Conscription in capitalist countries

[Unicorn]

Should we be for it or against it?

Pros:

+ The proletariat gets military training which is necessary for making revolution

+ Soldiers in professional armies are largely fiercely pro-imperialist right-wingers. Revolution is easier when these people don't have a monopoly to military training and arms.

Cons:

- Against individual liberties, refusing can lead to prison

- May in some countries send people die in imperialist wars

- In my personal experience people tend to become racists and right-wingers in the army.

Lenin's attitude was IIRC ambivalent.

[Dominicana_1965]

Should we be for it or against it?

Pros:

+ The proletariat gets military training which is necessary for making revolution

+ Soldiers in professional armies are largely fiercely pro-imperialist right-wingers. Revolution is easier when these people don't have a monopoly to military training and arms.

Cons:

- Against individual liberties, refusing can lead to prison

- May in some countries send people die in imperialist wars

- In my personal experience people tend to become racists and right-wingers in the army.

Lenin's attitude was IIRC ambivalent.
Completely against it.

Various conditions can determine how exactly the working-class will organize itself and what tactics it will use in armed struggle against the ruling class. Some will pick up arms and overthrow the capitalist state in high numbers and some will organize in bodies that serve as the force of the working class (like guerrillas). So the actual military training is to a extent useless since it doesn't adapt to every objective situation.

Also is the military training really necessary? There are sufficient works written by people who have taken part in insurrections. If one wants to learn why not simply read those works and take some advice from there.

Regardless, I'm pretty sure they will find out that they probably did all of the mentioned actions because the majority of the written works were constructed due to the concrete conditions of those individuals situation.

The concrete conditions of every region will determine what is possible to do in order to overthrow the ruling class.

[Unicorn]

The American Trotskyist organization "League for the Revolutionary Party" supports the draft in the US citing Lenin to defend their position. See this article:
http://home.flash.net/~comvoice/33cLRPWords.html

A rebuttal is also on that site.

[Unicorn]

Also is the military training really necessary? There are sufficient works written by people who have taken part in insurrections. If one wants to learn why not simply read those works and take some advice from there.
I have been in the army and know that it is not possible to learn how to fight reading a book. Practical experience and training is necessary. Untrained men die fast in a battle.

[piet11111]

I have been in the army and know that it is not possible to learn how to fight reading a book. Practical experience and training is necessary. Untrained men die fast in a battle.

true but the training most army's get does not suit the needs of revolutionary's.

if you want to learn how to fight an insurrection you need to learn from the iraqi resistance not the americans in iraq.
besides i think it would be a lot like the russian revolution with very little actual fighting instead of a full blown civil war.

[Unicorn]

true but the training most army's get does not suit the needs of revolutionary's.

if you want to learn how to fight an insurrection you need to learn from the iraqi resistance not the americans in iraq.
I have a training in guerrilla warfare. Actually, the organization of the revolutionary army should be very similar to the organization of the existing Western national armies. The divisions of the US army have most combat power in the world. Modern armies have very complex technical equipment and soldiers need a proper training to be able to operate weapon systems like SAMs, tanks or rocket artillery.



besides i think it would be a lot like the russian revolution with very little actual fighting instead of a full blown civil war.
The Russian Civil War was a massive conflict. The Red Army lost nearly a million men.

[Kami]

Even with the list you've drawn alone, the cons so far outweigh the positives that it seems beyond question, no matter what lenin thought. It's so far from the freedom that many on this board believe in, it's not worth contemplating.

[Unicorn]

Even with the list you've drawn alone, the cons so far outweigh the positives that it seems beyond question, no matter what lenin thought. It's so far from the freedom that many on this board believe in, it's not worth contemplating.
Well, the Trot organization I mentioned supports the draft in the US as do many liberal Democrats. I think these facts makes the issue worth discussing.

Would people rather vote for a pro-draft Democrat or an anti-draft Republican? How much importance does this issue have?

[Kami]

Would people rather vote for a pro-draft Democrat or an anti-draft Republican? How much importance does this issue have?
I'd either (likely) not vote, or (less likely) vote for someone else. It's a very important issue; a case may be made for the voluntary joining of the army (I would still argue against it), but the conscription is abhorrant. Don't the people involved get some say?

[Unicorn]

Don't the people involved get some say?
In my country (Finland) people can choose between the army (6-12 months) and the civilian service (13 months). The third option is jail.

[piet11111]

I have a training in guerrilla warfare. Actually, the organization of the revolutionary army should be very similar to the organization of the existing Western national armies. The divisions of the US army have most combat power in the world. Modern armies have very complex technical equipment and soldiers need a proper training to be able to operate weapon systems like SAMs, tanks or rocket artillery.


The Russian Civil War was a massive conflict. The Red Army lost nearly a million men.

the war was after the revolution and the revolution was relatively bloodless.

[Unicorn]

the war was after the revolution and the revolution was relatively bloodless.
It does not help to make a revolution if it can't be militarily defended. ;)

[Kami]

In my country (Finland) people can choose between the army (6-12 months) and the civilian service (13 months). The third option is jail.
A choice like that is no choice at all

[SocialDemocracy19]

ya dude totally 100 percent against because this is not true democracy wen u force people into any situation they didnt choose to be a part of!

[piet11111]

A choice like that is no choice at all

well in jail you get 3 meals a day and a room with a bed for free.
easy choice for me

[Cult of Reason]

If it was Finland, I probably would not mind that much. As far as I am aware Finland is not involved with any occupations or conflicts. Same for Switzerland. I, however, am in the UK, so I would be opposed.

[The Douche]

There are more benefits.

This means that not only working class kids have to join the military (like it is now) it means that even the son of the president has to serve. The odds of congress (or parliament if you have one of those) approving a war when they know thier sons will go are much slimmer than if they know thier sons are hanging out at Yale.

If you think you are prepared to fight because you read a book then you are wrong. The reason iraqi militants are making gains is because there are a lot of them and they are dedicated, not because they are exceptionally good fighters. If you section off a city and put a platoon of insurgents and a platoon of US infantrymen in there the infantrymen would come out victorious, I garuntee it, I am a US infantryman.

[BIG BROTHER]

I would be more inclined against conscription. Why feed the army of young proles? Just so they die in a war that doesn't help them and kill other proples?

In case of a revolution, I'm sure the organizers(the party, the vanguard the council or whatever you want to call it) will find a way to train the workers.

[RHIZOMES]

Anti-draft.

All it does is involuntarily make the proletariat instruments of the state, plus being in the army sort of brainwashes you to a pro-state position. Proletariat kids are sent to kill or be killed while the bourgeoisie kids get to fly a plane around a lake for a few years because of their rich daddy (Looking at you, Bush)

[BobKKKindle$]

Socialists should oppose all forms of conscription, as people should not be forced to fight against their will, in wars that they may not accept as legitimate. This is ultimately an issue of freedom, the right of each individual to make their own decisions, free from the coercion of the state.

The Military is based on deference to figures of authority, and so participation in the bourgeois military encourages people to accept authority as legitimate and not question the hierarchical relations which underpin every sphere of human activity in a capitalist society.

[RedAnarchist]

Totally against conscription. It would be like voting - instead of legitimising the government, we would be legitimising war.

[lombas]

Strongly against, as inspired by Bakunin's What is Authority? (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/works/various/authrty.htm)