Keep in mind that national guard troops are now being deployed to the middle east and many are already there. The guard is supposed to be defending only US soil not stationed in other countries. Their only option is to go AWOL and face the consequences which are severe. More rule reinterpretation by the government.
Would that not be an honorable thing - to face the consequences and maybe challenge the system instead of going overseas to kill or be killed for the oligarchs?
I guess you're right. It would be far better for the troops being deployed to all sit down and protest by using a flame thrower on themselves and the last remaining his 45 to his brain.
What is your definition of futile anyway?
Another approach would be for the national guard who are supposed to be protecting the constitution and US citizens to gather up arms against Washington DC. Wouldn't that be interesting?? That would not be futile and I'd join the party!
This is what actually has to happen. These criminals will kill us all first and they are already in the process of doing so. They have also battened the hatches (as a matter of fact Biden Stationed the military around the White House on Sunday!) and are prepared against us doing this.
that's an incoherent take. The natural laws of animal instinct are inherently deterministic and oppressive. Fight or flight. The strongest survive. Concepts like fairness, magnaminity, and restraint in the interest of justice are unknown. There's no international agreement among cats to refrain from eating endangered bird species, for instance. (The fact that human laws against killing endangered species have often been disregarded does not override the fact that the ordinances have also had some partial success- or the fact that no animal species other than humans is even capable of formulating a concept as subtle as preserving natural diversity at the expense of immediate gratification.)
To the extent that human laws reify oppression or lead to oppression, it's because some of them are formulated and/or selectively enforced for the purpose of the oppression of the weak by the strong, to prevent the threat of competition, for territory or survival, and/or to maximize the advantage of a few at the expense of the rest, in a zero-sum game. That's as "natural" as it gets. A squandering of the unique capacity of reflective human awareness to do any better, but there isn't anything per se "unnatural" about it.
"The societies that have rules that don't oppress are not following human rules."
Got any specific real-world examples to reference? Your statement is so vague that I can't even tell whether you're referring to human societies or nonhuman societies.
I don't understand what you are talking about. First you said that rules and laws exist solely for the oppression of lower castes and then you said only nature makes the rules. So you think nature makes oppressive rules? There are rules for reaching consensus. As far as I know they are human rules. They are not oppressive unless you are one of those people that likes to take up all the space.
I don't really think that when people decide to patriotically go fight for their country that they think much except that they are being good patriots, doing what duty has called on them to do.
It seems you are confused as to _when_ it happens and for _which_ country.
For the US those poor souls are mostly ones seeking citizenship, pursuing a career, or pursuing financing of their subsequent careers. Most of them when they hear "thank you for your service" sneer mentally thinking what a stupid ass the utterer is.
If "railroaded" can be applied to them, then it can be applied to anybody.
You are not suggesting they are grabbed off the street the way they do in Ukraine? If not, then they proceed in the same way one would choose some other career path.
This is a pointless discussion, really. I think that people in North America are too often doing whatever they do in a robotic fashion and not thinking clearly.
Susan T: I think "russian_bot" is more into trolling, trying to win arguments, and picking on technicalities instead of trying to attain a deeper understanding of issues and exchange of ideas. If you can, I suggest limiting your engagement with him in an effort to not further encourage his trolling behavior. (just my opinion)
The U.S. is full of alienated ghettos where schools have bars on the windows and going to school involve children going through a metal detector. Junkies on the streets, few jobs, no meaningful careers and wages below living wage standards ie eternal penury.
That’s the picture for where the U.S. military trawls through to recruit most of its “volunteers”
That’s the “freedom” the U.S. claims to be offering and those are the coercive conditions you seem to be comparing to Ivy League students flicking through brochures and speaking to a personal career counsellor about which six figures paying job to take.
They go to schools here in Canada and try to attract the poorer kids to the military. The elite would prefer that the economically unprivileged die rather than their own children or they themselves.
You are responding to my comment referencing Ukraine's mobilization which folks there dub "mogilization" - from Russian могила (mogila) which means "grave". You probably saw videos how they do it over there. Are you claiming American ghettos are subject to the same treatment? Can you provide links to the videos?
Of course not. So what are you saying then? That these ghetto inhabitants can't decide just like those Ivy leaguers whether they want to go or not?
You seriously believe the US military personnel believes they are "defending" while deployed thousands of miles away from the US shores?
Keep in mind that national guard troops are now being deployed to the middle east and many are already there. The guard is supposed to be defending only US soil not stationed in other countries. Their only option is to go AWOL and face the consequences which are severe. More rule reinterpretation by the government.
Would that not be an honorable thing - to face the consequences and maybe challenge the system instead of going overseas to kill or be killed for the oligarchs?
It would be honorable and completely futile. It would accomplish absolutely nothing more than ending up an example for others NOT to follow.
Wrong. Look into the history of the Vietnam war. Troops rebelled.
At least assuring one's alive you're calling futile? Knowing one's in the right is futile?
I guess you're right. It would be far better for the troops being deployed to all sit down and protest by using a flame thrower on themselves and the last remaining his 45 to his brain.
What is your definition of futile anyway?
Another approach would be for the national guard who are supposed to be protecting the constitution and US citizens to gather up arms against Washington DC. Wouldn't that be interesting?? That would not be futile and I'd join the party!
This is what actually has to happen. These criminals will kill us all first and they are already in the process of doing so. They have also battened the hatches (as a matter of fact Biden Stationed the military around the White House on Sunday!) and are prepared against us doing this.
Spending months/years in prison would be futile, and worse than death.
Then let them go there and kill, trying to avoid being killed themselves. Just so it's not futile.
Rules and laws made by the oppressors are made to control those they oppress. If rules and laws were made by the people, things might be different.
that's an incoherent take. The natural laws of animal instinct are inherently deterministic and oppressive. Fight or flight. The strongest survive. Concepts like fairness, magnaminity, and restraint in the interest of justice are unknown. There's no international agreement among cats to refrain from eating endangered bird species, for instance. (The fact that human laws against killing endangered species have often been disregarded does not override the fact that the ordinances have also had some partial success- or the fact that no animal species other than humans is even capable of formulating a concept as subtle as preserving natural diversity at the expense of immediate gratification.)
To the extent that human laws reify oppression or lead to oppression, it's because some of them are formulated and/or selectively enforced for the purpose of the oppression of the weak by the strong, to prevent the threat of competition, for territory or survival, and/or to maximize the advantage of a few at the expense of the rest, in a zero-sum game. That's as "natural" as it gets. A squandering of the unique capacity of reflective human awareness to do any better, but there isn't anything per se "unnatural" about it.
Well said DC Reade!
"The societies that have rules that don't oppress are not following human rules."
Got any specific real-world examples to reference? Your statement is so vague that I can't even tell whether you're referring to human societies or nonhuman societies.
I don't understand what you are talking about. First you said that rules and laws exist solely for the oppression of lower castes and then you said only nature makes the rules. So you think nature makes oppressive rules? There are rules for reaching consensus. As far as I know they are human rules. They are not oppressive unless you are one of those people that likes to take up all the space.
I don't really think that when people decide to patriotically go fight for their country that they think much except that they are being good patriots, doing what duty has called on them to do.
I think most of them are looking for a job with benefits, sadly lacking in most places in Canada and the US.
Who are we kidding?
They’re folks that have brainwashed into believing “Amerikkkan exceptionalism”.
Unless one goes back to Vietnam and the draft, that’s my experience with those who’ve enlisted.
It seems you are confused as to _when_ it happens and for _which_ country.
For the US those poor souls are mostly ones seeking citizenship, pursuing a career, or pursuing financing of their subsequent careers. Most of them when they hear "thank you for your service" sneer mentally thinking what a stupid ass the utterer is.
I think military personnel are railroaded one way or another and I think it is horrible that they die for whatever reason they are there.
If "railroaded" can be applied to them, then it can be applied to anybody.
You are not suggesting they are grabbed off the street the way they do in Ukraine? If not, then they proceed in the same way one would choose some other career path.
This is a pointless discussion, really. I think that people in North America are too often doing whatever they do in a robotic fashion and not thinking clearly.
Susan T: I think "russian_bot" is more into trolling, trying to win arguments, and picking on technicalities instead of trying to attain a deeper understanding of issues and exchange of ideas. If you can, I suggest limiting your engagement with him in an effort to not further encourage his trolling behavior. (just my opinion)
The U.S. is full of alienated ghettos where schools have bars on the windows and going to school involve children going through a metal detector. Junkies on the streets, few jobs, no meaningful careers and wages below living wage standards ie eternal penury.
That’s the picture for where the U.S. military trawls through to recruit most of its “volunteers”
That’s the “freedom” the U.S. claims to be offering and those are the coercive conditions you seem to be comparing to Ivy League students flicking through brochures and speaking to a personal career counsellor about which six figures paying job to take.
They go to schools here in Canada and try to attract the poorer kids to the military. The elite would prefer that the economically unprivileged die rather than their own children or they themselves.
You are responding to my comment referencing Ukraine's mobilization which folks there dub "mogilization" - from Russian могила (mogila) which means "grave". You probably saw videos how they do it over there. Are you claiming American ghettos are subject to the same treatment? Can you provide links to the videos?
Of course not. So what are you saying then? That these ghetto inhabitants can't decide just like those Ivy leaguers whether they want to go or not?