TheAgitator.com
More Leftist Draft Folly.
Sunday, January 5th, 2003A regrettable debate on a military draft has broken out at Stand Down. Check here and here.
Again, I’m pretty amazed at how quickly leftists abandon any notion of civil liberty when the civil liberties in question belong to people they don’t like (i.e. rich, white, Republicans).
What’s worse, they don’t seem to have much problem at all with another sort of conscription — forced national service. If I’ve read the posts correctly, these people seem to be advocating forcing every American at, say, age 18 into coerced national service, where they’d be “inculcuated with community values” — read: leftist values — and required to carry out various hummanitarian, earth beautification projects.
In other words, they want every one at 18 to be brainwashed, then forced into laboring for a panoply of leftist causes.
When I objected, one post told me, flatly, “if you don’t like it, you can leave the country.”
This is scary stuff. Leftists are sounding more like neocons every day. If the two can ever find common ground on this issue — a draft with an “opt out” for four years of Americorps, for example — we may not be that far at all from a return to conscription.
UPDATE: I should add that Talk Left has, predictably, eloquently voiced its opposition to the draft. I knew there was a reason I liked those guys.
So it’s not bad enough our country is brainwashed by liberal schools, now they want to go further. The fact is that so many leftist ideas make so little sense, both logically and economically that the only way to get people to buy into them is to indoctrinate people as early and often as possible.
Of course we can also look at this as another tax on citizens, taking two years of their earnings. And lord knows that they would think in terms of economics, taking someone from their most efficient and productive areas and having them do jobs that are not even near the actual value they could create on the open market. Then there is the concept of what would be our best defense, which of course is the main purpose of our federal government. Would you rather have a forced army or one where people enlist for extended periods and become more efficient at their jobs with experience?
As for “if you don’t like it, you can leave the country,” well yes, that will eventually happen. The most able and productive people will eventually not stand for these policies where we work for free, promoting leftists social issues. This is not what our Founding Fathers proposed in the Constitution and we should stand firm on our rights.
We don’t need a draft. The purpose of a draft (Vietnam, WW2 etc) was because of the need for a massive Army. Today’s wars don’t require that many bodies. If we have a draft, the extra unneeded bodies will be a finacial drag as well as a distraction for what needs to be done. Also why are we only talking about drafting males?
We don’t need a draft. The purpose of a draft (Vietnam, WW2 etc) was because of the need for a massive Army. Today’s wars don’t require that many bodies. If we have a draft, the extra unneeded bodies will be a finacial drag as well as a distraction for what needs to be done. Also why are we only talking about drafting males?
I’m dead set against the draft. I think it’s probably the crappiest thing I’ve heard concerning this possible war yet. What really gets me fired up is this “No exceptions, except for me.” attitude. If the draft is supposed to be fair then why should anyone respect an objector’s reasons not to fight but throw everyone else into the fray.
The leftists can shove the draft, but they can shove it a little further so long as they’re willing to exempt themselves from service. I say if you need to have a draft then everyone gets a bite of the shit sandwich. Are the leftists willing to put their money where their collective mouth is? I don’t think so.
A little while ago, the Wall Street Journal ran an editorial advocating shifting some of the tax burden to the poor and middle class. The theory was: a) by making the lower classes pay more in taxes, they would realize how much these social programs cost and would be less willing to support big government; and b) the rich are currently paying more than their fair share. Personally, I was in favor of this proposal.
My question is, how is this draft proposal really that different? The only justification I can think of is that in the military, you need people that want to be there. Still, isn’t it just people who are against the war wanting the burden of the war shared by everyone in the hopes that when those supporting it are faced with its cost (i.e. going themselves or possibly having a loved one go) those supporting it might reconsider?
How do people against the draft but for an adjustment of the tax structure reconcile this tension?
Bryan –
I too support the Wall Street Journal’s idea. Or at least the idea of a “reverse income tax” put out by Megan McArdle.
But I don’t feel the need to reconcile. Conscription is slavery. Actually, it’s a little worse than slavery. You’re forcing people to risk their lives for a cause or an interest they may or may not believe in. I don’t think that kind of thing should happen in a free society.
Taxation is a necessary evil. Excessive taxation is unnecessary evil. But neither of them might result in death. You can’t say that about conscription, and therefore, military service should always be voluntary. If the threat is real, and the need for troops is real, you’ll have no problem finding volunteers.
And, conversely, if there’s a shortage of volunteers, perhaps the politicians need to either a) reconsider how much of a threat the current villain really is, or, b) if they’re convinced of the threat, make a better public case as to why.
Also, note that the lefties want a draft not just for military service, but for national service — a mandatory Americorps/Peacecorps for everyone.