• eldavi@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    131
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    i think the real indictment is how we treat people who refuse to participate and die for the profit of the already rich; the government treats them with imprisonment while the rest of us treat them like a coward for standing up for themselves in thoroughly fucked up system…

    • Ptsf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      64
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah… That type of brainwashing is so commonplace now though. Just look at how the US is treating striking dock workers, people keep talking about how they make xxx,xxx and not how the ceos make xxx,xxx,xxx,xxx like it’s the workers being greedy… 🥲

      • aesthelete@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        The keyboard warriors instantly became experts on labor negotiations /s, even though they seemingly haven’t had the elementary realization that demands are movable in a negotiation, and you don’t negotiate by saying “oh, I actually make quite enough money compared to poor workers in Alabama with no union representation and I love the current benefits thank you kindly, sir”.

        • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          That’s how you end up arguing whether any sick time is on the table and then the government steps in and says no sick time now back to work. Don’t ask for just any sick time. Ask for fucking 2 months of paid leave for all workers and a $300,000 salary.

    • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      During WWII in Britain, about 10% of the men drafted were sent down into the coal mines instead of being sent off to war. In addition to enduring the horrific conditions of the mines, they had to endure abuse for not fighting. For bonus points, the old-time miners would often haze these draftees by letting their elevator cages free-fall for a bit during their first trips down.

      • BlitzoTheOisSilent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        2 months ago

        There were also the Order of the White Feather during WWI in the UK (and I’m sure other variations in other countries at the time). They were women who would walk around and try to shame young men into enlisting, or they would present a white feather to men who weren’t in uniform to highlight their “cowardice.”

        Some of the men these women gave feathers to were on leave from the front lines, or even home after being discharged from some horrific injury sustained on the front. My personal favorite: article.

        […] none more so than Seaman George Samson who received a feather when he was on his way to a reception held in his honour to receive the Victoria Cross as a reward for his bravery at Gallipoli.

  • GraniteM@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    114
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Hawkeye: War isn’t Hell. War is war, and Hell is Hell. And of the two, war is a lot worse.

    Father Mulcahy: How do you figure that, Hawkeye?

    Hawkeye: Easy, Father. Tell me, who goes to Hell?

    Father Mulcahy: Sinners, I believe.

    Hawkeye: Exactly. There are no innocent bystanders in Hell. War is chock full of them — little kids, cripples, old ladies. In fact, except for some of the brass, almost everybody involved is an innocent bystander.

  • Ulvain@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    102
    ·
    2 months ago

    “war is people that know each other but don’t kill each other making people that don’t know each other, kill each other”

    I can’t remember the author, but i love this old quote

    • BMTea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Great question. See, a farmer can’t stay behind and command the state because he is a farmer. The heads of state and the elite cannot all perish in trenches because then all that would remain are farmers. Established heirarchy for organizational power was invented probably by whatever primates we evolved from, and is observed among even some other species of primate.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Our country was built on well educated farmers taking up positions of governance. We’d be fine.

      • hark@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        A country without farmers will perish, a country without “elites” will make do.

        • BMTea@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Well… a country without “elites” and only farmers will very quickly find itself with a set of elites, from another country, who can organize their farmers to take and conquer others’ farmland.

  • Draghetta@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t really understand this seemingly widespread notion - that is also represented in this comic - that nations “agree” to go to war.

    That is not really how it works most of the time, there is usually an aggressor and a victim. It is usually not two powerful leaders butchering their own country’s population, but rather one powerful leader butchering two countries’ population.

    I know it’s not the point of this comic, but this really, really annoys me.

    • NABDad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think WW1 was kind of like the comic. It was a bunch of squabbling family members who got into a pissing match and then sent their citizens to die. It never would have happened if Gramma Vicky had still been alive!

      • Draghetta@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Sure, but this comic wasn’t made 100 years ago. It reeks of that “they should BOTH stop fighting!” rhetoric, that only benefits aggressors.

      • marcos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        The world used to be more like the comic. Now it’s more unilateral.

        But the one important detail never changes.

    • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s a pretty stupid comic actually. The conversation usually goes more along the lines of one nation demanding territory from the other, and the other telling the first to fuck right off.

    • hark@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Don’t forget proxy wars and subterfuge. It’s much easier to gain influence through “soft” power than through brutal invasion and occupation, but this “soft” power can still result in tremendous bloodshed, like instigated coups.

    • rocket600@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think your premise is wrong. It’s more plausible that because war is beneficial for the 1 percent, that this song and dance of political theater is purely to keep you and I entertained and in line.

      Or we could go with your idea that Putin thought it was a good idea to piss off the most powerful nations because he wanted to conquer some land. He was like A) I could peacefully hang out on my massive yacht or B) become enemies with a country that is notorious for stealth drone strikes.

      • Draghetta@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        War is beneficial for the 1% and there is no doubt about it. That doesn’t change anything that I wrote, and it’s not at all incompatible with Putin being an aggressor and a stupid asshat.

        As someone put it: dictatorship is a job with amazing benefits, but a terrible retirement plan. Putin can never retire and chill on his yacht, he needed to be at war for his regime security.

        He never meant to piss off the most powerful bloc in the world, he thought he could just snatch Ukraine and get away with it with a little frown from the west, like he did with parts of it before (Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk), like he did with Georgia (South Ossetia, Abkhazia). He miscalculated Ukraine’s response, and the west’s.

        He is not the first dictator who believes his own bullshit about the rest of the world you know? Do you think Hitler wanted to go to total war with UK, France, USA and USSR all at once? Or do you think he was secretly in cahoots with Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin to have a nice little war together to enrich their 1% and historians are conspiring to hide this?

        • rocket600@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Hey thanks for the reply, but I don’t understand how you can attest to Putins intent. Does he confide in you? Do you read his blog?

          There is just no way that this war is one sided. Didn’t US/Nato provoke Russia by moving resources into Ukraine, breaking the minck agreements? I don’t know if that’s true, but thats way more plausible than it’s just big bad Putin. He’s the villian. Case closed.

          I honestly don’t KNOW anything for certain. History was written by the victor. Propaganda is everywhere. I just find it annoying when people claim to KNOW something because they watch the news or read history books. Were you there?

          Can you one hundred percent positively say Putin is NOT just trying to defend his nation from this US/Nato proxy war? Don’t lie to me.

          (I don’t necessarily think Putin is a good person, I just don’t think he’s the only bad one.)

          I do appreciate you taking the time to set me straight. Not sarcasm.

          • Draghetta@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Mate, I don’t have the resources to answer to all that. If after two and a half years of war you still believe the “nato provoked Putin” bullshit I don’t know what to tell you.

            I cannot read Putin’s mind but I have read and listened to a plethora of explanations for the current state of affairs, from multiple POVs and to varying degrees of depth. Some of them make more sense, some of them less. The explanations you are bringing up (nato provoked, breach of minsk, defensive war, etc etc) are among those that makes the least sense under a bit of scrutiny.

            I don’t want to have this debate under a fucking comic thread so I’ll disengage. I’ll just say that just because people you don’t like (government? newspapers? I don’t know) say something it doesn’t mean it is AUTOMATICALLY false and any other explanation is preferable. I know it’s boring, but maybe, just maybe, they are onto something once in a while.

            Don’t trust them if you don’t want to, do your own research - but do it for real, not like the antivaxers. Maybe that propaganda bullshit you find more reasonable will appear for what it is.

    • index@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      That is not really how it works most of the time

      That is indeed how it works most of the time

  • samus12345@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    2 months ago

    Kropp, on the other hand, is more philosophical. He reckons that all declarations of war ought to be made into a kind of festival, with entrance tickets and music, like they have at bullfights. Then the ministers and generals of the two countries would have to come into the ring, wearing boxing shorts, and armed with rubber truncheons, and have a go at each other. Whoever is left on his feet, his country is declared the winner. That would be simpler and fairer than things are out here, where the wrong people are fighting each other.

    - All Quiet on the Western Front

    • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Forget that. They need to face the same stakes that they’ve forced millions of other people to face. Deadly force. Put them through the same grueling conditions, and the cost of failure is death.

      • samus12345@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 months ago

        I assume Kropp was intentionally treating the leaders with more compassion than they treat their citizens.

    • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      So we should have a political system where the physically strongest get elected leader? Or would it be a elected position?

      Current US election aside

  • banazir@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    Politicians hide themselves away/They only started the war/Why should they go out to fight?/They leave that all to the poor, yeah/Time will tell on their power minds/Making war just for fun/Treating people just like pawns in chess/Wait till their judgment day comes, yeah

  • BMTea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s called the division of labor. You can’t have the guy in charge of running things get turned into Beefaroni in a foxhole.

    • affiliate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      that would be bad, yes. but you could also make the argument that the guy in charge of things would be much less likely to initiate a war if he knew there was a chance he could get turned into beefaroni in a foxhole.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      No but you can conscript their kids and require them to be on the Frontline. You can have a conscription program that cannot be bought out or excused. You can require a military referendum.

      There are ways to deal with this problem.

  • WhyFlip@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    2 months ago

    Fucking stupid. Like the decision to go to war doesn’t weigh on the person and people having to make that decision.