Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

If you think spending time in the military makes a person more politically savvy and prepared to evaluate political issues you haven't spent much time in or around service members. Their level of political effeciacy is about the same as the average persons.

Yeah, I've never understood the idea that military service produces superior political actors. It isn't like the average serviceman is given an in depth education in politics, economics, and culture.

Well, I guess from a conservative perspective "better" could simply means "votes conservative" and since veterans tend to vote conservative one might conclude that the military produces "better" voters.

In fact, that makes a lot of sense, I've know many people who determine their opinion of others on the basis of their voting habits.

dogma wrote:In fact, that makes a lot of sense, I've know many people who determine their opinion of others on the basis of their voting habits.

That is correct you filthy, unwashed, thinks-he-better-than-thou hippy tree-hugging pinko commie liberal.


It is not just military service that makes a politician. Americans love the larger than life person- that includes war heroes (even if a military man does jack, there is a level of credibility that goes with "I carried a gun in defense of your right to suck air freely and watch American Idol"), celebrities, famous people, ect..

dogma wrote:Yeah, I've never understood the idea that military service produces superior political actors. It isn't like the average serviceman is given an in depth education in politics, economics, and culture.

Well, I guess from a conservative perspective "better" could simply means "votes conservative" and since veterans tend to vote conservative one might conclude that the military produces "better" voters.

In fact, that makes a lot of sense, I've know many people who determine their opinion of others on the basis of their voting habits.

That's a bit part of it, a whole lot of people confuse "intelligent thinking" with "thinking that's the same as mine". But there's also an idea that some people are more deserving of a say in politics than others, because they're more responsible and have given more, which is a reasonable sounding idea, albeit one that'd be near impossible to administer fairly. What's interesting, though, is that for a certain proportion of the population they tend to assume military service is the form of possible service to society (and will only grudgingly accept that other professions also contribute, and may not even do that). Which is an interesting reflection on the way some people look at the world, if nothing else.

Ahtman wrote:If you think spending time in the military makes a person more politically savvy and prepared to evaluate political issues you haven't spent much time in or around service members. Their level of political effeciacy is about the same as the average persons.

The idea behind pushing for service votes is that one will have a greater sense of what it means to sacrifice your own comfort for the greater good. At least in the classic Assimov take on things. Political savvy =/= sense of civic duty.


But military service doesn't lead to a greater appreciation, awareness of, or respect for the greater civic good.


Christ, I sound like a ******** Tau. [Please don't use speling to avade the swear filter.]

Or it can give untold power to the military over politics. I'm an 8 year vet and I've seen what a military dictatorship can do.

I think it's worth noting that even in Starship Troopers, the reason the vote was restricted to veterans had more to do with status quo than any actual justification. There was a mealy mouthed "if you make somebody work towards something they'll appreciate it more" type justification, but IIRC even in the book there were tangible benefits for military service such as training, the GI bill, etc.

There's a quote from an ancient greek, and it might even be from the book, which basically says that there is no way to filter people to find those best able to vote. Just let 'em all vote, because it's the most fair (and as Dogma says, it gives the most legitimacy to the government).

Polonius wrote:I think it's worth noting that even in Starship Troopers, the reason the vote was restricted to veterans had more to do with status quo than any actual justification. There was a mealy mouthed "if you make somebody work towards something they'll appreciate it more" type justification, but IIRC even in the book there were tangible benefits for military service such as training, the GI bill, etc.

I wonder how the bugs voted...

dogma wrote:Yeah, I've never understood the idea that military service produces superior political actors. It isn't like the average serviceman is given an in depth education in politics, economics, and culture.

Well, I guess from a conservative perspective "better" could simply means "votes conservative" and since veterans tend to vote conservative one might conclude that the military produces "better" voters.

In fact, that makes a lot of sense, I've know many people who determine their opinion of others on the basis of their voting habits.

All very true. The majority of US servicement must surely vote Republican? I spendt 6 months with the Oaklahoma national guard and i was suffocated by the testosterone, the chewing tobacco and the Republican love.

And i vote conservative in the UK and i think they are slightly more right wing than the hand wringing nancy boys that make up the opposition, so i guess thats just the way of it eh?

I was in the military for ten years, but i dont like soldiers.

The higher up the tree you go, the better the blokes are. SF guys are alright, but everybody else just likes to talk big and make things up. Most soldiers sailors and airmen (and especially the last two) are so far in the rear they have to send their laundry forwards, but they still talk like they had brass knuckle boxing bouts with Taliban fighters.

And i really hate macho guys as well, plenty of them in the armed services.

A large amount of service personel are poorly educated as well right? Barring officers, and this is one of the reason many people join. Considering i dislike overtly macho, stupid people. I think its fair to say that i dislike about 75% of the armed forces.

Although, ive now got a civvie job, and i dislike 95% of them. So are they good guys after all?

All this rage and hate is perplexing me.

Im confused....