Why do they have to fill it in and return it just to say no? Could this be used against them at some time in the future? And why women instead can just ignore it?

Usually HN is very wary of the consequences of the state collecting data about its citizens and restricting freedoms in small steps. Is it not the case now?

They only recently (2011?) ended mandatory conscription so this is a pretty big about-face.

This may be too far of an obscure historical reference, but is there really nothing specific to German history and nothing within german civic education and contemporary national identity formation that might make this potentially more controversial?

Hint:some of these events involved spheres of influence and control over resources in eastern europe!

Eighteen year olds in the US have to fill out a “selective services” form. This was for the draft, and continues in case the draft is ever reinstated. So in peace time not problem, in wartime? Different story.

The problem here that this probably is only part of a larger society militarization plan.

The guaranteed next step is to offer the volunteers a long term paid contract at the end of their term. This would probably be well above what they would be paid elsewhere (young men with no university degree, desperate enough to volunteer in the first place).

Run the scheme for a few years, and you will have a large number of, young, high-school-level educated people that are financially dependent on the army. Thus, a militarized society.

What could possibly go wrong?

Has a standing army of angry young men, resentful at their economic circumstances in Germany ever historically caused any problems?

> Just build nukes

I'm broadly sympathetic to the argument that the multipolar world we're in now makes a good case for nuclear weapons adoption. But Germany probably isn't the one Europe wants to arm itself. And even if it did, their Greens wouldn't allow it.

More nations with nukes just seems to increase the odds that someone dorks up and possibly gets everyone screwed.

And what happens when Russia launches nukes in response?

Ukraine gave up nukes that they couldn't afford to maintain and got unenforcable security guarantees 'assurances' in return.

Giving up the nukes allowed Ukraine to attract foreign aid and build an economy for 20 years before invasions began. Who knows what would have happened if they kept nukes and didn't get necessary aid and couldn't build their economy or maintain the weapons.

I support this strategy.

Build nukes and plenty gigantic bunkers for the population, nothing else. And then follow the doctrine of immediate nuclear escalation upon any territorial infraction. Plane got off course in bad weather? Grab your Sauerkraut and bye bye Moscow.

> The form will be mandatory for men and voluntary for women.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_men_are_created_equal

Military service was only recently abolished in Germany. And compared to the old system, this one would qualify as voluntary for now. This might not remain that way, but that's probably an issue to discuss if and when that happens. There's all kinds of other challenges at that point, and I think at that point challenges based on fairness could be valid (as only some people are drafted, not everyone).

> There's nothing here that could be really described as "voluntary".

that's the same "voluntary" they use for Chat Control, by the way.

>mandatory for men and voluntary for women.

this is what "patriarchy" actually looks like but you sure won't see anybody on the left complain about that....

We just pretended the genders were equal in a time of plenty now time to face the reality.

I think a lot of young people look at all of the wars waged post-WWII and are rightfully opposed to fighting for their governments. Would you want to die for nothing in Vietnam? Probably not, and a lot of other people didn't want to as well. Some of them did anyway, and it was all for nothing.

So please have some grace if today's kids have looked back at our miserable history and have decided that they'd rather not die for a country that doesn't seem to give a shit about them.

The German government will be the first ones to tell you that the German language and ancestry is totally unrelated to the idea of who gets to be German.

In my opinion pitting our youth against theirs man to man means we have already lost anyway. Lots of people that don't deserve it would have to die. We need to be able to destroy them at the push of a button so they don't even think about invading us. And then we don't need to order kids around to their deaths.

In other words we need a nuclear umbrella. Now that America is no longer our friend we need to build our own. It has worked very well to keep us safe since the 50s. And I don't think the French + English ones are sufficient deterrence anymore.

History shows that the best way to resist, in these circumstances, might be to let them in, and then blow them up in the streets and countryside until they leave. It's cheaper and (morbidly enough) probably has a lower human cost.

That wouldn't be half as bad, by comparison. But it's more like learning how to survive in the Russian "meat wave" corps a bit longer than your peers.

Looking at the parts of Eastern Ukraine that were under Russian occupation since 2014 and are now almost devoid of male population, that's what happens if you're not willing to fight in your own (European) army: sooner or later you end up fighting in the Russian one.

Why not, at that guy cares about his country

Learning to speak Russian, and to live with the massive amount of corruption, prosecution, genocide, and much lower quality of life.

Assuming you survive the initial wave of plunder, rape and murder of course.

But that they learn how to speak English is not an issue for you, is it?

I'd rather learn Russian than to get drilled to shoot Russians. Current Germany/Europe doesn't have anything to offer that I'd raise a weapon for.

Each to their own.

> your livelihood to just start learning how speak Russian now?

that was a thing in East Germany not that long ago

What are you suggesting? That without forced military service Russia will take over Germany? It's not impossible, but basic military service likely does little to thwart invasion by a powerful Russian army — powerful by your suggestion. This is quite an expensive program and a questionable use of taxpayer money.

The idea is that it apparently doesn't matter who is the government, German or Russian, because these young men can't start normal lives anyway.

Why fight for a nation that is keen on giving away your taxes to random immigrants? Then forcing you to fight and die?

Classic move: make the kids struggle, then offer them a lifeline if they just put on a uniform. The GI bill is great, but you shouldn't have to step on an IED to go to college.

The old, the prime beneficiaries, can fight for themselves.

Elbows up!

The mix is the centrist way of populism: I large number of people affected are not allowed to vote. At the same time the current government consists of the 2 parties that were mostly backed by already retired people or baby-boomers, soon to be retired. We have state elections coming again and the government is largely unpopular and has not delivered on other things, with economic prospects not looking good either. After seeing years of partially misguided 'rational' governments, Germany is clearly shifting towards a more populist path (unclear which political direction, but we all know who are the best at this game, particularly if the generation 'never-again' won't vote anymore)

Yes and the question is who does the German state really target to enroll in their "new" army. Because "This generation" has a lot of clearly distinct groups.

So it could be:

- the native young population who are now flocking in the AfD

- the people fighting the AfD in the street

- the second generation immigrants born there

- the very recent immigrants

- a mix of all

Because the alchemy of creating a working army and "esprit de corps" is much harder than in a corporation. You cannot just take a modern managerial approach to creating an army.

A mix of all will end up obviously in a disaster but selecting on any group will end up in a civil war or coup.

Exploiting the south via the imbalanced currency union doesn't work anymore now that their economies can't swallow more debts to buy German stuff, China and the USA are not buying anymore and decades of underinvestments have caught up. It wouldn't be surprising therefore to see the German government fall backs to the only trick they know: constraining wages and limiting consumption. If I was particularly cynical, I could even argue that this youth conscription is fundamentally yet another form of wage suppression but I genuinely think it's a political coup to please the old voters who want something done for defence, preferably with no impact to them and their savings and don't care at all about the young.

At least, the current government tried relaxing the debt brake a little and investing but I fear it's too little, too late. Germany is hooked to competitiveness shortcuts at the expense of their neighbors. The cure would be harsh. Add the quasi-religious adherence to a completely broken economic model turned into an absurd moral system and I personally have very little hope to ever see the situation improves. Then again, I have too moderate my cynicism. I thought for a long time that the eurozone creation, a currency union without transfers, was so stupid it would never be toppled as the worst political decision but then Germany passed the Schuldenbremse. They might manage to outdo themselves once again.

I'm convinced the status quo will prevail. The German public will prefer slow death to any kind of transfers and common investments. They have already blocked the interesting parts of the Draghi plan. Japanification here we come. Let's enjoy becoming Disneyland while we slowly lose any kind of international relevance. I mean at least there most likely will be catering to the elderly and maybe crafting luxury goods as an alternative to tourism. At least, our brightest should be able to leave to places where innovation still happen. Such an exciting future Karlsruhe is leading us to.

I'm just sad my country is tied to the sinking ship.

Classic FAFO for decel movement.

Aging population and no growth to pay for it (while growing bureaucracy).

The alternative of doing nothing, pretending the world is the same as 15 years ago and praying for world peace doesn't seem like a better idea.

If anything military service should have been kept everywhere in europe. Not for war, but for national cohesion, for some people it was the only time they'd get out of their little social bubble and stereotypes.

The speedy success of Germany invading France in 1940 had more to do with their use of radios and giving commanders on the field some latitude on how to accomplish objectives than with the consequences of the Versailles treaty on the population. The French Army and the British Expeditionary Force were more stuck in a WWI style of command from the top that proved vulnerable to speed. But it wasn't clear cut as the "fast attack" plan was initially rejected by the German top brass, themselves still stuck in the past.

Send the older generations then. Why should Gen Z be forced to pay the price of the previous governments' poor decision making? Namely, in Germany, nurturing a authoritarian regime by decimating green energy initiatives in favor of Russian oil imports. Russia would never have taken such bold action if Europe responded strongly no later than 2014.

> The didnt invest for decades, so structures in the background to handle all those additional young recruits are no more existing.

Yes but remember that was the point.

The career and trained militaries were spending most of their time schooling young people and were not focusing on capabilities. This is why most countries put an end on that nonsense.

So right now you can be sure an enormous amount of personnel in the German army switched focused on running this new "Voluntary service". A voluntary service which will produce at best 1% of workable soldiers.

This makes no sense.

Russia invading Europe would be America's war?

"gender is a social construct" only goes so far...

Including women would have been a legal nonstarter.

The german constitution restricts drafting to men[0] and would have to be changed before such a law could even be considered.

Before you ask, yes, the constitution also says that men and women need to be treated equally[1]

[0] https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/art_12a.html

[1] https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/art_3.html

Your comment specifically, I believe, falls short of the ideal to get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic becomes more divisive.

We should probably avoid posting shallow dismissals and remember that a good critical comment teaches us something.

Additionally, as your comment leaves readers wondering which parts of the divided comment section you deem "worthy of HN" and which you do not, I cannot help but think of this ambivalence as a method to spark reactions. Another word for this method would be "to bait", I think.

What is the HN ethos anyway? The "common thought" and average HNer was different in 2007, 2015, 2025, and will be again rather different in 2035.

One could say the "hacker ethics", love of freedom, tinkering goes beyond time, but this falls apart at any topic beyond that.

Including women in this does have the additional hurdle that a constitutional amendment would be needed, which is less likely to pass, regardless of the merits.

/s surely? Women stay behind or the population would face higher risk of collapse in heavy casualties otherwise.

Agreed. This is a rational response to the USA's protective umbrella being discarded, and the end of NATO. Europe became far too complacent, and the change is going to be quite uncomfortable at the very least.

Again, this is a very rational response and I applaud the German government for being realistic.

The threat was always there but Western side of the continent tricked itself into this narration that normal relations with Russia can be established. While countries who were trapped in Warsaw Pact/Eastern Bloc for nearly a half of the previous century knew already that you can never trust Russians.

Some of Central-Eastern politicians were warning the rest of the continent but they were ridiculed, portrayed as populists or blinded Russian-haters, and "only" full-scale invasion of Ukraine was needed so Western countries would finally understand that imperialistic aspirations of Moscow never went dormant.

There was mandatory military service until 2011 when it was paused. Since then Germany had a purely professional army like the US. Mandatory military service was 9-12 months basic training, which could be objected on moral grounds. Objection meant doing alternative (civil) service for the time (e.g. working in a hospital, school, THW, etc.).

As a Ukrainian I see this take as both perfectly logical and utterly naive at the same time.

How many russian soldiers died in order for them to control Belarus?

How many russian soldiers died in order for them to undermine European security by persuading the British electorate to vote for Brexit?

How many russian soldiers died in order for them to have a US administration that is trying to force an allied country to capitulate to a genocidal terrorist regime?

The Ukrainians are fighting a hot war today because they recognised and wished to release themselves from the shackles of russian soft power.

War isn't only fought with tanks and bombs and guns.

> The most stringent ones seems to be that RU has a lot of fiul, gaz and coal and an industrial network spread accross a vast land that's not easy to target,

Very recent Ukrainian drone self-defences prove otherwise - far away russian refineries are not so far away anymore. And, are very difficult to defend. Throw in an additional few partisans to mess up the railway system (russian lifeline) and I rather suspect a coup to happen soon.