Life and culture in the Soviet Union, North Korea, China etc was/is heavily controlled by the state, so their reputations around the world may be askew compared to actual life. I'm asking anybody with any experience of living in these countries to tell me what it was like, the positives and negatives.
liberty student:You don't know Natalie, so please don't post stuff like this. She's a pretty consistent libertarian, and you shouldn't be attributing motives to her you cannot possibly understand.
To be fair, it's hard to be objective when it comes to your own family However, I don't believe they and other veterans I talked to enjoyed war or hated all Germans (despite the Soviet propaganda).
liberty student:Almost universally, all veteran members of this community oppose war and violence.
Nothing is a better antidote against violence than actually being involved in war.
If I hear not allowed much oftener; said Sam, I'm going to get angry.
J.R.R.Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings
krazy kaju:The USSR was a total police state where many were afraid of any kind of dissent and it also had some of the lowest living standards in the Soviet bloc (at least when compared to Poland, East Germany, and Czechoslovakia).
Yes, it's quite ironic considering that Russia was the center of the empire with so many resources available. Even most Soviet republics somehow had a better standard of living (Baltics, Ukraine, Georgia in particular).
Natalie:Yes, let's alienate the whole segment of population that can potentially help us fight for our freedom (unless you're naive enough to think that government will do it without a fight).
Not mention that it distracts from the fact that the main culprit - and murderer - is the government (or any other government-like entity who uses organized force to gain power).
Remove monopoly of force, and you'll end up with militias and private security & defense organizations (like Blackwater, but serving the private sector).
Calling someone "murderous thug" without checking all the circumstances is not a "criticism".
It's stupid labeling that our media is so fond of, where gun owners are called dangerous vigilantes, militia is full of white supremacists and veterans are crazy maniacs who did nothing but killed babies.
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
Oh Juan, you are so bi-polar with your right and left paradigm. There are bigger problems in this world than right wingers.
Juan: You are not talking about the military are you ? You can't be that confused. You think that the military, which are totalitarians to the core, are going to fight the government ?
Why not? It happened before. Remember Colonial forces and confederate army?
Again, stop generalising. People volunteer for different reasons, especially in time of war. Not to mention that sometimes they don't even have a choice.
There're plenty of ex-military (or even current military personnel) on various libertarian boards. Many of them are openly anti-government, pro-limited government or even anarchists. Interestingly enough, I don't see other government workers. Tax collectors... not them
Juan:Their 'mission' is to defend the government. They are the government.
They're only servants. The high-ranking officers can be influential but they don't make political decisions (at least in the US). Remove the government, and they will either have to find another line of work or become private mercenaries.
Juan:he very foundation of the state is the army. Basic libertarian insight - an insight right wingers seem to have a problem grasping.
Aren't you forgetting about police, federal agencies, IRS, etc? Army is only one of the enforcement branches these days. It can be used against the people, of course, but even if a small portion stops believing in the government and is actually willing to fight against it, than it has a chance of crumbling it.
Juan:You mean criminal organizations like blackwater ? Is that your vision of a free society ?
A free society is where there's no monopoly on the use of force. It's where I can use whatever means necessary to defend myself, my property or my family. Or join the militia and mutual defense organizations. Or yes, pay to the for-profit professionals - Blackwater is just used as an example of a private security firm, perhaps not the best one, considering their history.
Seriously, read some ideas about how the private defense agencies might operate in the free market.
Juan: Right. It's a statement of fact.And I stand by my comments. I said that the commies and the military get
Did you even read what I wrote? Communists (in the USSR, at least) distrusted the military (the actual fighting forces). They killed a lot of military personnel and drafted people against their will and even tried to get rid of any expressions of patriotism (i.e. love of one's country). That doesn't look like "getting along nicely" to me.
Juan:because they ultimately are both brutal collectivists.
You do realize that in the past there were plenty of mercenaries in history whose sole motivation was to earn money by fighting for the highest bidder (often governments, but not necessarily so)? They were certainly brutal, but not "collectivists". At some point central governments realized that it's far safer to nationalize all the armed forces and outlaw the independents. I mean, what if people decide to hire mercenaries against their own lords and masters? Scary thought indeed!
Juan:There's a good deal of truth in that. Again, the sort of truth that right wingers don't want to hear.
The same kind of truth that you see in the op-eds on "global warming" and wonders of socialized healthcare?
Please enlighten me about the dangers of private gun ownership and the safety of the police state.
And what's with the "right wing" fixation? Do you seriously believe that all gun owners support Republicans?
liberty student:There are bigger problems in this world than right wingers.
They want to own guns to shoot the tax collectors! The "murderous thugs"
I am not a veteran, but I was a PFC in the U.S. Army four sometime more than four months. Although I did not deploy, obviously, I did get to know many different personalities in the service. During my short stay in the Army I suffered a lot of paid from pre-existing back problems (mild kyphosis), thanks to the 100lb.+ packs us infantrymen had to carry during marches and FTXs. I complained and asked them to change my MOS—that is, change my specialty; I told them that another combat specialty was fine, such as artillery or armor—they gave me 800mg pain killers and told me to take four a day, instead. I also had a lot of time to think about my future—I had signed a five year contract—and I thought that once my term was over I was going to go back to the civilian world with absolutely no marketable skills. Of course, there was also the fear of losing limbs in Iraq, which I was guaranteed to go to (all infantrymen deploy). This is not information I usually give out, but I went AWOL and went back to my homeland (Spain)—there, I became a deserter. I turned myself in a year later, only to be discharged with an Other Than Honorable Discharge (technically, it's neutral, since it's not Dishonourable, but it's also not a General or Honourable Discharge; I'm hoping that after I get my degree I can get it upgraded to a General Discharge, which will not preclude me as much from several employment options).
Normal 0 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
I did not join the military because I enjoy killing people. Up until then, I had only fired a gun once in my life. I believe I was two years old. I joined the military because my first two years at a university had been a fiasco, and I didn't want to live with my parents and I didn't want to go look for a job. Instead, I chose the simpler option of joining the Army. It is a job, but it's not a job you have to apply for, really—you are accepted without question. They lured me in with the promise of using cool weapons. Nobody has a clear idea of what war is until they live through one, or something that is close to one. As I said, I never went to war, but infantry OSUT did open me up to some of the realities. The point is, those that join to kill people are few. Most join due to financial issues—the armed forces are almost a guaranteed paycheck for the rest of your life, if you chose to retire through the armed forces. The benefits are great (at the expense of everybody else, of course), et cetera.
To marginalize all soldiers are murderers, just because the institution they fight for was designed to monopolize power for the State, is showing ignorance and a clear bias. It is true that a majority of soldiers have a misguided view on what freedom is, and what one has to do to guarantee their freedoms. Soldiers are not the type to be well read, nor aware of the truth in regards to the acts of their government to restrict the freedoms that soldiers believe they are fighting for. A lot of them believe that fighting in Iraq is necessary to protect the United States. It is all part of an indoctrination committed to by the State. The individual soldier should not be blamed. Besides, the fact that more and more soldiers are "converting" to libertarianism shows that not all soldiers are malintentioned. During Cato University 2009, I met two Naval Academy graduates and one graduate from the Army Academy at West Point. I also met a former-Marine. None of these men were murderers.
I did not join the military because I enjoy killing people.
juan what he did was ugly but not criminal. he didnt murder anyone or threaten anyone with murder. (did you point your gun at people?i hope not....) the worst thing he (probably) did was accept stolen property as payment. so there is a question over net tax payer or net tax consumer. if he works as a productive member of society for any significant period of time i would be gobsmacked if he didnt end up to be a net tax payer like the rest of us.
i certainly don't read them as advocating for the military, or excusing actual crimes of soldiers. though if they ever did this in the past they are probably no different from us in that we have all of us acknowledge our imperfections and that we have at one time or another harbored silly dieas, and maybe even did wrong acts we now regret.
i like a big tent.
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
Even had a prior service member gone to war, is there no such thing as forgiveness? Libertarians who have been to war are useful, because they provide invaluable insight into war and the machinations of the State. Or, should all soldiers be executed, or at best marginalized from society? I'm not sure what the usefulness of insulting service members and grouping them into "murderers" and refusing to accept them as libertarians is, Juan.
Natalie:A free society is where there's no monopoly on the use of force.
It's odd here in former Yugoslavia, the people, for the most part, realize that socialism destroyed their economy and destroyed them psychologically (no one trusts the government, and they're all afraid to save/hold money due to hyper-inflation). But no one blames Tito; in fact, he's hailed as a great leader, and many long for the days of "Yugoslavian dominance." They can't tell you why socialism failed from an economic point of view; they merely explain that only Tito could keep the Croatians, Serbians, Slovenes, and Montenegrins together. Each party blames others for the failure, without actually acknowledging the failure of socialism.
"If we wish to preserve a free society, it is essential that we recognize that the desirability of a particular object is not sufficient justification for the use of coercion."
Juan:Good for you. 'We' need more 'libertarians' like you and Natalie.
Right, we need more "libertarians" like Juan who slander people they haven't met and tell blatant lies.
Juan:Basically, you don't know what you are talking about.
Oh, unlike some white tower libertarians, I know it very well. I know what's it like to live in a totalitarian state and the kind of defenselessness you feel when you can't protect yourself even against "official" crimes.
Juan: What defines a free-society is unconditional respect for individual rights.
Exactly how you're going to protect your freedom without the right of self-defense?
And what's unconditional respect? Is it some kind of a zombie socialist paradise where everyone agrees to the party line?
Nir:i certainly don't read them as advocating for the military, or excusing actual crimes of soldiers.
Jonathan:The individual soldier should not be blamed.
Jonathan:Even had a prior service member gone to war, is there no such thing as forgiveness?
I'm not sure what the usefulness of insulting service members