Draft service

[Free Palestine]

Option F

As in go f#ck yourself.

[Free Palestine]

Seriously though...

Conscription, I believe, is forced labor, and a moral evil.  I don't give a crap about your arguments about "civic duty" or social contract theory philosophical bs, conscription = forced labor = wrong.  Even if the nation is at alleged risk, people should not be forced into labor.

And yes, I oppose jury duty as well.

[Free Palestine]

What I find especially annoying is progressives who support this kind of thing.  What the hell happened to "my body, my choice" or "keep the government out of people's private lives"?  But I digress...

[Free Palestine]

In my humble, respectful opinion, options A-C are unambiguously authoritarian choices and D is presented in too much of a biased, nastier-than-necessary manner. That having been said, I value individual rights more so than collective duties and value the defense of the People more so than the defense of the state. I believe that option D is the best available in this list. If a war is truly just and worthwhile the masses will rally to arms and enlist. Any government that is prepared to use its citizens as expendable tools in its quarrels against their will is a grave, albeit latent threat to its own people - a looming and potent enemy from within, so to speak.

There are conditions under which I'd probably enlist - putting my life on the line for something greater than myself - and yet there are also conditions under which I would be alright with a foreign power seizing control of my community, would seek to emigrate abroad, or even take up arms against the state. You see, I am not government property and bow unquestioningly to no authority. That is to say, I'm a free man. Call me a wuss if you like. I will not be ashamed. I also frown upon glorification of gender roles. They are social constructs, and I am not made at all insecure by the fact that my personality and habits are both "masculine" and "feminine."

Of course then you run into the tragedy of the commons/free rider problem. I see this as the same sort of issue as https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=156526.0

 I'm not arguing that peacetime conscription is a good thing, but in a time of emergency when the country itself is threatened requiring able bodied persons to defend their homeland shouldn't be viewed as a negative. States have the responsibility to defend the liberties of its citizens and in return the citizens must protect the state. Of course, this assumes the state does defend liberties and the war is just.

Forcing individuals to defend the state they may or may not care for should be viewed as negative.

[Free Palestine]

In my humble, respectful opinion, options A-C are unambiguously authoritarian choices and D is presented in too much of a biased, nastier-than-necessary manner. That having been said, I value individual rights more so than collective duties and value the defense of the People more so than the defense of the state. I believe that option D is the best available in this list. If a war is truly just and worthwhile the masses will rally to arms and enlist. Any government that is prepared to use its citizens as expendable tools in its quarrels against their will is a grave, albeit latent threat to its own people - a looming and potent enemy from within, so to speak.

There are conditions under which I'd probably enlist - putting my life on the line for something greater than myself - and yet there are also conditions under which I would be alright with a foreign power seizing control of my community, would seek to emigrate abroad, or even take up arms against the state. You see, I am not government property and bow unquestioningly to no authority. That is to say, I'm a free man. Call me a wuss if you like. I will not be ashamed. I also frown upon glorification of gender roles. They are social constructs, and I am not made at all insecure by the fact that my personality and habits are both "masculine" and "feminine."

Of course then you run into the tragedy of the commons/free rider problem. I see this as the same sort of issue as https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=156526.0

 I'm not arguing that peacetime conscription is a good thing, but in a time of emergency when the country itself is threatened requiring able bodied persons to defend their homeland shouldn't be viewed as a negative. States have the responsibility to defend the liberties of its citizens and in return the citizens must protect the state. Of course, this assumes the state does defend liberties and the war is just.

Forcing individuals to defend the state they may or may not care for should be viewed as negative.

I'm a big believer in the principle of the social contract. Specifically, I believe that in a free society where one can emigrate freely that staying as a citizen and living in your country implies consent to being governed by it. Along with this goes responsibility to defend it.

That's why I reject social contract theory.  Living in a certain place is not consent to be dragged out of your home and forced to risk dying for the state, no more than wearing an outfit like this in public is consent to sex.  It's not really consent -- it's just an excuse made up to justify the state's injustices.