The Ethics of Military Conscription

Context:

Throughout US history, there have only been a few select times in which military conscription, or the draft, have been utilized by the government to fill their ranks: the Civil War, World War I, World War II, and the Cold War.

As we're learning about WWI and how Wilson created a draft to fill the military, it seems relevant to discuss whether such drafts are morally permissible or not. This debate is still continuing today, with advocates for the draft citing countries like Singapore as stellar examples of how compulsory military service helps a nation's character and strengthens their populace. Opponents of a draft argue that the draft would violate freedom and autonomy, and instead of guaranteeing citizens’ rights, the government would be infringing up them.

These are only a few examples of the arguments people bring up in support of or against the draft. Ultimately, whether the draft seems good or bad is necessarily contextualized by the lens through which we evaluate it.

Why a draft is good in general

Proponents for the draft argue that having a compulsory military service would decrease adventurism, the willingness to take risks in politics, and would overall decrease the likelihood of war. Their logic is that because policymakers’ sons, daughters, and other familiars are all at equal risk of being drafted and sent to war, policymakers will be more cautious in engaging in wars if they know their children are at risk of dying. This forces policymakers to only engage in absolutely necessary wars, which overall betters the world because there are less unnecessary wars, and because the wars that are being fought will actually yield utility and improve the world (like if we defeated ISIS).

Another argument that falls in favor of the draft is simply that of military readiness. The argument goes that if America has a draft, that means we have a stronger and better military, which in turn means we deter otherwise hostile nations from acting aggressively. By reifying American hegemony around the world, we theoretically lead to more peace.

Why a draft is bad in general

Of course, there are also several reasons military draft can be considered bad.  

One of the most common objections is that a draft would be too expensive. According to US Army Reserve Officer James Lacey, it would cause around 3 trillion dollars to equip and train new draftees, and about 1 trillion dollars each year to maintain an army of draftees. This would crush the economy and tank growth, which would severely decrease the overall quality of life for citizens and decrease their happiness.

Another objection is that the draft would be unequal and would increase social disparity because of the structure of the draft. Historically, the rich have always been able to get out of the draft, which means that the draft would be disproportionately comprised of exploited minorities. As such, proposed drafts have often been called “poverty drafts,” and imposing a draft would only oppress the poor while letting the rich get away, a clear detriment to societal welfare.

Clearly, both sides offer compelling arguments, and it’s up to individuals to decide which side’s arguments they buy more. Yet it seems like this calculus mostly rests on the assumption that we aren’t at war, something different than what the draft in WWI should be evaluated under.

Wartime emergency:

Remember that the question of whether conscription was moral or not that Wilson had to answer was different than the question we are answering today. The main reason for this is because we are essentially at peace, while Wilson was dealing with the turmoil of a worldwide war.

Intuitively, it seems that a draft is more legitimate during times of war because the nation is facing a crisis that should be averted and solved as quickly as possible. If the best way to solve that is a draft, then a draft should be instituted. In World War I, the draft seemed legitimate enough for even Wilson, a morally uptight person, to approve.

The Selective Service Act of 1917 was generally met with enthusiasm, most likely due to previous efforts by the government to spread pro-war propaganda to instill patriotism in the country. Whereas around 2 million men had volunteered, 2.8 million had been drafted, and less than 350,000 men tried to dodge the draft.

But it’s important to recognize that the American government also deprived people of their rights during World War I by censoring newspapers, imprisoning those who were against the war, and passing the Espionage Act and Sedition Act. By instituting a draft, the government asserted its power to infringe on individuals’ rights more and built to the precedent, possibly paving the way for more human rights abuses.

As with the case for a peacetime draft, there are compelling arguments on both sides, and I’ll leave it up to you to decide whether drafts are good or not.