NationStates Jolt Archive

[This is not my personal view. It is a grim idea and should be read as a warning.]



The first and foremost action that must be done is to shape the character of the soldier. This can be achieved by using a variety of methods which produce a slightly differing result. The most efficient and rational approach is do so not by any physical conditioning, but rather Pavolvian mental conditioning. Present a figure or even an idea and associate that with a threatening characteristic. However, the commanding officers must name a threat. Through history it can be seen the threat of losing one's existence is far more potent than any other. People will wage war against any society that they see as a possibly threat. To do this the commanding officer must give the soldier a reason for existence and then present the idea or figure as leading the soldier to his death. The reason for life that will secure the highest degree of allegiance is to serve the purposes of the State. Through propaganda and other tools give the soldier the idea that they exist for one purpose only, to serve and exact the will of the State, that life contains no further reason. This will satisfy the existential fears and needs of the soldier while at the same time shaping the soldier's character. Before conditioning may begin there are a few more steps that must be taken.


The morality that the soldier possessed upon arrival must be stripped and thrown onto the ash heap. The ideal soldier has no independent morality, nor does he know of individualism or liberty, the soldier has the morality that the institution of the military and State lay upon him. This requires the traditions of the old destroyed to make way for the new, the collectivized. After this is done the soldier can be programmed to follow orders exactly and conditioning can begin. It can be said the driving force of this is fear, that is quite right. However, it is not physical fear and it must not be for then it is far more difficult and time consuming to maintain the illusionary threat and an efficient degree of odedience. Fear will bring about alleigience to the master and there exist an effective way to maintain it. This can also be achieved through the same conditioning. One must make the soldier live for the State and implant it in his mind that no harm must come to this and that all who do must be eradicated as expeditiously as possible, lest the soldier wishes to fail in his purpose. The driving force is a State-designed form of existentialism and it is the driving force of the army.

I now move on with what form of morality must be programmed into the soldier. The concepts of innocence and guilt will be decided by the State. The political and economic enemies or dissenters of the State must be shown as 'guilty' and the State the 'innocent'. A soldier must bemade to believe that the military and all of its branches are to protect the innocent at any and all available costs. Be it a mere infant or a well-aged man, if they be an enemy or dissenter they are guilty and must be obliterated. Otherwise the virus will spread and the innocents will be soon dead. All action must be under the guise of defense, this is also to convince the civilian population to see justification for the action(s). Physical death must not be feared, if it is then the soldier will become overwhelemed. Death must be viewed as the highest level of allegience and obedience and if the order for it is given, it must be performed to its fullest definition. Those who are injured in battle are to be seen as weak and as the lowest rank. This is to instill the soldier with fear of failure and serves as a deterrent. Emotions such as love, sadness, happiness and concepts such as brotherhood, family, peace, tranquility, religion, philosophy, pessimsim, optimsim, and compassion, to name a few, must be supressed so that soldier is a drone. There must not be any issues of race in the military, that will only lead to inefficieny. Nationalism is much more useful.

The soldier must be lead to believe that he is always exacting justice and nothing less, all punishment that is delivered has been righteous. Philosophy must be denied to the soldier, his mind must not be contaminated with ideas such as Aristotle; they serve no purpose other than consuming precious time. Relihion must be denied, the soldier must know no God nor any spirit, the State is God and the military its hand that delivers justice and exacts revenge. Freedom is a vile concept in the military and, if allowed, will cause it to destroy its very infrastructure. Every soldier is the same, there is no uniqueness, every soldier is uniform and dissenters are to receive the harshest of punishments. To fail to do so is failure, failure is pain and pain is destruction. The soldier has no brain of his or her own. S/he is to follow every order unquestionable and knows no honor. In short, the life of a soldier is a life of complete and utter servatude to the State. To make sure that ti continues to endure.

What of the civilian population? They are to kept seperate from the military at all times. Their values and ideals must never find their way into the military. No independent press should be allowed, not even one that supports the military. The only media that the soldiers should be allowed to have access to it a State-run or military-run media. Essentially it would be propaganda and nothing more. Private sectors should be built for the army, navy, marines, and air force. It should be sheltered and have a harsh hierarchy. No democracy, only a hierarchy of obedience. The same ideas shold be applied to the civilain population. In order to maintain the sort of military mentioned, the civilians must be under the control of the State. A strict hierarchy must exist and a police state should emerge. If the State wishes to possess an outstanding military, it should be wise enough to know to and how to supress the civialians. I propose a State-run media for this as well. However, dissenters will be more prevalent in this area of society, but that is why the police exist, or at least how it should be.

I leave you with this. It is what the world will be if individualism is supressed and the military is the highest 'moral' institution.The soldier mentioned is a drone and no one must suffer this. I call for all those to use free expression, peacefully, to end tyranny so that this scenario will never come.

Truer words have never been spoken, my friend

Truer words have never been spoken, my friend
Interesting the article is, hmm. How do you mean?

*snip*
Where is this from?
Seems to refer to the US (reference to Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines) but real US military couldn't be further from this - in fact, while there is no doubt the US military is more conservative than the population at large, we have our share of leftists, democrats, and moderates...
Also, while the US continues to rely on the National Guard & Reserves, this is a nightmare with no chance of becoming reality. We are citizen soldiers, carrying our morality and ethics from the civilian world into the service.
FINALLY, and I can't stress this enough, the military is IMPROVED by YOU JOINING! I know plenty of intelligent folks of conscience who would never think of joining, but the more good people that join, the better the military becomes. If all Americans served 2-3 years, our military would be better principled and better run than it is now (as a matter of fact, I would LOVE to see a 2 - year mandatory service requirement in the US.)

-snip-
I wrote it. It wasn't supposed to mirror the current military, but is a warning of what it could become.

Where is this from?
Seems to refer to the US (reference to Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines) but real US military couldn't be further from this - in fact, while there is no doubt the US military is more conservative than the population at large, we have our share of leftists, democrats, and moderates...
Also, while the US continues to rely on the National Guard & Reserves, this is a nightmare with no chance of becoming reality. We are citizen soldiers, carrying our morality and ethics from the civilian world into the service.
FINALLY, and I can't stress this enough, the military is IMPROVED by YOU JOINING! I know plenty of intelligent folks of conscience who would never think of joining, but the more good people that join, the better the military becomes. If all Americans served 2-3 years, our military would be better principled and better run than it is now (as a matter of fact, I would LOVE to see a 2 - year mandatory service requirement in the US.)

I'm not sure I agree with that, Jalula. I suspect that the honesty and integrity would go down in the U.S. services if you started forcing them to take anyone and everyone on a mandatory hitch, there are a lot of people who just shouldn't be in a uniform, and the larger a system is, the more likely it is to suffer from internal corruption and disciplinary rot.
The kind of rot that makes incidents like My Lai inevitable.

The ideal Soldier should be Intelligent, Ethical, and Honourable. He or she serves because he or she recognizes the necessity of voluntary service.
Voluntary service, as opposed to Coerced Service.

A Soldier must be ETHICAL, because in his or her hands, is the power to end the lives of others, and the Duty to do so.

A Soldier must be INTELLIGENT, because of the weight of responsibility he or she carries. Dumb people do bad, bad, things under pressure when you let them have guns.

A soldier MUST be HONOURABLE. Telling the truth is a survival characteristic, doing a proper job of maintenance is a survival characteristic, Shirking is counter to survival, as is lying to cover your ass.
The only way to get an intelligent person to risk his or her life, is if that person is also honourable. One sad fact is, there are lots of people who lack personal honour and integrity, who would otherwise be well-suited to military life. As long as it's both voluntary, and hard, those types, who would pose a danger to the Nation with their excessive self-interest, are a vanishingly small minority whose desertion of their comrades may make the news, but aren't otherwise all that injurious.

There's also the matter of resources-spent-for-results. A Mandated two-year term would place less resources into training per-capita, resulting in a larger, but less skilled and competent, military suffering from Morale problems due to the large number of people who don't want to be there, or who really ought not be there.

The military is a tool of the state. It must be well-oiled and powerful.

The military is a tool of the state. It must be well-oiled and powerful.
Operative word there.

(as a matter of fact, I would LOVE to see a 2 - year mandatory service requirement in the US.)
America already has more soldiers than it needs volunteering, and there's no real danger of the country getting invaded. Mandatory service is just not necessary.

This is some sort of satire, correct? I hope you are not serious.

This is some sort of satire, correct? I hope you are not serious.
Read the first line of the first post.

Read the first line of the first post.
Thanks, I didn't see that. *feels like an idiot* It's a very fascist method mixed with powerful propaganda.

You should read the writings of the Legalists in China. It sounds a tad like this. I'm farily well versed in theories such as these.

All military writers throughout history have been concerned with how best to motivate, control, assemble and empower troops. Some favor draconian measures, others belive factors like shame, rewards, punishments, honor, humanity should be espoused to varying levels and degrees.

You should read the writings of the Legalists in China. It sounds a tad like this. I'm farily well versed in theories such as these.

All military writers throughout history have been concerned with how best to motivate, control, assemble and empower troops. Some favor draconian measures, others belive factors like shame, rewards, punishments, honor, humanity should be espoused to varying levels and degrees.
It seems like a mixture of shame, fear, and a complete re-molding of character.

America already has more soldiers than it needs volunteering, and there's no real danger of the country getting invaded. Mandatory service is just not necessary.

actually they are far far from that.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050503/us_nm/iraq_usa_recruiting_dc_8

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Army missed its April recruiting goal by a whopping 42 percent and the Army Reserve fell short by 37 percent, officials said on Tuesday, showing the depth of the military's wartime recruiting woes."

a few more articles.

http://us-politics.news.designerz.com/army-recruiting-down-for-third-month-in-a-row.html

http://us-politics.news.designerz.com/armys-recruiting-force-takes-day-to-reflect-on-values-amid-complaints-of-aggressive-tactics.html

http://us-politics.news.designerz.com/us-marine-corps-misses-key-recruiting-goal-for-fourth-straight-month.html

now im not saying this means that you guys are open for an invasion, but the fact they are widening the parameters for recruitment, can only impact negatively on your army, also the cases of recruiters getting potential soldiers fake certs of education and ignoring drug addictions just to get another recruit, is well, just plain worrying.

You should read the writings of the Legalists in China. It sounds a tad like this. I'm farily well versed in theories such as these.

All military writers throughout history have been concerned with how best to motivate, control, assemble and empower troops. Some favor draconian measures, others belive factors like shame, rewards, punishments, honor, humanity should be espoused to varying levels and degrees.

It does remind me quite a bit of the book of Lord Shang, which is the only legalist text I have yet read. Especially the denial of the sophists, and the inherent simplicity and trust in the gov't the soldier is conditioned to develop. I'd not have noticed that otherwise, well spotted.

It seems like a mixture of shame, fear, and a complete re-molding of character.

Yeah, a basic reduction of induviduality is a characteristic of most military writers. This one takes that concept to an extrme, arguing for outright brain-washing. Such measurse have the benifit of reducing the need for constand disciplinary actions to keep the troops in line, and allows the leadership to use the soldiers without fear of independant actions screwing up planning.

The use of fear as a motivational factor seems ill-described, despite the time spent on it in this post. I'm not sure the writer understands how fear is to be used. From what I see, it would be a fairly simple thing indeed to take soldiers such as these and "re-program" them if they are captured. They would be increadibly easy to turn. This is hardly the kind of soldier you want.

The "fear of wounds" stuff makes little sense. Armies throughout history either venerate scars or ignore them. Ignoring scars means that you keep all mention of wounded persons out of your motivational stories, songs and attentions. You do this to convince the masses that army life is glorious and non-threatening, to dissuade fear of bodily injury. To actively disparage your own wounded is pointless.

It does remind me quite a bit of the book of Lord Shang, which is the only legalist text I have yet read. Especially the denial of the sophists, and the inherent simplicity and trust in the gov't the soldier is conditioned to develop. I'd not have noticed that otherwise, well spotted.

Yup. When you're holding a hammer, everything starts looking like a nail. ;)

I've studied such texts for years now. Its my "thing", my specialty.

The "fear of wounds" stuff makes little sense. Armies throughout history either venerate scars or ignore them. Ignoring scars means that you keep all mention of wounded persons out of your motivational stories, songs and attentions. You do this to convince the masses that army life is glorious and non-threatening, to dissuade fear of bodily injury. To actively disparage your own wounded is pointless.
The use of the wounds seems like an attempt at shame, though I don't completely see its usefulness.

Yup. When you're holding a hammer, everything starts looking like a nail. ;)

I've studied such texts for years now. Its my "thing", my specialty.

ah... I'm more of a punic (well, second punic) war person.... Hannibal is such a fascinating character, and history as a whole fascinates me. Even Rome, who I hate on principal I admit is incredibly interesting. Though I don't think I'll ever know why Antiochus III of Seleucia made Hannibal an admiral when he turned up at his court.

The ideal soldier is alive and healthy.

actually they are far far from that.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050503/us_nm/iraq_usa_recruiting_dc_8

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Army missed its April recruiting goal by a whopping 42 percent and the Army Reserve fell short by 37 percent, officials said on Tuesday, showing the depth of the military's wartime recruiting woes."

a few more articles.

http://us-politics.news.designerz.com/army-recruiting-down-for-third-month-in-a-row.html

http://us-politics.news.designerz.com/armys-recruiting-force-takes-day-to-reflect-on-values-amid-complaints-of-aggressive-tactics.html

http://us-politics.news.designerz.com/us-marine-corps-misses-key-recruiting-goal-for-fourth-straight-month.html

now im not saying this means that you guys are open for an invasion, but the fact they are widening the parameters for recruitment, can only impact negatively on your army, also the cases of recruiters getting potential soldiers fake certs of education and ignoring drug addictions just to get another recruit, is well, just plain worrying.

It could also be seen as an example of mid-decade slumping. Around 1995 through 1998, the U.S. army was failing to achieve goals by record numbers as well. This was without a resurgence in antiwar/antiwarrior media coverage or the reanimation of mid-sixties antiwar protest sloganeering.
One of the main reasons they're loosening the requirements now, is that they tightened them so heavily during the early-1990's drawdowns, the "RIF" or "Reduction In Force" that basically gutted the capability developed over the period of the Reagan Administration.
For a time, one of the volunteer military's biggest attractions, was the ability to get out of a bad situation by enlisting. Under Bush 1 and Clinton, ASVAB requirements and pre-requirements were effectively used to screen out the very type of applicants that tend to become "Lifers". Kids from bad neighbourhoods, bad family backgrounds, with prior misdemeanours or drop-outs were barred, as were those who had previously used drugs (even when they were now 'clean').

Recruitment goals were only changed upward in '95 when re-enlistment numbers plunged, and deployments to trouble-spots rose sharply. (Bosnia, Kosovo, East Timor, Haiti).

There was a temporary upswing after 9/11, but most of those are now getting out (four year contract), and McDonalds still has wages that out-compete the U.S. Army for considerably less risk, and far, far, fewer restrictions on personal behaviour.

Niccolo Medici,
What would you suggest I read as an introduction Legalsim?

[This is not my personal view. It is a grim idea and should be read as a warning.]

The first and foremost action that must be done is to shape the character of the soldier. This can be achieved by using a variety of methods which produce a slightly differing result. The most efficient and rational approach is do so not by any physical conditioning, but rather Pavolvian mental conditioning. Present a figure or even an idea and associate that with a threatening characteristic. However, the commanding officers must name a threat. Through history it can be seen the threat of losing one's existence is far more potent than any other. People will wage war against any society that they see as a possibly threat. To do this the commanding officer must give the soldier a reason for existence and then present the idea or figure as leading the soldier to his death. The reason for life that will secure the highest degree of allegiance is to serve the purposes of the State. Through propaganda and other tools give the soldier the idea that they exist for one purpose only, to serve and exact the will of the State, that life contains no further reason. This will satisfy the existential fears and needs of the soldier while at the same time shaping the soldier's character. Before conditioning may begin there are a few more steps that must be taken.


The morality that the soldier possessed upon arrival must be stripped and thrown onto the ash heap. The ideal soldier has no independent morality, nor does he know of individualism or liberty, the soldier has the morality that the institution of the military and State lay upon him. This requires the traditions of the old destroyed to make way for the new, the collectivized. After this is done the soldier can be programmed to follow orders exactly and conditioning can begin. It can be said the driving force of this is fear, that is quite right. However, it is not physical fear and it must not be for then it is far more difficult and time consuming to maintain the illusionary threat and an efficient degree of odedience. Fear will bring about alleigience to the master and there exist an effective way to maintain it. This can also be achieved through the same conditioning. One must make the soldier live for the State and implant it in his mind that no harm must come to this and that all who do must be eradicated as expeditiously as possible, lest the soldier wishes to fail in his purpose. The driving force is a State-designed form of existentialism and it is the driving force of the army.

I now move on with what form of morality must be programmed into the soldier. The concepts of innocence and guilt will be decided by the State. The political and economic enemies or dissenters of the State must be shown as 'guilty' and the State the 'innocent'. A soldier must bemade to believe that the military and all of its branches are to protect the innocent at any and all available costs. Be it a mere infant or a well-aged man, if they be an enemy or dissenter they are guilty and must be obliterated. Otherwise the virus will spread and the innocents will be soon dead. All action must be under the guise of defense, this is also to convince the civilian population to see justification for the action(s). Physical death must not be feared, if it is then the soldier will become overwhelemed. Death must be viewed as the highest level of allegience and obedience and if the order for it is given, it must be performed to its fullest definition. Those who are injured in battle are to be seen as weak and as the lowest rank. This is to instill the soldier with fear of failure and serves as a deterrent. Emotions such as love, sadness, happiness and concepts such as brotherhood, family, peace, tranquility, religion, philosophy, pessimsim, optimsim, and compassion, to name a few, must be supressed so that soldier is a drone. There must not be any issues of race in the military, that will only lead to inefficieny. Nationalism is much more useful.

The soldier must be lead to believe that he is always exacting justice and nothing less, all punishment that is delivered has been righteous. Philosophy must be denied to the soldier, his mind must not be contaminated with ideas such as Aristotle; they serve no purpose other than consuming precious time. Relihion must be denied, the soldier must know no God nor any spirit, the State is God and the military its hand that delivers justice and exacts revenge. Freedom is a vile concept in the military and, if allowed, will cause it to destroy its very infrastructure. Every soldier is the same, there is no uniqueness, every soldier is uniform and dissenters are to receive the harshest of punishments. To fail to do so is failure, failure is pain and pain is destruction. The soldier has no brain of his or her own. S/he is to follow every order unquestionable and knows no honor. In short, the life of a soldier is a life of complete and utter servatude to the State. To make sure that ti continues to endure.

What of the civilian population? They are to kept seperate from the military at all times. Their values and ideals must never find their way into the military. No independent press should be allowed, not even one that supports the military. The only media that the soldiers should be allowed to have access to it a State-run or military-run media. Essentially it would be propaganda and nothing more. Private sectors should be built for the army, navy, marines, and air force. It should be sheltered and have a harsh hierarchy. No democracy, only a hierarchy of obedience. The same ideas shold be applied to the civilain population. In order to maintain the sort of military mentioned, the civilians must be under the control of the State. A strict hierarchy must exist and a police state should emerge. If the State wishes to possess an outstanding military, it should be wise enough to know to and how to supress the civialians. I propose a State-run media for this as well. However, dissenters will be more prevalent in this area of society, but that is why the police exist, or at least how it should be.

I leave you with this. It is what the world will be if individualism is supressed and the military is the highest 'moral' institution.The soldier mentioned is a drone and no one must suffer this. I call for all those to use free expression, peacefully, to end tyranny so that this scenario will never come.

Obviously, you and whoever wrote this have never been a soldier, nor do you know what it takes to make an ideal soldier.

Niccolo Medici,
What would you suggest I read as an introduction Legalsim?

I'm not Niccolo, but I'd say the book of Lord Shang is a good place to start. As far as I'm aware, it is the original legalist text, after all.

[This is not my personal view. It is a grim idea and should be read as a warning.]

[ major snippage ]

I leave you with this. It is what the world will be if individualism is supressed and the military is the highest 'moral' institution.The soldier mentioned is a drone and no one must suffer this. I call for all those to use free expression, peacefully, to end tyranny so that this scenario will never come.
And just where did this come from, may I ask???

Niccolo Medici,
What would you suggest I read as an introduction Legalsim?

The book of Lord Shang is considered definitive. I don't have a good translator to reccomend to you.

Also, look for the Wu-Tzu for a REALLY good example of Legalist thought translated into a Confucian/military setting. I believe Sawyer is the best translator for that.

Also, if you want a look at legalism in action, look for histories of the Ch'in (Qin) dynasty; the first true dynasty of a unified China. Its policies were almost entirely legalist. Li Si, Lu Buwei, and Lord Shang are prime figures in its Legalist idealology.

(A good movie about the Qin dynasty is "The Emperor and the Assassin". Very interesting stuff, it gives you a good look at just how draconian the policies were in Legalist states.)

And just where did this come from, may I ask???
I wrote it. It is supposed to be a grim view of the future if the military became the state. Sorry about clarity.

The book of Lord Shang is considered definitive. I don't have a good translator to reccomend to you.


Also, if you want a look at legalism in action, look for histories of the Ch'in (Qin) dynasty; the first true dynasty of a unified China. Its policies were almost entirely legalist. Li Si, Lu Buwei, and Lord Shang are prime figures in its Legalist idealology.



for the first paragraph, I found Wordsworth to be quite sufficient. add to that that it also comes with a copy of the Art of War, by Sun Tzu, a commentary on the Art of War, and it's quite a good buy.


For the second... as an aside, this didn't turn out too well for Lord Shang. He was protected by his Lord, whilst he was still alive. Unfortunately for Lord Shang, he outlasted his Lord. The disgruntled peasants made sure to correct that error, and he was pulled apart limb from limb by horses.

I wrote it. It is supposed to be a grim view of the future if the military became the state. Sorry about clarity.
Good writing, weak premise, really bad research.

Soldiers will always go where they are told, do what they must, and fight to stay alive. Add a lot of complaining. I think the world is safe from your scenario.

I don't think anyone is more against war than soldiers and it only takes a little taste to get there.

Soldiers will always go where they are told, do what they must, and fight to stay alive. Add a lot of complaining. I think the world is safe from your scenario.

I don't think anyone is more against war than soldiers and it only takes a little taste to get there.
Amen! ( especially in a democracy )

Amen! ( especially in a democracy )
I see ya stuck around for another day. Glad of it.

<--------- Hopelessly addicted! :D

I see ya stuck around for another day. Glad of it.

A bunch of drones can become lemmings if they are not taught to think for themselves. I tried to get into the military around 18 years of age but was too light. I guess it wasn't God's will. I noticed as of late instead of listening to whatever people say, I am going out alone for my own reasons. For instance, no one wanted to hike into the woods at night without flashlights, so I went alone into the darkness. I had a flashlight but every time I used it, it would make the woods a cave. When I kept it off, I could see all the way down the trail. Went into a couple of canyons my only light being the moon. At places in the darkness the only sound I could hear was the drum of my heart beating. I came back to camp at 10:30pm. I suppose if there was a war, the woods would be a good place for me to disappear into. I have been looking for circumstances which bring constant turbulence and fear facing.

I want to come to a place where I have no fear at all, but the only way to do that is to constantly go straight into the fear. I find with this fear facing, no volunteers or friends that want to come with me. I come to the place where it's just God and I. Alone.