different to mom and dad expecting you to wash up after dinner. You live here too, contribute!
The alternative is to have a standing professionall army. Then you have people who are actually trained and “combat ready”. I wouldn’t say that’s worse at all. It allows people who want to be in the military to be in the military and people who don’t, won’t have to.
Mandatory military service isn’t doing your bit, it’s sitting around for a few months doing nothing useful. Even if war breaks out during your time, you are barely better prepared than someone just picked off the street. And after 2-3 years all the “training” you went through is forgotten anyhow.
I understand the need of drafting people during a time of war. That makes sense. But all mandatory military service does, is waste a year of your time.
Ok, but let’s look at a country like Finland.
They live next to an enormous, aggressive neighbour. Should Russia decide to go Ukraine on them (is that likely? It’s besides the point for the discussion on conscription) they need hundreds of thousand of soldiers to enable a credible defence. If they have that as a standing, professional army, society is wasting huge resources keeping people in uniform that could be out and be productive members of civil society.
And should they wait until things looks threatening they don’t have the time to train this army, nor the time to integrate a sudden, enormous new component in a the standing army that’s used to working only with itself.
Instead they choose a system of conscription. Soldiers are trained, then sent home to be productive. Occasionally they’re recalled for supplementary or refresher training, when equipment or doctrine changes. Invariably, they get older, eventually too old, so while they may remain part of the reserve, they’re recalled less in favour of their younger colleagues.
Undoubtedly they won’t be as effective as a standing army if recalled in war-time. So they’re lead by professional officers, keeping only the squad leaders and platoon leaders in the reserves while anyone of another function are in the standing army. The sergeant’s and lieutenants in the reserve are recalled more often, many having some contract that requires many weeks of service every year.
This makes it possible for Finland to maintain a credible defensive posture without keeping half a million soldiers in their standing army, doing nothing productive for society and costing a fortune.
Conscription has a place when the country is small, the threat nearby and unpredictable.
I can’t help but wonder if your opinion is enabled by the advantaged position of having an ocean between the society you live in and its potential aggressor. Most European states with a front towards Russia has found conscription the best compromises between the vast cost of maintaining a professional army large enough and keeping their societies productive in peace time.
I would agree, but the way, that being trained to be a soldier in a conscripted defence isn’t that particularly useful to the individual receiving the training (other than a change in attitude towards accepting challenges, which many employers later appreciate). It can feel like a waste of YOUR time. In this case, however, the usefulness is for society at large, something I know has been going out of fashion in this day and age.
Finland
Norway, not Finland. Women have a duty to serve but so few are called up that it’s kind of voluntary in practice.
Nope it is uncommon. Equal conscription only has been a thing for a few years in exactly two countries: Sweden and Norway. Neither Finland nor Singapore conscript women. Israel has conscription for women but it’s shorter.
A (de facto) lottery was what made Germany suspend conscription because only pulling in a fraction of each cohort was considered a breach of equality.
Yep, I was one of only roughly 15% of men in my cohort that had to do conscription or civilian service after leaving high school. The rest did gap years or did go to university directly. This was generally considered to be unfair. This is why now a “Allgemeine Dienstpflicht” is discussed by politicians, where everyone has to do some service to society for a year, but can freely decide whether it is military os civilian service.
I served in civil defence and can say that that’s definitely a good idea as civil defence relies on a large reserve. While getting volunteers once shit hits the fan is absurdly easy, practically none of them can be taken on, at least not for tasks more complex than forming a human chain to move sandbags, because there’s no time to train them. When the draft was still active there was a steady trickle of conscious objectors, and even if they don’t serve in the active reserve they’re still people you can integrate quickly. It hasn’t been that long since the draft got suspended so readiness isn’t in dire straits but if it goes on, it very well could be.
A couple of months on how to operate a radio, structure and organisation of the services, some theory about dikes and floods or avalanches or whatever might be applicable, qualification as a low-rank paramedic, knowing how to evacuate a city and build a tent city and operate goulash cannons never hurt anyone. Heck, half of that is a summer camp. A year would be a bit much I think, six months would be adequate, but there’s nothing stopping different services from requiring longer service. Civil defence is a good place to put people who can’t be arsed to choose though, I think, and it’d be cheap and easy to expand training capacity to cover a complete cohort. We do have a fuckton of tents and goulash cannons, wouldn’t hurt to actually use them. And those lentil reserves need rotating, might as well do it directly into people’s stomachs.
Also, just like back in my days, don’t require people to do the service in one continuous block, mine amounted to an average of a weekend per month for five years.
Not really. The Dienstpflicht is just virtue signalling by conservatives because the youths are so darn lazy and entitled. They know very well it’s unconstitutional and will never pass.
Singapore does not conscript women, it’s a matter of much debate. 80% of military work is administrative and logistic work which women are definitely physically qualified to do (without even considering the plenty of women who are more physically fit than some men, who would also do well in other physical roles).
What is jangelan?
It’s the typical phrasing of social pressures to not stand out in Scandinavia, drawing from a book where the author phrases the “rules” somewhat as a legal code. Tall poppy syndrome is an overlapping idea that might be more familiar to English speakers.
Googling tall poppy syndrome brings up that it’s mostly a nz/aus thing. I’ve never heard of that in the states. In the wiki article it mentions there’s a Japanese saying that goes “the nail that sticks up gets hammered down,” which I have heard.
I think it should be Jantelagen.
It seems really uncommon to me. I’m aware of only Israel doing this, while I know that Switzerland, Finland, Austria, Germany 15 years ago, when they still used the militia, and Thailand do not. In the US I believe only men have to register for the draft.
Mandatory military service is slavery. Do not give up your freedom, do not serve corrupted governments and politician. Fight for justice not against it.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-preparedness-the-road-to-universal-slaughter
No, it is forced labor and indeed a serious infraction on human rights, but it’s by no means slavery. Slaves can be sold and subjected to a bunch of other abuses.
Unlike slavery forced labor can be acceptable in certain conditions. I don’t think conscription in Western countries falls under that. It’s far too expensive (delaying people’s entry to the workforce by a year should cost more than 2% of GDP and you can buy a lot of advanced weaponry with that much money) and in most places getting enough people into the military should be doable by offering more benefits. But in countries like Ukraine or in the West when we’re talking about things like natuaral disasters it may be necessary to force people to work for the community.
work for the community.
Shooting at people and dropping bombs it’s not work. The community is not the government.
Shooting at people and dropping bombs it’s not work.
Is that all you think military service teaches you?
The community is not the government.
I guess we could discuss the validity of each country’s implementation of democracy , but, at least in theory, the power to govern derives from a mandate from the community. So no, the community is by extension the government.
Is that all you think military service teaches you?
No i’m sure they teach you how to play the guitar and draw paintings, not using guns designed and built to kill people.
hey now. they also teach you to be phobic of fireworks, driving and falling asleep.
What about compulsory education, is that imprisonment then?
It is for many
The article, to which you have linked, concerns a 60 year old critique of the contemporary US educational system. Besides the critique being of dubious relevance, simply due to its age, using it to argue that compulsory education is akin to imprisonment for many is misleading, if not fraudulent. Quite frankly it seems to me, that you linked the first apperarently appropriate hit in your google search.
You are supposed to read the “article” posted before calling it out
According to whom?
Have you actually read it? If you had, you could have addressed my arguments, instead of feigning indignation that I hadn’t spent the 10 minutes reading a seemingly superannuated critique of an equally archaic educational system.
Do you make a habit of reading every eight-page Wikipedia article someone randomly links to in an online debate, without said person qualifying the article?
if you are interested in the argument i encourage you to read the book and check the other references in the wiki page
Ok. It’s worth adding that in Denmark you can be a conscientious objector and go work in a public library instead.
I mean, there’s slavery and then there’s “working in a public library”. I’m not 100% sure they are the same.
If you have slaves working in a library that’s still slavery.
If being told you have certain obligations you must adhere to is “slavery” then, sure, it’s slavery.
You’re also expected to do your homework, tidy up your room, keep under the speed limit, not throw litter.
The world is full of demands on us. Some times the mature thing is just to say “sure, I’ll do my bit”.
I’m not sure you understand what mandatory military service is. You are not expected to do it, if you don’t you get punished and go to jail.
Are you suggesting we jail kids that don’t do their homeworks?
Do you understand that Russia has conscription and it’s forcing people to go to the front? The same thing is happening in Israel
I spent 3 years in an army that relied on conscription. I do get it, I think.
I’m fine with a conscientious objector option; this was an option when I joined up and some took it.
I think there’s a huge gulf between being “forced” to join the army (navy/airforce) of a democratic state’s which serves a purpose a of defending the country against attacks vs being forced to join a force which attacks another country or people. I didn’t make the distinction clear so I’m glad you’re calling me out on it. For clarity, then: I’m talking about conscription into a territorial defense force, not an expeditionary aggressor force.
Russia is defending themself from the nazi, israel is defending themself from hamas, france is talking about sending troops to ukraine to defend europe. It’s always the same story. An actual defense conscription would teach people how to throw boiling oil out of their windows, doesn’t seem like it’s going to happen or the goal.
1: Libraries have absolutely been supported with slave labor in the past.
2: Forced labor is forced labor.
3: There is still a difference between a draft to defend your country from a fascist like Putin and being drafted to invade Vietnam. I wouldn’t personally call the first slavery, but the second one is.
Based
deleted by creator
Sad story
Good, if service is a duty of citizenship all should be called to partake and where some may not be able to contribute the same for any number of reasons they should have a way they can as well.
I don’t like conscription, though as a citizen of a country looking at a civil war in the future I do see some benefits to all citizens being trained soldiers, but the duties of citizenship should be spread to all who can bear them. It ensures that none feel that they are more entitled to the rights and benefits of citizenship than others and is an act of a fair and just society.
