Is there data about how the mode of a states army affects the probability that it is employed against its own people? I mean is it more liklier that the army is used to supress the own people or a certain group of people when the army is based mostly on career soldiers or long term conscripts? And will the probability decrease when most conscripts will only enlisted for a short period?

Is there research whether the length of mandatory military service affects the probability an individal will refuse immoral or illegal orders?

Also thinking about whether it affects the probality of a coup or a revolution, and whether the army will beat down uprisings and revolution.

  • I can't think of a case where soldiers refused orders to suppress civil uprising except on orders of their officers, and officers are almost always career soldiers. I could be mistaken, though.
    – Philipp
    Nov 15, 2015 at 17:11
  • 1
    This may be very difficult to answer, because professional armies frequently tend to be correllated with countries that don't experience much uprisings in the first place (or vice versa).
    – user4012
    Nov 15, 2015 at 21:38
  • I would like to ass following assumptions.
    – user16032
    Nov 21, 2015 at 23:10
  • I would like to ass following assumptions (i) a conscript army tends to be more similar to a professional army the longer the conscript iis. e.g.China, Israel have a relativ long conscript which enhances the separation between "army" and "civilian". (ii) professional soldiers can be seen as "worrier caste", which are distinctly separated from civil society. Would you agree?
    – user16032
    Nov 22, 2015 at 9:00
  • 1
    Professional does not mean 'volunteer.' It is possible to have a volunteer, but non-professional force, and vice versa, see Soldier and the State by Huntington. Dec 17, 2015 at 13:18


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .