Its a known fact that some parents breed children with the intend to sell them, which in peace times gives excesses like pre-teen beauty pageant, Epsteins Modeling agency, prostitution and all that.

In war times parents sell their sons to whatever warparty pays the most.

In Russia the Families of russian serviceman killed in ukraine get a payout of 7 million rubles, which is around 124.731,67 USD at the time of writing, an astonishing sum for russian proportions.

Russian Media, directly or indirectly state owned media, not dissidents or liberals or whatever, report on these stories more and more. They do this in your face to send a message.

"In Odintsovo, a mother handed over her draft-evader son to the police because of his love for video games"

Its mostly stories where mothers rat out their NEET sons who live with them to the authorities. A NEET son is worthless for them, he will probably end up as so many russian man an addict or in prison, so better cash out on this investment as long as the war is still hot. There are some videos with russian prisoners who are calling their mothers back in russia and their parents get upset how he could allow himself to get captured.

There is no pension when your son is just captured. Back in the soviet days a soldier missed in action was presumed captured and his family disgraced in the eyes of the party.

While in america you have all these little social reject shitstains like Nick Fuentes, the mexican catboy leader of the white race, streaming from his parents basement how great russia is and boooh NATO. 

If just find the scenery funny where some chechen military police drag him out of his little coomer cave and pressgang him into some depleted battalion tactical group where the rest of the soldiers are slant eyed minorities,so that he can fight guys from all over europe who don't do hitler posting out of irony.

But these scenes were probably not so different in the days of states armies or the ottoman empire when some parents even payed to have their sons get taken by the army so they have the chance of some sort of carrer in an overcrowded agriculture society.

-Teutonic Fist

…

Sir, thanks for this. I cannot read the links with this computer. I also consume zero NoAssTodayOleg versus YouGotGrain news.

What you relate here sounds like a better deal then U.S. conscripts getting their nuts shot off in Vietnam with no compensation for the family, other then posthumous membership in the black wall got-snuffed club. This recalled to me the word service and servant.

Today I annotated copious English pamphlets from the 1640s and 50s concerning the Maryland planting of 1634 and of certain small scale civil wars. In these battles, servants were armed as conscript soldiers. [1] One sergeant, having been robbed by a rebel, was even given possession of five “chattels” belonging to the rebel officer as compensation. The sergeant’s name was Vaughn.

This was a time of religious war in Europe and mercantile [our religion] feuds in America, which featured the defeat of King Charles I by Parliament in a civil war. The various letters and pamphlets have two different uses of the term servant. The main usage was shared with the terms “hands” and “chattels” and it was “servants,” also “rustics” who were generally plural and always unnamed, people identified only by their lowest class position.

Other then the odd use of the term servant, lets say, of Leonard Calvert Governor of Baltimore complaining that his servant carelessly left the cage open where his master was keeping a red bird for his brother and Lord Proprietor back in England, the singular use of the term servant, mostly in the first person address, was by a planter or sea captain, a member of the master class, who owned their own anonymous servants, declaring themselves to be the named “faithful” or “humble” “servant of a king or governor or comissioner. In later times, negro house slaves would insist that they were not slaves but servants, wishing to share in the status of the Master’s House.

Today, what is the Master’s House, if not the corporation or government agency which employs us?

In America, we have parsed our English anachronistically to elevate ourselves to the level of agency enjoyed only by the masters of our lowly ancestors. Americans are still obsessed with British Royalty. Your account of the Soviet and Russian casualties and captives and missing soldiers, whose parents at home bear the shame of surrender or desertion and reap the pay when the sacrifice is made, reminded me of the Hessian soldiers in the American Revolution whose pay went to a distant king and who deserted at unit strength whenever not being watched by cavalry.

Somehow in America, I suppose due to the fiction that “we the people” meant something other than the rich grifters that founded this nation, Americans have come to regard slave soldiering as honorable and thence took the term service in the vein of noble address of old, declaring themselves to have “served,” as an honorific.

This has been shamelessly borrowed by police, and fire and even medical government employees, [2] in the same way as letter writing captains and planters assigned themselves as the servants of governors and kings, to align themselves within the dominant hierarchy and thus confirm their own mastery—or at least moral superiority—over those beneath them.

As the conscript army, which was destroyed in Vietnam by its own technocratic masters, by accident of design, gave way to the volunteer army, which is truly a mercenary force, of which one does not have to be a U.S. citizen to serve, then the term service in its higher meaning, of being the ultimate heroic civic servant, was grabbed onto by the new mercenary soldiers as a legitamizing semantic, whence they discarded their old bitter conscript terms such as “G.I.” for Government Issue.

I have been adopted by certain Christians in the far west who have seen me working for free for local folks and have designated me as serving in Christian works with my hands, or committing service. Service is one of the most ancient respected stations. Of kings and queens there were but two to a nation, of princes, satraps, etc., but a few. But a warrior who submitted to the king or lord, had many fellow-fighters to enjoy parity with and had a certain respect from his betters, if still a slave in all but name.

Agency as part of bondage is a key to long lasting terms of enslavement not plagued with uprisings and runaways. One final case of semantic drift is the now recent and rabid insistence by restaurant workers that there is no such thing as a waiter or waitress, but only servers. In olden times, the servant was lower than the waiter. Their servant had to do certain things regularly and be willing to do anything in addition. The waiter or lady in waiting waited on her master or mistress’s need and was then very often detailed to command lesser servants to carry out the task.

Our corruption of soldiering [3] to understand that anyone paid for a task, even if forced into it, is not bound but free, and the downward drift of the terminology of the ass-kissing minor official assuring his master that he is his slave and has no designs above his station, has gotten an entire nation to accept that serving is superior to waiting. This last flies in the face of the past traditions in which the laborer died as his master waited to profit from his doom, and the dawning feral feudalism, such as depicted in your account, where the family at home wait on the capture or death of their son for shame or payment.

This is exactly what welfare mothers in America have done my entire life: have children for the $2k a month they earn you for 16 years, and then teach them to argue with and fight the police so that mamma can collect on a big law suite when the pigs finally rid us of her whelp’s rap.

The servant is the person who maintains his pact with the higher secular power, weather public or private.

Notes

-1. During the English acts of Enclosure, slaves and servants, so armed, were often armed by the merchants, peasants and nobility to drive the working class from common lands and make of them a potential servant pool.

-2. A medical worker I know recently had her coworker get a notice from the medical system that said: “We are monitoring your social media, watch what you post.”

-2. Likewise, police routinely enforce unjust charges of law violation, such as arresting people who defended themselves from attackers at home and at work, and they and their Back the Blue supporters claim that the officers cannot refuse to serve an unjust warrant because it would endanger their pension—that is the very definition of a system mercenary, of the Loyal Servant of Olde.

-3. The Romans who originated the concept of soldiering as we understand it, understood that the soldier was not a free agent but rather the property of the state who was permitted unique lateral fraternal relationships and certain deadly agency to maintain a separate identity from the civilian and less-then-lethal servile segments of society.