Our National Crisis

Our nation faces a crisis. In the simplest terms, we are becoming like everyone else. The United States has always been different from the rest of the nations of the world because we were a nation founded on, and centered on, a series of ideals. What set us apart were a set of ideas and beliefs about the individual and society that made us quite unique and made us treasure our shedding of the past and the adoption of a new mantle, a new title, that of American. We reveled in not what we were, but what we were to become, not in what made us the same as our ancestors, but what made us different from the rest of the world, and similar to our new neighbors. We believed in government of the people, by the people, for the people. We believed in unalienable rights, we believed in One out of Many.

But today, increasingly, we find that this sense of the exceptional, the unique nature of America is being marginalized. It is to be expected that others would do so – when one is jealous of another they tend to belittle that which they cannot have. But today we find many of our “leading” citizens finding nothing exceptional about our nation. Instead of celebrating that which makes us unique and one, they celebrate our differences. Instead of looking forward to a future as Americans, they ask us to celebrate our pasts and to revel in our diversity, and look forward to a future in ‘a global community.’

Is it their fault? In a sense. But it is also everyone’s fault. Over the past 40 years our education system has spent less and less time teaching about the greatness and the uniqueness of our nation and more about the nation as simply another nation, stressing our errors not our successes. We risk losing a grasp of what makes us unique and with that loss we risk the very essence of this nation. America stands on the brink of becoming simply another old and tired nation, one in which the people - our citizens  - are simply those who were born here. This is truly a national crisis.

Is there a means at hand to reunite the nation, to give a rebirth to the notions that powered us through the last 234 years? I believe there it. It is encapsulated in the simple notion of service, of putting nation before self, of understanding that for this nation to succeed, with its demanding vision of participatory government and participatory society, that each of us is required to give. Sacrifice is necessary from each, but sacrifice for a greater good. This is the difference between simple self interest, which produces greed and short-term success, and enlightened self-interest, which in the long run produces both greater freedom and greater abundance. The nation faces a true emergency. And emergencies call for drastic action.

The Draft

Taken in isolation, a draft (or conscription), compulsory service in the military, is not a good idea. The concept that the government can – on a whim, that is, without cause – force you to serve in the military is contrary to the premise of individual liberty that is central to the very nature of this country.

That position having been established, is there a circumstance, a cause, under which it would be acceptable for the government to establish a draft? Governments by their nature have as the prime goal the survival of the state. This has been recognized and accepted since the earliest writings on political philosophy, the understanding being that within the concept of the social contract the notion of providing security, the prime driver for the creation of that contract, the survival of the state created by that contract is essentially equal to the notion of providing security to the individuals who create the social contract. Ergo, survival of the state (the nation) does constitute an emergency that warrants consideration of actions that we might otherwise consider beyond the pale.

Certainly, this was the very point made by President Lincoln. From his perspective virtually any action was justified if it kept the Union together. Everything else had to be subordinated to that one position. Emergencies demanded strong action, and national survival justified exceptional action.

The Crisis We Face

Today the United States faces a wide range of issues: on the economic front a large and growing debt; unfunded annuities that dwarf the nominal debt; financial crises and job migration; and rising energy costs. On the social front we face an immigration crisis and an increasingly compartmented and stratified culture; and from abroad (and in some cases from within our own society) we face Islamic terrorism; the proliferation of nuclear weapons; and the rise of a host of potential adversaries.

Further, there is the crisis of identity that we identified at the top of this article. Arguably, it is our greatest threat. And it comes on top of all the other threats that we face.

Separately, each of these problems might be met and successfully addressed. Each would require a sustained effort. But collectively, they will require not simply concerted effort, they require a multi-generational commitment to an effort centered on the very idea of our nation as a whole, to a concept of this nation that expands well beyond the specifics of this or that issue. No one will try to reduce and then eliminate national debt simply because it is debt, nor will they seek a solution to the problem facing Social Security in the latter half of the 21st century simply because the numbers say it is necessary.

There must be a unifying force, a concept and vision which ties one idea to the other, and more importantly, ties one person to another.

An Exceptional Nation

This nation was born from a number of ideals, and in that sense – and it is a vitally important sense – it is truly exceptional. Most countries in history were (and are) the result of geography and conquest. Allegiance to the nation was based on the fact that you were born there and nothing more. The United States chose a different path, one encapsulated in several key documents, such as the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and pursuit of happiness…” and the Constitution: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

The notion of equality and unity is even more explicitly captured in the nation’s motto: “E Pluribus Unum” – One Out of Many. This speaks directly to an idea, a vision that has not simply been pooh-poohed of late, but actually pushed aside, the idea of the United States as the Melting Pot, a place where all could come, irrespective of their nation of birth, or their ancestry, and they would no longer be Irish or English, German or Dutch, Japanese, Korean, Chinese, Indian, Persian, Arab, Berber, Kenyan, Congolese, Rwandan, Samoan or Philippine; they would be Americans. And they would all be equal, equal under the law and equal with respect to their opportunity to live free and to seek their success and to provide for their families. They would, in the words of a great American, be “judged not by the color of their skin, but the content of their character.”

But we are now on the verge of losing that sense of unity, of losing the United in the United States. We are told to celebrate not what makes us alike, but what makes us different, and we now seem to have forgotten that it is not what makes us different, but what makes us alike that brings us together, that provides our unity, that provides the strength we need to face the challenges ahead.

This crisis, this national emergency will require a girding of our loins for at least one and probably several generations. To fail to address that emergency is to risk the nation itself. If we are to meet this emergency it will require all of us working together, as one team. But we are told we are not one team. Nor is there any mechanism in our current social order that promises to act as the driving force to build that team. We as a nation need some mechanism that will give to each of us a common foundation, a common touchstone that we can draw from to rebuild that unity, to rebuild that sense that we are part of a great undertaking, that our participation, our sense of ‘ownership,’ as part of a great team, is essential to our sustained growth. Without that common sense of belonging to something greater, without that sense that we are on the same team, working not for the greater good – not waiting for a handout – our national crisis will only deepen.

The Professional Lament

It is with this national emergency looming in front of us that the notion of restarting the draft is recommended. There are both philosophic and practical reasons for opposing a draft. Among them, the one mentioned at the top of this paper: that this is granting the government authority over the entire populace. Further, many in the military will laud the value of an all-volunteer force, citing in particular the greater professionalism and higher retention. But, both of these traits are purchased at great real cost in pay and particularly in greater dependent, retirement and medical benefits. Such arguments also eschew any discussion of the political reality that a volunteer-professional military force increases the separation between the citizenry and their military and encourages the political elite to use that force without substantial regard as to the concerns and desires of we the people.

Of course, no one could support a return to a draft if it would directly and immediately threaten the security of our nation. But such is not the case. The idea that the draft will give you less qualified personnel is, obviously, false. If the services were able to draw from high-school graduates and college students across the nation, particularly in a case where there are more than 1.5 million male high-school graduates and 600,000 male college graduates every year, there are certainly ample numbers to meet the yearly requirements for several hundred thousand needed each year. (This number would grow somewhat because the manning models for the services would change, but the numbers are well within the available manpower.)

Service lore (almost a military urban myth) suggests that it is nearly impossible to achieve and then maintain the level of training necessary to support today’s high-tech military, that the level of training needed to develop both today’s combat personnel and today’s combat support personnel far exceeds what can be obtained when faced with draft personnel who will only be in the service for two years, hence would spend nearly their entire enlistment in training.

In fact, a return to the draft would require a change in training models. But concerns about this or that personnel manning and training model are insignificant if the draft were able to provide a unifying force to our citizenry as a whole.

If there were a draft the services would be free to use a different set of standards: personnel in their first two years of service would be paid substantially less, the services could bar anyone from joining the services with dependents in tow, personnel in the first two years of service would not need money to live off base, there would be more personnel available for basic services such as cleaning up around bases. In short, the transition could be made to a different and less expensive model. Additionally, as we have a smaller military then when we last had a draft, the services could be much more selective and still meet yearly quotas. That it would offer its own leadership challenges is accepted. But again, that has been dealt with before, quite successfully.

The Essential Point

But the reason for a draft now outweighs any objections to the cost of transitioning from one personnel and training system to another. Our nation is faced with a true national emergency. In many respects our public schools have failed to educate our citizens as to what makes us unique among the nations of the world, and therefore what unites us, makes us one and apart from the rest. We hear politicians speak too glibly of ‘the world’ and less easily about the exceptional nature of America. Such was not always the case. And since the days of the Civil War we have lived in a society where every family had a member who had sacrificed for the nation, and in doing so had learned something about what made us a nation, and came away understanding at the visceral level that we were ‘one out of many.’

Most will accept that only in the event of national emergency is a draft justifiable. But, we are now in a national emergency, politically, economically and spiritually. And while the draft is not and cannot be considered a panacea to address this emergency, it is a vital and necessary element of the solution.

The draft would be this: the simple requirement that all males, between the ages of 18 and 26, be subject to a draft, and that perhaps 500,000 to one million per year (depending on the personnel manning model) be inducted into the military for a two year tour of active duty, followed by 4 years on inactive reserve status.

The implications to our society would be massive. Not only would the American people directly reconnect with their military, within a few years it would mean more members of Congress and members of Congressional staff with military experience, and hence improved judgment in all questions concerning our national security, from budgets and personnel to procurement and support to overseas operations.

What it would provide, apart from the specific military capabilities, is this: a leavening of our society. Every year one million men would – in common – take an oath to defend the Constitution and the nation; one million men would experience – in common – working for a cause greater than themselves; they would understand the real nature of heroism – sacrifice to that higher cause; every year one million men would be released from the service having lived together, served together, sacrificed together – under our flag, in support of the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution; each year another million men would, despite whether they were rich or poor, of Armenian, Dutch, English, German, Indian, Irish, Japanese, Somali, Vietnamese, or Zimbabwean descent, would look at each other and know that they had these things in common, that despite external appearances that made them look different that they had supported the same things, believed in the same things, sacrificed for the same things, slept in the same barracks, used the same latrines, ate (and hated) the same foods; and defended the same nation, defended the same people, defended the same beliefs.