I don't understand ANY argument for conscription. Of all the laws on the books that are still "acceptable" in modernity from even the "progressive" crowd, the one that perplexes me the most is conscription.
For me, it's just so simple: If a government needs to force people to fight for the government then the government has no right to exist. A legitimate government should be able to raise a fully volunteer army because all the citizens the government represents wants to fight to defend this government.
Just think about it for a moment. Supposedly some evil enemy is coming to rape your women and kill all the men or enslave everyone by taking their rights away. Everyone should want to defend against that, no? If someone doesn't volunteer to fight against that then clearly they've decided that rape and death is better than... rape and death? Or, perhaps they've decided they can still live without dying for a country and they'd rather this conclusion.
How can anyone justify using force to force something to go to war and die against their will?
I hate the concept of conscription so much I think anyone who suggests it should be hanged, tbh. You want people to fight for you? Offer them an incentive then.
Not in the slightest, as best I can tell. He even makes some allusions to older forms of war such as raping and carrying off women and children.
He made a historical allegory and then proceeded to ignore it and pout about it.
But in fact there are plenty of historical examples, more than not, of a levy, conscription, draft or what the fuck ever you want to call it, that were not only moral but necessary.
Firstly because the idea of war does not demand or even allow for the nonsense group consensus that he claims is necessary, and secondly because the average prole/peasant throughout history has always had to be kicked and whipped into getting off his ass. Because the average person is by and large worthless.
Dude isn't arguing all that clearly, but that's the impression I got from it.
Older? It's literally happening right now, except they don't have to carry them far since ZOG is providing the rapists with taxpayer-funded housing.
Very true. But then he's Canadian.
Yes, older. It was practiced more commonly during the Middle Ages, when it wouldn't result in miscegenation. Vikings carrying off Saxon women wasn't exactly destroying your own people. The children ended up the same color as you, spoke your language, and were raised to kill your enemies.
This largely ceased in the colonial period because conquering the lesser races doesn't provide much incentive to intermix with them, but instead to bring in your own people and settle. Which is what happened historically.
What we have now is certainly different both in outcome and intent. The lesser races are attacking the foundations of civilization and that is being done with the intent of wiping out the White race. They're colonizing our land and attempting to pollute our race into functional nonexistence.
Ah, a leaf.