[stickyricky]

We should at least acknowledge the "trolley" problem here. You have two bad choices: join the marines or live in poverty. The US has a "volunteer" force but "volunteer" is a stretched euphemism in my mind. There aren't many people with options "volunteering" for the marines.

Obligatory "I'm pro vaccine".

[mywittyname]

Marines are the most prestigious branch of the military, by a huge margin. Plenty of people willingly join the Marines, specifically because they know they get to spend the rest of their life saying they're a Marine and with that comes (near universal) respect.

The fact that the military lifts people out of poverty is a great thing. It's a damned hard life being in the military, especially if you make a career out of it. But four years of service with a decent shot at an education and solid employment when you get out is a fair trade.

[stickyricky]

> a fair trade

That's exactly my point. You join the Marines and you get all of the benefits and drawbacks you enumerated. You don't and you get to live in poverty. I think that can be described as coercive.

To be clear, I'm not against the Marine corps or their vaccine policies. I just don't think coercion (even if it originates outside the Marine Corps) can be removed from _some_ people's choice to join.

[wmidwestranger]

> Marines are the most prestigious branch of the military, by a huge margin.

I hope it lasts. Surely every generation has faced the challenge to uphold the same principles as The United States Marine Corps but, just as certainly, the struggle of today seem more perilous than before.

I often think of how the British refused to burn down a Marine Corps barracks during The War of 1812 out of respect for an honorable opponent.

[AlexandrB]

By this logic people are also forced to work for Uber/Amazon/other exploitative employers of low-skill labor. This undermines many arguments against unionization, treating "gig" workers as employees, or in favour of "right to work" laws. Yet the political leanings of those opposed to vaccination are often anti-union, pro "right to work", etc. So this doesn't help illuminate what they mean by "forced", unless this is a framing used out of convenience to justify their opinion in this specific case.

[stickyricky]

People can absolutely be "forced", "coerced", or "compelled" into doing something with no understanding on how to stop it. Or perhaps they do understand how to stop it but don't want the trade-offs a potential solution implies.

Either way, the coercion in the equation is constant. And that doesn't have to be a bad thing. But it is something we can acknowledge and then determine if X degree of coercion for Y outcome was moral, valid, justifiable, etc. But the coercion existed regardless of our conclusion of its utility.

[wmidwestranger]

> Yet the political leanings of those opposed to vaccination are often anti-union, pro "right to work", etc.

The fact that they have the most to gain from unionization, socialized healthcare, excellent public education, etc. yet seem to support the politics most beneficial to the wealthy and powerful seems like more than a coincidence to me.

[manuelabeledo]

> You have two bad choices: join the marines or live in poverty.

That's a loaded conundrum, but isn't this also true about pretty much any other job, especially in the US?

[stickyricky]

Sure but we're talking about if people were forced to take a vaccine. Social pressure, conditions of employment, mandates by government agencies. All of these things can muddy what it means to make a "voluntary" choice.