It’s also the home of people being drafted (even more so than for political elite of the country). If some of them want to get the fuck out (yes, from their home) then those thay have elected shouldn’t have the right to force them to stay and die.
It’s a little more complicated than that (and the original post is a ridiculous oversimplifications with the intellectual level of a 5-year-old, if that much).
It’s down to how much do each of us owe to the Society we grew up in and the Society we live in (if not the same) and thus how much do we have a moral duty to pay it back when called upon it to protect said Society.
Different people will decide differently on those things and thus determine in their own minds what they think their “duty” is.
Then of course, on top of this there’s also the whole “protecting my family”, “fight alonside my friends”, plain old “warrior spirit” and such motivations on one side, as well as “having to stay to work to feed my family” and such on the other, but that’s not really to do with “duty” and “moral”.
In this specific case there is also the HUGE moral element that they’re paying to avoid the draft, and those doing so actually have money, so they’re likelly bigger beneficiaries from Society than those who can’t afford to make such payments, which brings in a massive element of injustice (one might make the case that the richer the person the more they have a duty towards the Society that made the and kept them thus).
Ultimatelly the draft itself should include some elements to make it fairer (and it does, up to a point, thinks like not drafting poor people with lots of kids - who need to earn a living for their family - or people who don’t have the local citizenship - who likely owe much less to local society than the locals) but in this specific case it absolutelly make sense to throw the book at those who are local citizens who have more money than most and yet use it to evade a duty to Society which is likely higher than that of most other people.
Only certain political subcultures in the United States and most absolute dictatorships (like China and Russia) think the State is Society.
States are just one form of organisation that naturally emerges in Societies to manage certain aspects of it. They’re not Society, just as Legal is not the same as Moral (i.e. sometimes what’s lawfull is imoral and what’s moral is illegal).
In fact I agree that people have no duty to the State.
And in Russia that does mean that they have no duty to obey the draft, because it was the Russian State that made the war and it’s not being done for the good of Society.
However in Ukraine people would be fighting for Society, not the State and in fact they would be fighting against the State: the Russian State, which is trying take over their land, their things and even control their lives and impose their will on them.
On the Ukranian side this is very much a fight for Freedom from a State which does not operate for the good of people and doesn’t even want them to be free.
In fact it even makes sense for some Ukranians to be against the Ukranian State as it operates and still join to fight because the Russian State would be even worse - they’re fighting for their families, their friends, their neighbours, even themselves, not for the Ukranian State.
I’m surprised so many people read your post without holding the simple truth that Society (all of us) is not the State (just a few people, sometimes not even elected and when elected, often only through lies and rules that mathematically rig the voting systems). I suppose there are a lot of politicans that want people to confuse such things as Nationalism and Patriotism, hence people who are constantly fed that political spin also end up confusing related elements such as the State, the Nation and Society.
(Also most actual Political Thinking has been killed in the last 4 decades and replaced by techniques from Marketing, so it’s unsurprising that most people haven’t really pondered by themselves on these things which were all the rage for ideologies back in the first half or the XX century, especially in the US where politics has long ceased to be about grand visions for the future of society).
So society owes us nothing, but we owe society our lives? Why? I’m not sure I agree with that. I would risk my life protecting myself and my loved ones, but asking me to protect strangers and to die for them is a tall ask IMO.
Those people happily enjoyed the benefits of their society, and now try to get around the contribution part - by spending money they got trough their position in this very society.
Everyone is free to dislike this deal, but then you should find yourself a country which doesn’t have a draft. It’s as simple as that. But they didn’t. They lived in their comfort zone and now try to get around the rules.
Last, this discussion should be about the officials who took the bribes.
That you can read and write, have Internet and are alive past (I assume) the ripe old age of 20, is because of Society: anything that you cannot do with your own hands only exists because people have organised to achieve more than single individuals can by themselves and to protect what they achieved from other individuals that would take it by force.
Being outside Society would basically mean having the same rights as a wild animal: you can be killed at will by anybody, enslaved, own nothing that you cannot yourself protect, will be left to die if hurt, will likely be run over and/or killed if you enter communal spaces (such as road, parks). Forget about more complex rights than that such as the rights that come from citizenship: wild animals are not citizens.
It would be immenselly educational for people who parrot this kind of libertarian crap if there was indeed a way for them to be free of all duty to Society and Society free of all duty to them.
As there isn’t, if you want a (even partially so) place where people have little or no duty to Society, I suggest you move to a place like Somalia, though I expect that if you take such an extreme “I have no duty to the group” take as you wrote here you would be dead pretty quickly (or maybe just enslaved, who knows): even in a place like that which is pretty much an Anarchy when it comes to the power of the State, people still group up in large groups with a mutual duty of protection (a Society of tribes), and funnilly enough that is same kind of mutual duty of protection you want to evade in the “tribe” you are part of currently whilst enjoying all the benefits only made possible by that very thing you do not want to fight to protect.
Even cavemen had Societies, just very small and called tribes, only back then those who didn’t want to contribute to the defense of the group were pushed out and generally died.
I think that when you grow up and live in a society, you owe many parts of your life to it, to the people who educated you, taught you, protected you or served you, but also the people who came before and made it possible for all those previous people to be there for you.
Therefore, you have a moral responsibility to defend that.
Yeah, we have the moral responsibility to defend our corrupted politicians and billionares who brought humanity to the brink of extinction. This system must be saved at all cost
Do you think what Putin wants to bring to Ukrain is any better? It’s what you describe multiplied by a thousand. So yes, we have the moral responsability to resist against the worse even if the current is not great.
It’s also the home of people being drafted (even more so than for political elite of the country). If some of them want to get the fuck out (yes, from their home) then those thay have elected shouldn’t have the right to force them to stay and die.
It’s a little more complicated than that (and the original post is a ridiculous oversimplifications with the intellectual level of a 5-year-old, if that much).
It’s down to how much do each of us owe to the Society we grew up in and the Society we live in (if not the same) and thus how much do we have a moral duty to pay it back when called upon it to protect said Society.
Different people will decide differently on those things and thus determine in their own minds what they think their “duty” is.
Then of course, on top of this there’s also the whole “protecting my family”, “fight alonside my friends”, plain old “warrior spirit” and such motivations on one side, as well as “having to stay to work to feed my family” and such on the other, but that’s not really to do with “duty” and “moral”.
In this specific case there is also the HUGE moral element that they’re paying to avoid the draft, and those doing so actually have money, so they’re likelly bigger beneficiaries from Society than those who can’t afford to make such payments, which brings in a massive element of injustice (one might make the case that the richer the person the more they have a duty towards the Society that made the and kept them thus).
Ultimatelly the draft itself should include some elements to make it fairer (and it does, up to a point, thinks like not drafting poor people with lots of kids - who need to earn a living for their family - or people who don’t have the local citizenship - who likely owe much less to local society than the locals) but in this specific case it absolutelly make sense to throw the book at those who are local citizens who have more money than most and yet use it to evade a duty to Society which is likely higher than that of most other people.
As corrupt and shitty the Ukrainian state is, very few people owe their life to it. Draftdodging is morally defensible in almost all wars.
Society is not the State.
Only certain political subcultures in the United States and most absolute dictatorships (like China and Russia) think the State is Society.
States are just one form of organisation that naturally emerges in Societies to manage certain aspects of it. They’re not Society, just as Legal is not the same as Moral (i.e. sometimes what’s lawfull is imoral and what’s moral is illegal).
In fact I agree that people have no duty to the State.
And in Russia that does mean that they have no duty to obey the draft, because it was the Russian State that made the war and it’s not being done for the good of Society.
However in Ukraine people would be fighting for Society, not the State and in fact they would be fighting against the State: the Russian State, which is trying take over their land, their things and even control their lives and impose their will on them.
On the Ukranian side this is very much a fight for Freedom from a State which does not operate for the good of people and doesn’t even want them to be free.
In fact it even makes sense for some Ukranians to be against the Ukranian State as it operates and still join to fight because the Russian State would be even worse - they’re fighting for their families, their friends, their neighbours, even themselves, not for the Ukranian State.
I’m surprised so many people read your post without holding the simple truth that Society (all of us) is not the State (just a few people, sometimes not even elected and when elected, often only through lies and rules that mathematically rig the voting systems). I suppose there are a lot of politicans that want people to confuse such things as Nationalism and Patriotism, hence people who are constantly fed that political spin also end up confusing related elements such as the State, the Nation and Society.
(Also most actual Political Thinking has been killed in the last 4 decades and replaced by techniques from Marketing, so it’s unsurprising that most people haven’t really pondered by themselves on these things which were all the rage for ideologies back in the first half or the XX century, especially in the US where politics has long ceased to be about grand visions for the future of society).
Draftdoging an economic or offensive war is much different than draftdoging a defensive war.
So society owes us nothing, but we owe society our lives? Why? I’m not sure I agree with that. I would risk my life protecting myself and my loved ones, but asking me to protect strangers and to die for them is a tall ask IMO.
Society is the return for contributing.
Those people happily enjoyed the benefits of their society, and now try to get around the contribution part - by spending money they got trough their position in this very society.
Everyone is free to dislike this deal, but then you should find yourself a country which doesn’t have a draft. It’s as simple as that. But they didn’t. They lived in their comfort zone and now try to get around the rules.
Last, this discussion should be about the officials who took the bribes.
That’s not at all what I said.
That you can read and write, have Internet and are alive past (I assume) the ripe old age of 20, is because of Society: anything that you cannot do with your own hands only exists because people have organised to achieve more than single individuals can by themselves and to protect what they achieved from other individuals that would take it by force.
Being outside Society would basically mean having the same rights as a wild animal: you can be killed at will by anybody, enslaved, own nothing that you cannot yourself protect, will be left to die if hurt, will likely be run over and/or killed if you enter communal spaces (such as road, parks). Forget about more complex rights than that such as the rights that come from citizenship: wild animals are not citizens.
It would be immenselly educational for people who parrot this kind of libertarian crap if there was indeed a way for them to be free of all duty to Society and Society free of all duty to them.
As there isn’t, if you want a (even partially so) place where people have little or no duty to Society, I suggest you move to a place like Somalia, though I expect that if you take such an extreme “I have no duty to the group” take as you wrote here you would be dead pretty quickly (or maybe just enslaved, who knows): even in a place like that which is pretty much an Anarchy when it comes to the power of the State, people still group up in large groups with a mutual duty of protection (a Society of tribes), and funnilly enough that is same kind of mutual duty of protection you want to evade in the “tribe” you are part of currently whilst enjoying all the benefits only made possible by that very thing you do not want to fight to protect.
Even cavemen had Societies, just very small and called tribes, only back then those who didn’t want to contribute to the defense of the group were pushed out and generally died.
Just contribute your life savings to the war effort in exchange?
I think that when you grow up and live in a society, you owe many parts of your life to it, to the people who educated you, taught you, protected you or served you, but also the people who came before and made it possible for all those previous people to be there for you.
Therefore, you have a moral responsibility to defend that.
Yeah, we have the moral responsibility to defend our corrupted politicians and billionares who brought humanity to the brink of extinction. This system must be saved at all cost
Do you think what Putin wants to bring to Ukrain is any better? It’s what you describe multiplied by a thousand. So yes, we have the moral responsability to resist against the worse even if the current is not great.
^^ found Zelensky’s lemmy account
I’m not from Ukraine.