Replies

Government, by its nature, coerces people into doing things for the good of society as a whole. School taxes are an example. Most other taxes are another. Try speed limits, building codes, etc.

I really don't care if our younger citizens develop "resentment" because they're coerced into military service. I'm quite sure there was resentment to the draft on the part of some in WWI and WWII. I know one of my cousin's wasn't happy when he got a second helping in Korea, AFTER he served in WWII. That's why it's called civic DUTY.

The draft was highly successful at fielding large enough armies to meet the needs of the United States for over sixty years. It wasn't stopped because it was a failure. It died because of a lack of political will on the part of the government, fueled by a canard that only poor whites and blacks were drafted [apparently middle class, non Ivy League college students and high school grads didn't count].

I got out of the military 35 years ago. Until a second cousin enlisted in the Air Force a couple of months back, NO male in my family [and there's a bunch] has deigned to serve. That's wrong.

There is a growing disconnect between the military culture, and the societal culture -and it's widening. It's been discussed on other threads. Compound that with the fact that fewer and fewer of our elected representatives have either military experience, nor at best, any comprehension of how the services work, or what they need, or at worst the contempt of Kerry, or the loathing of Clinton, and you have a potential long term recipe for disaster. Within one generation of Rome doing away with conscription, and Marius' professionalization of the Legions; Rome itself was invaded twice by its own army [ Sulla and Caesar].

As for your suggestion, Heinlein "Starship Troopers", although he limited the franchise and office to military veterans.

There is a signficant difference between telling citizens that, as they go about their private business they must obey certain laws and regulations, and telling citizens that they must set their private business aside altogether and, upon pain of death, do what the state tells them, ordering them about in ways (UCMJ, hierarchy) that would be quite unconstitutional in civil life. This is not Sparta.

It's one thing for citizens to voluntarily submit to military discipline, quite another to tell them they must do so. In fact, we amended the constitution to outlaw involuntary servitude, except upon conviction of crime.

I believe as strongly as anyone that citizens ought to feel a sense of obligation to preserve the state and a sense of duty that would lead them to share the burden of defending the state. That model of civic virtue rather reminiscent of the Roman republic was the founding model of the American republic: our notion of the entire male population of military age constituting the militia, but the organized militia was entirely voluntary, and subject only to limited service.

However, the fact that I think citizens ought to feel a duty does imply that I believe the state has the right to impose not only the duty but punishment for refusal to accept it. As much as I like the militia model - as a VMI man the notion of the "citizen-soldiers, attached to their native state and ready in every time of deepest peril to vindicate her honor and defend her rights" has stayed with me through the past 40 years since I first walked through the arch - I think we're better off today with a primarily professional army with strong citizen-soldier reserve elements, rather than relying on reluctant draftees.

Government, by its nature, coerces people into doing things for the good of society as a whole.

Wow, who knew that you would post here, of all places?

I gotta ask:

1. Does it bug you that people accuse you of being a lesbian and/or a frigid beotch?

2. When you found out about the Monica thing, were you tempted to bounce an ashtray off Bubba's head?

2a. If so, did you yield to that temptation?

3. Come on, make it official: you're running in 2008, right?