Quote:
Originally posted by Greenhat
The Draft was a mistake in WWII in my opinion. It certainly was not necessary to the winning of the war.
Actually, in my opinion, conscription is always a mistake. Slavery is not any better a thing because it is in the service of the nation.
And militia service, restricted in time and location, is significantly different from conscription that sends men to foreign lands "for the duration".
|
As regards your last point, it does not apply to Mr. Lincoln's draft. Enrolling Act of March 3, 1863, Section 11: "And be it further enacted, That all persons thus enrolled shall be subject, for two years after the first day of July succeeding the enrolment, to be called into the military service of the United States, and
to continue in service during the present rebellion, not, however, exceeding the term of three years; and when called into service shall be placed on the same footing, in all respects, as volunteers for three years, or during the war, including advance pay and bounty as now provided by law." [emphasis added]
It does apply to Mr. Roosevelt's. The Selective Service and Training Act of 1940 was amended after Pearl Harbor to lengthen the term of service from one year to the duration plus six months.
As for conscription = slavery, I find that a difficult viewpoint to credit. It is certainly not true as a matter of law or American tradition. Not being either an anarchist or a Rothbardian libertarian, I don't consider it true as a moral principle. Human liberty is about duties as well as rights.
Do you consider military service to be slavery? The military has laws against desertion. As Rothbard argues "In addition to demanding the end of conscription, then, the libertarian also proposes to do away with the entire concept of a term of enlistment and the practice of slavery this implies." (of course, in the Rothbard school, jury duty = slavery, anti-strike laws = slavery, taxation = slavery, subpoenas = slavery, among other things).