Owners 'R' Us?

What is truly amazing about the Selective Service memo mentioned in that Rolling Stone article below, is that the proposed "needs" draft is clearly meant to be the palatably thin end of the wedge. It is a given that a new draft would be as popular as a prostitute in church on Sunday morning. But a "partial" draft, and one that picks out "professionals" rather than regular working stiffs, well, hey, that'll work, right?

Sure. And if I could just sell these people some land in southern Louisiana sight unseen, I'd be able to retire early.

The primary objection to the draft during the '60's coalesced, not around the unfairness of who went and who didn't (that came later) but first around the very concept of a draft. My father was old enough to lie about his age to get into the Navy in World War II; after Pearl Harbor, he said, everybody wanted to go. But the Vietnam draft brought back memories of the "impressment" of soldiers into Her Majesty's Navy. Indeed, the draft is one of those unhappy consequences of modern technology and improved recordkeeping, which is why "impressment" is no longer a needed practice. Still, the fundamental principal of the draft was that "everyone went." The objection to impressment was that only the unfortunate went. And the justification for it was that the unfortunates were the king's subjects, and the king needed sailors. In the U.S. draft following Pearl Harbor, you weren't "owned" by the U.S. government, but you "owed" it a duty. During World War II, that duty was clear; during Vietnam, it became less and less so. And, of course, the less "universal" the draft, the less supportable it ultimately is. The "impressment" argument of the '60's recognized this distinction: it was premised on the idea that the government did not, in fact, "own" you, and could not coerce your military service.

But now, the very idea of a "needs" draft, is that all your professional training belongs to...the government. Your education, your skills, your career...are not yours any longer. They serve the needs of the Pentagon. Whatever you do for a living, if the military "needs" it, you have to provide it. Gives a whole new meaning to "ownership society," doesn't it?

And someone in the government thinks this is a good idea, that this thin end of the wedge will be acceptable until it is a fait accompli, and a universal draft is reinstated? Before the debacle of Social Security reform, I'd have been worried. But now, I'm beginning to think it will be a very interesting 4 years indeed.