A famous pro-government German magazine called for conscription to fight against Russia.

The German magazine Stern recently published an article advocating for the mass conscription of German youth to join the army, presenting it as a necessity to defend "freedom and diversity."

The article, written by Tilman Gerwien, argues that Germany can no longer rely on the United States for its protection and must prepare its youth to face future wars.

Gerwien criticizes the country's "complacency" and proposes a shift toward greater militarization. He also criticizes the traditionally anti-conscription stance of the German left, which in the past demanded the withdrawal of U.S. troops and protested against NATO.

Gerwien urges the new generation to abandon their pacifist ideals and accept that Germany must defend itself.

However, the conscription proposal has faced strong backlash. Critics point out the irony that Gerwien, being too old to be drafted, is urging others to face the front lines.

The proposal also highlights a broader shift in the German left, which, especially since the escalation of the war in Ukraine, has become more hawkish. The Green Party, previously associated with anti-war stances, has now adopted more defense-oriented policies.

Many Germans, especially young conservatives, no longer feel connected to a "New Germany" for which they would be willing to fight.

The article's suggestion that conscription could be a solution to this disconnection with national pride is controversial, as many believe this measure would only increase divisions within the country.

Stern's article frames conscription within the defense of "freedom and diversity", but this idea clashes with the reality of an increasingly polarized German society. The article argues that Germany needs to move away from individualism and adopt a collective mindset.

It claims that young Germans must fight not only for the country, but for the ideals of diversity that Stern promotes, just like the left around the world.

However, critics argue that these ideals are empty, especially when the German government is working to limit freedom of expression and ban political parties, including the AfD, which has gained massive support in the polls.

The article also raises the question of why Germans should fight. While promoting the defense of "freedom and diversity," the magazine's cover and the representation of young Germans in the article raise doubts about who would really be called to make the ultimate sacrifice.

Critics point out that, despite calls to defend diversity, the magazine's cover shows two white people, which contrasts with the multicultural society that Stern claims to defend. This inconsistency has not gone unnoticed, especially as the German population is becoming more "diverse."

Stern's conscription proposal also faces skepticism due to the low public support for military service. A recent survey revealed that only 17% of Germans would be willing to take up arms to defend their country.

The magazine's suggestion that conscription could be implemented despite low enthusiasm for military service has been compared to the last days of World War II, when the German army tried to mobilize reluctant soldiers.

This comparison highlights the disconnect between the establishment's push toward militarization and the lack of genuine support from the population for such measures.

Many commentators on social media have expressed their strong disapproval of Stern's stance, with some questioning why they should defend a country they no longer feel proud of.

Others criticize the magazine for promoting a "war mentality" while ignoring the wishes of the majority of Germans, who are not interested in serving in the army.

Some  even question the motives behind the defense of conscription, accusing the magazine of being influenced by the arms industry and corporate interests, rather than by a genuine concern for national security.