Conscription Is Collectivism

LewRockwell.com ^ | January 14, 2003 | Rep. Ron Paul, MD

[LiberalBuster]

Two Democratic Congressman introduced legislation last week to revive the military draft, taking a race-baiting shot at the President and his war plans. Their idea is not new, however, as similar proposals were introduced by Republicans in the months following September 11th. Although the administration is not calling for a draft at this time, last week’s controversy shows while conscription has been buried for 30 years, the idea is not necessarily dead.

Neither the Pentagon nor our military leaders want a draft. In fact, a Department of Defense report stated that draft registration could be eliminated "with no effect on military mobilization and no measurable effect on military recruitment." Today’s military is more high tech and specialized than ever before, and an educated volunteer force is required to operate our modern Army, Navy, and Air Force. Most military experts believe a draft would actually impair military readiness, despite the increase in raw manpower, because of training and morale problems.

So why is the idea of a draft even considered? One answer is that our military forces are spread far too thin, engaged in conflicts around the globe that are none of our business. With hundreds of thousands of troops already stationed in literally hundreds of foreign nations, we simply don’t have enough soldiers to invade and occupy every country we label a threat to the new American empire. Military leaders conservatively estimate that 250,000 troops will be needed to invade Iraq, while tens of thousands already occupy Afghanistan. Add another conflict to the mix – in North Korea, the Balkans, or any number of hot spots – and our military capabilities would quickly be exhausted. Some in Washington would rather draft more young bodies than rethink our role as world policeman and bring some of our troops home.

Military needs aside, however, some politicians simply love the thought of mandatory service to the state. To them, the American government is America. Patriotism means working for the benefit of the state. On a crude level, the draft appeals to patriotic fervor. This is why the idea of compulsory national service, whether in the form of military conscription or make-work programs like AmeriCorps, still sells on Capitol Hill. Conscription is wrongly associated with patriotism, when it really represents collectivism and involuntary servitude.

I believe wholeheartedly that an all-volunteer military is not only sufficient for national defense, but preferable. It is time to abolish the Selective Service System and consign military conscription to the dustbin of American history. 500 million dollars have been wasted on the Selective Service System since 1979, money that could have been returned to taxpayers or spent to improve the lives of our nation’s veterans.

Ronald Reagan said it best: "The most fundamental objection to draft registration is moral." He understood that conscription assumes our nation’s young people belong to the state. Yet America was founded on the opposite principle, that the state exists to serve the individual. The notion of involuntary servitude, in whatever form, is simply incompatible with a free society.

[Support Free Republic]

Donate to Free Republic, and Save Larry The Lobster!!!
	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

[The Obstinate Insomniac]

bump

[ChemistCat]

I liked Heinlein's system proposed in several of his books. Nobody has to serve. But then, nobody HAS to vote. No service, no full citizenship.

[The Obstinate Insomniac]

I favor a society that encourages but does not require government service. Look at our computer industry and it was young college dropouts or recent graduates started many of the cutting edge companies. Would we be better off if these individuals had to wait a few years to get started?

[truth_seeker]

What IF after 9-11-2001, and having identified the murderers as Saudis and Egyptians (aided by various other foreigners) an emergency draft was begun.

Also an announcement made, that the US had been attacked by agents of radical islam, funded by various international sources.

The purpose of the draft would be to wage full scale war, against every nation which gave safe harbor, financing, or permitted mullah-incitements.

Had that been done, many would have volunteered, IMO.

[John R. (Bob) Locke]

"Ronald Reagan said it best: "The most fundamental objection to draft registration is moral." He understood that conscription assumes our nation’s young people belong to the state. Yet America was founded on the opposite principle, that the state exists to serve the individual. The notion of involuntary servitude, in whatever form, is simply incompatible with a free society."

As usual, Ron Paul is spot-on.

Something in that 14th Amendment about involuntary servitude, if I recall correctly.

[fporretto]

According to historian Robert Higgs (Crisis And Leviathan), the original rationale for conscription was that it was simply a form of tax payment -- in-kind (military service) rather than in legal tender. (Inasmuch as a 1934 Supreme Court decision asserted that Congress could quite legitimately impose 100% tax rates -- that it had not done so was merely an act of "legislative grace" -- this is perfectly consistent with "the needs of the State come first" social reasoning.) The whole question of whether conscription constitutes involuntary servitude was bypassed.

If your blood isn't running cold yet, you haven't had enough coffee.

Anyone who understands the connection between a man's labor and his life can see the web that connects conscription and direct taxation. And anyone who's frank enough to allow that conscription is just another form of tax payment must then admit that Americans are, at best, about 60% free. We will leave the government's assertion of a power to impose 100% taxation -- the entire value of your life, whether through conscription or the imposition of a 100% tax rate on your earnings -- for a later analysis.

Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit The Palace Of Reason:
http://palaceofreason.com

[ChemistCat]

Why later? I'm listening. Since I've long advocated that property crimes are partial murders, and ought to be punished as such, I'm very interested in hearing your elaboration on this. Please do.

[metesky]

The draft is merely the calling up of selective members of the unorganized militia per the Militia Act of 1792.

[inquest]

The draft is merely the calling up of selective members of the unorganized militia per the Militia Act of 1792.

If that's true, then the act's being glaringly misapplied. The militia and the army were intended to be two very separate institutions. At the time the Constitution was passed, it was considered one of the essential natures of a standing army that it be composed exclusively of volunteers. The militia was to be composed of conscripts, and be paid and barracked only when on an active mission, and to operate only within the United States.

[metesky]

I think the aftermath of the Civil War was the start of all the changes; no more all volunteer units, no more units consisting of all men from one state, etc.

[Leisler]

Archives & Manuscripts 

H .F. O'Bevine to Culberson, May 26, 1898

The coming of the Spanish-American War meant that the regular army and militia needed to be augmented with volunteers. President William McKinley authorized the raising of three regiments of volunteer cavalry from the western states. Only one, the First United States Volunteer Cavalry, would actually serve in combat. Their name would go into history as the "Rough Riders."

The legendary unit was led by Lt. Col. Theodore Roosevelt and drew many recruits from Texas, particularly from the Texas Rangers. Beginning in May 1896, the Rough Riders began to train in San Antonio. Although Texas horses also joined the unit, in the end no transportation could be found to take the horses to the fighting in Cuba. The Rough Riders would fight as infantry. On July 1, 1896, the Rough Riders made their famous charge up San Juan (actually Kettle) Hill, seizing Spanish fortification at the cost of 1000 American casualties. This famous exploit would catapult Theodore Roosevelt to the White House.

This letter offering to raise a unit of riflemen covers many of the concerns of Texans as the fighting in Cuba grew closer.

"Texas Rising "

Dallas, Texas, May 26th 1898

Governor C.A. Culberson
Executive Mansion

Dear Sir
Judging from the number and nature
of the letters which I have received from Western
Texas and Indian Territory, I can easily assemble
200 riflemen, and thus form a nucleus for a regiment of
mounted rifles, on the order of the "Rough Riders"
or old "Texas Rangers." Such men as I refer to, do
not want to join the Regulars, though eager to
be pushed to the front where the "fighting is the thick-
est." At a private meeting last evening, it was
proposed to call our troop the "Culberson Car-
bineers," in honor of your father.

As President McKinley has issued his second
call, I now take the liberty of asking your Excell-
ency to give me authority to proceed further in
the matter, so as to be in readiness for action as
soon as we are needed. As for myself I am an
"immune," having had the fever incidental to residence
in Cuba and Central America.

Your Excellency's obedient servant
H.F. O'Bevine

"Texas Rising "

H .F. O'Bevine to Culberson, May 26, 1898, Records of Charles Allen Culberson, Texas Office of the Governor, Archives and Information Services Division, Texas State Library and Archives Commission.

---

SITE NAVIGATION TEXT LINKS
Agency Info | General Interest | Librarians | Govt Agencies | Catalogs & Searches | Publications
News & Events | Statewide Search/TRAIL | Contact Us | Site Index | Policies & Disclaimers | Webmaster