Because it allowed USAmericans to ignore their state's imperialism as they were no longer forced to participate in it. People only fight the system when they're personally inconvenienced by it.
Comments
ziq OP wrote
State doesn't listen to the poor. Has to be people in their own class being affected.
celebratedrecluse wrote
ok, but most imperial armies have relied on significant numbers of lower-class or lower-caste people, even slaves in many instances, so it is unrealistic to assume an empire as wealthy as the US would not do so when it was threatened with the prospect of a middle class rejection of the social contract
i believe we have to make politics for the world we have, not the one we wish we lived in, you know? but i feel ya
chakarera wrote
https://mic.com/articles/59699/one-stat-about-the-u-s-military-that-will-surprise-you
That's actually a myth. Most are just overly patriotic middle and upper class kids.
celebratedrecluse wrote
Huh. Interesting
By "enlisted", are they factoring in the officer ranks though? Good faith would have me believe no, but this article seems to writing from a very pro-military perspective: "Look at how privileged the military is-- isn't that awesome?!". Since it validates their POV, I can see why they might try to fudge the definitions a bit by counting officers as "enlisted".
But maybe not. If it's really just the enlisted ranks, though, that's very interesting, and contradicts what I believed to be true.
chakarera wrote
Interesting, I didn't think about that. http://freakonomics.com/2008/09/22/who-serves-in-the-military-today/ has statistics and specifies non-officers, so it seems it really is true that even non-officer recruits are on average higher income than the general population.
celebratedrecluse wrote
Damn. I guess I am more propagandized than I realized, lol
celebratedrecluse wrote
Well, cheer up, there's still the poverty draft! :^)