the system for who is required to participate has practically never been fair and equitable, jury duty is not comparable to military service, and forced labour is slavery

civil jury duty is a really weird example to use anyway, since civil jury trials are practically non existent outside the USA

[–] xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

practically never

Soooo... sometimes.

Jury duty is also compulsory labour.

[–] Lols@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

forced labour is slavery

[–] xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

So you're just doubling down on jury duty is slavery instead of considering a nuanced perspective?

Edit: autocorrect

[–] Lols@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

im assuming you mean nuanced

me not agreeing with you doesnt mean i didnt consider your perspective, and saying 'well surely not all forced labour is slavery' isnt nuance

[–] xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The issue is you're confusing compulsory labour with forced labour.

If you don't do conscription or civil service work (the alternative option) the consequences are a fine, or jail. This is the same as eg refusing jury duty or not doing your taxes.

Having compulsory civil duties is not new, nor is it slavery. In countries at high risk of conflict (eg Taiwan), it's practically required for their continued short-term existence.

I'm not even pro-conscription (for my own nation at this time), but "conscription is slavery" is so reductive, and just stops people discussing the actual pros and cons of the practice.

[–] Lols@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

The issue is you’re confusing compulsory labour with forced labour.

seems like a you problem, what with you talking about compulsory labour while i explicitly said forced labour

If you don’t do conscription or civil service work (the alternative option) the consequences are a fine, or jail.

"youre not forced to do it, you just get tossed in jail if you dont do it"

In countries at high risk of conflict (eg Taiwan), it’s practically required for their continued short-term existence.

if a country can only motivate its people to actually protect said country by threatening them into doing so, it didnt actually deserve protection

and just stops people discussing the actual pros and cons of the practice.

good, i do not want people discussing the actual pros of slavery

[–] xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 10 months ago

I didn't say civil jury duty (I assume you mean for civil trials by that)

I said jury duty, which is a civil duty.