Young people gathered in Berlin’s central Potsdamer Square on Thursday and marched through the German capital to protest against the government’s plans to reintroduce military service. While the police counted around 3,000 participants, organizers claimed there were 6,000 demonstrators in Berlin and 50,000 in more than 130 towns and cities across Germany.
Why so many demonstrators, then? If the Basic Law is sorta like the US Constitution, then I imagine it can’t be quickly or easily changed.
I’m not sure if there’s a “military or public service” decision this time, but when I had to go these were the options. Learn how to hold a weapon or learn how to wash old people (or drive an ambulance, help at an orphanage, etc).
It sucks, as you’re drafted at ~18 years and slightly above, but it’s not the end of the world.
That held true for only a very short period. Basically ‘choosing’ was only a true option from mid-nineties to the end of the draft.
Ask people how hard it actually was to do civil service in the 70ies and 80ies. You had to really prove that you are morally not able to use a weapon. With weird tests, questionnaires and psych evals. When there’s a real menace on the horizon they really want you to die
for your countryfor their wealth.“but when I had to go” does the lifting here. I can’t speak for others.
Besides that, drafted soldiers can only be sent into combat if war had been declared. For the “conflict” in the Balkans, no drafted soldiers could be sent.
The law says that the service is mandatory. You can join the military or alternatively do some civil service. The issue is, however, that the law only says that it’s mandatory for males. Females are allowed to join the military if they want, but they don’t have to. That law can be changed, but there’s no political majority for it.
That means that if you’re a young girl you can go to university, start working, do your apprenticeship, or do some work and travel in Australia and if you’re a male you can be drafted to the military. So that kind of explains the demonstrations.
But as i can tell from my own experience: males can be drafted, but their draft can be declined if you are unfit, or don’t want to join. In the latter case you have to do civil service. I did civil service for 10 months, one of them was paid time off and the payment was rather good (free food and lodging, and 900€ on top)
As long as there is no real compensation for the gender payment gap or the pregnancy, i am a ok that they have a pass.
So the youth is protesting against compulsory military service because of gender inequality, that‘s your take here? I wish you‘d just not comment at all, if you have no idea, what you‘re actually talking about. That‘s really the dumbest take I‘ve heard, yet.
Also, if anything: „If you‘re a young
girlwoman“, because I do hope you‘re not talking about child soldiers, but are merely a sexist dipshit.Schönen Frauentag.
The take is: One of the reasons why there are these protests is because the way the military service is getting reinstated is deeply unfair. Not sure why you are talking about child soldiers and why you are trying to insult me.
I agree. Incidentally, they did use “males” for “men”, so they were derogatory to both sexes equally.
English is not my first language, so please do not judge my language too harshly. Can you tell me what I should have used here? Because I know “male” and “female” is the official translation of the german gov for my sex/gender in my passport , f.e. used here. So why is it wrong?
I know in Spanish «male» and «female» is used in a biological way, as in «a male human», so calling a woman «a female» (or a man «a male») is seen as treating them as animals, as not the same as you. I think it’s the same in English (as the r/MenAndFemales Reddit page suggests), but I can’t confirm this in any dictionary.
I really feel that I stumbled into a kind of crazy debate. I googled around and you can find articles referring to “males” and “females” in a human context from the most reliable sources. Wikipedia does it. The NIH does it. You can find it in newspapers like the Guardian. You can find statistics from the world bank about “females” and “males” per country. And then you have a vicious debate on Reddit (and here) where users are attacking others as sexist if they use the term.
English is not my native language, but I am not sure where this is coming from. The animal connection doesn’t seem to be correct to me as the general usage just seems to be a plural of “male” and “female”? And some people seem to think that “men” and “women” would be better terms, but those terms are usually referring to adults and not boys and girls?
So you never learned basic English? And now you have to refer to your passport in order to be able to distinguish men from women? lol, sure bro.
Man/men, woman/women, people, humans.
Male and female are adjectives to describe sex. Man and Woman are cultural gender roles, which would be the right choice here.
Probably a bit complicated in some cases, as all this a a fairly recent cultural topic and some people actively struggle with a changing culture that‘s not strongly patriarchal, but either way, male and female is something you use maybe in more clinical or scientific settings, i.e. a female human.
Using female for woman is a bit like using „Weib“ in German.
There was also a law like that in Ukraine. And look how fast that can go away.
They’re discussing changes to this since the Ukraine war began and these changes could be enacted within the next years. The young people currently demonstrating would be directly affected so it’s understandable they go to the streets. If all parties needed for a majority agree on the relevant points, things can get moving pretty fast (see the decriminalization of Cannabis for the whole country or the adaption of the access rights of police to enable them to use Gotham in BW …).
It’s also worth to mention that the German military has issues with providing enough equipment for their recruits and there are scandals about abuse, racism and sexism on a regular base. The current government fails to address these issues in a proper and transparent manner but wants to force young people to join anyway.
Plus, consitently sides with america and israel.
The basic law dictates compulsory military service, but that has been suspended for a while now, because after the fall of the Soviet Union the need for that went down, the Bundeswehr was of little relevance.
The basic law also grants you the right to refuse the service for conscientious reasons (like not willing to kill, religion). Usually in those cases you‘d end up doing some substitute civilian service, anyway, if otherwise you‘d be fit for military service.
What‘s happening now is, that Germany is gearing up for war against Russia. Militarization is in full swing, money is funneled towards military spending, as well as infrastructure spending that benefits the military (west-east axis to transfer equipment and units), all while spending on social, cultural and educational sectors is being cut.
And with that the state has a renewed interest in human military stock that would be available, if that war actually happened.
So the suspension is cancelled and slowly, but surely, the younger generation will be compelled to join the compulsory military service. And you‘re right, for changes in the basic law, you would need a two thirds majority.
Now here comes the „conscientious reasons“ into play, because the threshold of what counts as such is defined through normal laws and these can be changed more easily (simple majority, I believe).
Basic law defines: „you can refuse for conscientious reasons“; normal law defines: „what actually is a conscientious reason in case of refusal“.
So the problem here is, that citizens are granted the right to refuse, but the state dictates the conditions on what counts and what not.
In practice the state will create the conditions to get the amount of people into the military, they think they need. Against the will of the individual, if need be.
I appreciate the explanation. Thanks!