logoalt Hacker News

ck45yesterday at 4:48 PM1 replyview on HN

What's a reason that is politically and not against one's conscience? I assumed that one's political beliefs would also manifest in conscience.

The cold war has been over for a very long time. The whole process was reformed in 1984 by removing the mandatory oral hearing. Sources say that acceptance rate was above 90% after 1995. That's not good enough (should be 100%), but not terrible either.


Replies

itsyonasyesterday at 5:00 PM

> What's a reason that is politically and not against one's conscience? I assumed that one's political beliefs would also manifest in conscience.

For example, I don't think it's in my interest to defend or die for the German state. However, I would use violence to protect my life if someone tried to kill me or threatened my life directly. The German state would interpret this as a political objection rather than a conscientious one, since I am willing to use violence in principle. If I could convince them that I would let someone kill me without defending myself because I categorically reject violence for any reason, they might consider that a conscientious objection.

> Sources say that acceptance rate was above 90% after 1995.

Yes, as I said, after the Cold War, Germany no longer wanted to maintain such a large army, so they started accepting any reasonably well-written argument. But in any war, you can see that nation states will start struggling to recruit new soldiers as it becomes obvious to the population that it's a rather pointless endeavour to die for their state. So, they start forcing people. We've seen that in Russia, Ukraine, Israel, USA, etc.

show 2 replies