Anti-Conscription Movement

Subject: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: GUEST,Peace Matriot
Date: 28 May 02 - 07:12 PM

Women were among the earliest anti-conscriptionists, and founded two well known international peace organizations still in business today, the War Resisters International, and Women's International League for Peace and Freedom.

THE ANTI-CONSCRIPTION MANIFESTO 1926 was signed among others by Henri Barbusse, Annie Besant, Martin Buber, Edward Carpenter, Miguel de Unamuno, Georges Duhamel, Albert Einstein, M K Gandhi, Kurt Hiller, Toyohiko Kagawa, George Lansbury, Arthur Ponsonby, Leonhard Ragaz, Romain Rolland, Bertrand Russell, Rabindranath Tagore, Fritz von Unruh, and H G Wells.

HERE IT IS:

'It is our belief that conscript armies, with their large corps of professional officers, are a grave menace to peace. Conscription involves the degradation of human personality, and the destruction of liberty. Barrack life, military drill, blind obedience to commands, however unjust and foolish they may be, and deliberate training for slaughter undermine respect for the individual, for democracy and human life. 'It is debasing human dignity to force men to give up their life, or to inflict death against their will or without conviction as to the justice of their action. The State which thinks itself entitled to force its citizens to go to war will never pay proper regard to the value and happiness of their lives in peace. Moreover, by conscription the militarist spirit of aggressiveness is implanted in the whole male population at the most impressionable age. By training for war men come to consider war as unavoidable and even desirable.'

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Noreen
Date: 28 May 02 - 07:32 PM

Er- are you in the right place, guest? This is a music site...

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: GUEST,Peace Matriot
Date: 28 May 02 - 07:37 PM

I posted this as a counter-balance to the military minded "Memorial Day, A Look Back" thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Bobert
Date: 28 May 02 - 08:03 PM

Guest: Don't be too concerned about posting a non-music thread. That's why there is a BS category to begin with. Some folks get real offended by it but, hey, they are reading them, aren't they.

I agree that conscription just adds to an allready insane cycle of human behavior and have been known, on occasion, to get a tad worked up on the issue. It surprises me not that Albert Einstien was one of the original signers since he spent his life dwelling on possibilities rather than improbabilities. Peace is possible only after mankind sheds the misconception that it is improbable. With an ever shrinking planet, limited resources and a global economy, peace is a concept that this generation should be teaching rather than taking a pass on the challenge. How selfish. Seems all we (not me...) learned from the 60's is that it's better to be on the winning side than the moral side...

End of Bobert's mini-rant... but offered with respect and in the memory of those who have given their lives in what they felt was right. We can not change those failed decisions and events.

Peace

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: michaelr
Date: 28 May 02 - 08:22 PM

Bobert, you're going to get into trouble again!

;-) Michael

Subject: ADD: C for Conscription
From: CarolC
Date: 28 May 02 - 09:39 PM

I did a search in the Mudcat and didn't find this anywhere (which could be my fault, but ah well)...

'C' FOR CONSCRIPTION

Well, it's 'C' for Conscription
And it's 'C' for Capitol Hill!
Well, it's 'C' for Conscription
And it's 'C' for Capitol Hill!
And it's 'C' for the Congress
That passed that goddamn bill!

[YODEL]

I'd rather be at home,
Even sleeping in a holler log,
I'd rather be here home,
Even sleeping in a holler log.
Than go to the army
Be treated like a dirty dog!

[YODEL]

'C' FOR CONSCRIPTION (PETE SEEGER/MILLARD LAMPELL) (1941)
(Tune: JIMMIE RODGERS, "Blue Yodel -- T For Texas")

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: GUEST,Peace Matriot
Date: 28 May 02 - 10:09 PM

Then there is Andy Irvine's song Gladiators too, about the anti-conscription movement in Australia:

http://andyirvine.com/lyrics/gladiators.html

I understand the Aussies had a considerable cache of conscription songs. They seem to be universal across Europe at least. In a quick check on google, I came across:

Song type known in Romanian as 'cãtãnie' (approximate translation 'conscription' -in the village before to go into the military service, and in the army);

Greek rebetika songs on conscription and war;

Moravian folk ensemble called after its home town Bøeclav. Breclav is situated in the south of Moravia, at the border with Austria and Slovakia. It is lovely flat country, near the confluence of the rivers Morava and Dyje, the country of the vine, which stimulates both the nostalgia of long slow songs and the hot temper of lively conscription songs.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Bobert
Date: 28 May 02 - 10:22 PM

Michaelr: Thanks fir the warnin' there, Michael, but since I don't know any better, we both know I'll just wade right into the middle of the scrum. But, hey... peace.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: GUEST,Peace Matriot
Date: 28 May 02 - 10:23 PM

And then this WWII folk song collector from the other side:

RINSHO KADEKARU 1920-1999- a biography Rinsho Kadekaru was born at Nakahara in Goeku Village in the centre of Okinawa on July 4th 1920. He began playing sanshin at the age of seven, and by the time he was 15 started to participate in his village's all night revelries known as mo-ashibi. These were outdoor parties that took place in open spaces on the outskirts of farming villages. Young people would sing, dance and drink, often until dawn, then do a full days hard labor in the fields, and party again the next night. The highest musical standards were maintained and Kadekaru soon gained a reputation for his sanshin playing and was often invited to perform at other village's jamborees.

Successive authorities attempted to ban the mo-ashibi, these unruly gatherings were thought to be immoral, but they flourished until just before the second world war. In the pre-war years there are stories of parents encouraging their children to take part in the mo-ashibi every night, in the hope they would fail the medical for military conscription due to exhaustion.

After the war, and the US occupation, the mo-ashibi was outlawed for good. Kadekaru stayed on the islands of Saipan and Tinian returning to Okinawa in 1949. His reputation had not been forgotten and he became one of the pivotal figures in the post-war Okinawa folk boom. He recorded nearly 250 songs for local record labels, more than any other musician.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: GUEST,Peace Matriot
Date: 28 May 02 - 10:37 PM

And then there are the musical anti-conscriptionists:

Franz Schubert Composer, b. at Vienna, 31 January, 1797; d. there 19 November, 1829. He studied under his father, and subsequently under Holzer and Salieri, and in 1807, was first boy soprano in the Lichtenthal choir. In October, 1808, he entered the Imperial Choristers School, and soon gave evidence of extraordinary musical genius as a composer, his first effort being a pianoforte duet, early in 1810. During 1811 and 1812 he produced many instrumental pieces, also a "Salve Regina" and a "Kyrie". He left the Choir School in November, 1812, and took up work as a schoolmaster in order to avoid conscription.

And of course, there's the 16th cent. Scots anti-conscriptionists, mentioned at Dick Gaughan's website article on Thomas Muir and the song Scots Wha Hae:

http://www.dickalba.demon.co.uk/songs/texts/muirnote.html

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Big Mick
Date: 29 May 02 - 12:04 AM

This is exactly the place for this type of thread, Noreen. Mudcat is about the music and the issues that spawn it. I would think that other appropriate songs to include would be the various and sundry protest songs of the 60's.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: paddymac
Date: 29 May 02 - 04:52 AM

What happens when there are no more volunteers? Does victory go to the wealthiest "side" - the one able to buy the best or most mercenaries?

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Teribus
Date: 29 May 02 - 05:59 AM

Paddymac - what you state is pretty much what happens - that is how the Pope ended up with his Swiss Guard, retained to this day.

There used to be a couple of sayings applicable to most military organisations:

"NEVER VOLUNTEER"
and
"One volunteer is worth ten pressed men"

Conscription in this day and age does not have a great deal to offer either the individual or the military forces the conscripts are foisted upon. Having said that, those who are vehemently against anything military should be thankful that volunteers still exist to fill the ranks, as those who are not prepared to defend, protect and bear the cost of that effort, may well find that their stance condemns them to live in a set of rules imposed by others. Part and parcel of this is to remember those who went before and paid the ultimate price for the freedoms so many take for granted today.

Cheers,

Bill.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: GUEST
Date: 29 May 02 - 07:42 AM

So, Mudcat looks pretty much like a pro-military music site. Lots of former military folk and war re-enactors, right?

Odd, for a folk music website. Not unheard of, but odd.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: artbrooks
Date: 29 May 02 - 08:56 AM

21th century warfare is highly technical, and requires skilled and well-trained soldiers. At the same time, I think that there is a great deal to be said for having a military that is largely comprised of people that are not professional soldiers and really don't want to be there in the first place.

I am personally in favor of universal national service, which you can call conscription if you wish, with military service being one of the voluntary options available for those serving.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Steve in Idaho
Date: 29 May 02 - 09:40 AM

GUEST - I don't know that we are "Pro-military" or not. But this forum does seem to respect those of us who went off to the craziness called war. And I've never asked anyone to respect the war - just respect for my choices. After all they were mine and I'm the one who lives with them - right?

And I can't speak for anyone but me - but I don't know of too many of the Vets here being pro-war. Read some of Big Mick's posts for confirmation of that. He is the most elequent of us - IMHO.

And this is the thread for it -

Steve

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: GUEST
Date: 29 May 02 - 10:06 AM

Actually, Norton1, I don't have to respect your choice to go to war. Now, you'd be closer to gaining my respect if you intended to create mutual respect between yourself and anti-war activists, rather than coerce respect for your choice to be a soldier.

For me, none of this is about pacifism. To be an anti-war activist, one need not be a pacifist. The most famous of all pacifists, Gandhi, was much too ardent an Indian nationalist for his pacifism to be truly effective. It was his blind spot, albeit a perfectly understandable one, considering his intent was to overthrow British rule through non-violent non-cooperation.

I believe we can learn a lot from Gandhi because he was a wise man, not a saint. Here is a quotation from him about the predicament you find yourself in:

"A warrior lives on his wars, whether offensive or defensive. And he suffers a collapse if he finds that his warring capacity is unwanted."

Your warring capacity is unwanted by me, so you will have to find another avenue to cultivate my respect for your choices.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Big Mick
Date: 29 May 02 - 10:12 AM

Once again the GUEST creates a false predicate and feels smug about it. For your post to be valid, you would have to show that those of us who are, or have been, warriors are failing. I can speak for myself only, and let me assure you that I am not failing in most of the endeavors that I have chosen.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: artbrooks
Date: 29 May 02 - 10:17 AM

This is an interesting discussion, begun by a named Guest. Let's not let ANON.GUEST hijack it.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Big Mick
Date: 29 May 02 - 10:25 AM

I agree, Art. A debate about the conscription issue is within the parameters of the thread, I would think. Not a debate on GUEST trollers.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: GUEST
Date: 29 May 02 - 10:39 AM

You know what Big Mick, threads about the military aren't about you, what you did or didn't do, and whether or not you feel like a failure. It just isn't.

Like I said, this seems to be a pretty gung-ho pro-military kind of place. Seems all some of you want vets here want to do is pick fights with anti-war activists voicing their opinions, in order to defend your personal choices to go soldiering.

I can agree to disagree, but I will not be coerced into respecting for the choice you made to become a soldier, or for what you did as a soldier. You and Norton1 seem to feel you have the right to bully people into respecting you because you were a soldier and know people who died in war. Very few human beings on this planet don't know someone who was killed in war, so that one doesn't automatically buy you respect. In fact, nothing in this life automatically buys a person respect. It gets earned. And believe me, neither of you have done a thing to earn mine.

Now, if you had come home from war and joined other anti-war veterans, I'd be more likely to listen to you. But your bullying tactics in this forum in the last 24 hours don't impress me in the least. You sound like a war apologist to me.

If you were, since the war, actively participating in the formation and maintenance of international peace organizations, development of non-violent methods to be used tactically in conjunction with non-cooperation and non-violent resistance tactics, or were involved in international diplomatic efforts or conflict resolution research--then I'd give your opinions some attention.

But as it is, from what I gather from some of you vet's and your supporter's posts here at Mudcat, all some of you seem to be doing is demanding respect you haven't earned because you think it is owed to you by everyone, just because you were a soldier. A lot of anti-war folks like me serve the international interests of humanity, not the petty nationalist interests of a single nation-state, especially the world's largest military superpower. So really, your demands for respect for "defending freedom" for the United States will continue to fall on deaf ears. Deal with it.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Steve in Idaho
Date: 29 May 02 - 11:11 AM

Laughing at comments - Too funny! Bullying? That is hilarious! Maybe you ought to go back and look at what I've done since the war. It's posted here. I am always assuming that since I may challenge, but generally respect, other's choices that my own would have the same attention paid. I forget who I am talking to. So whether or not you respect me is pretty much a non-issue. And I don't see your stance/participation on anti-war activities. Just some vague innuendos about having done something.

I don't know what a war apologist is so you lost me there. I'm not apologizing for anything. I do firmly believe that as long as people don't meet on common ground to end something so terrible as war then war will continue. Warriors know it first hand and activists have the incredible gift of naievity to fuel the fire of change. Between us we can do something.

I spent my time with the Viet Nam Veterans Against the War, I protected peace marchers (still a warrior so was that OK?), demanded an end to the craziness, drove people to Canada, and a lot of other things. It took both sides to effect change. So for me it is important to have some credibility about the experience of war. If you haven't participated it leaves a bit of a hollow ring to it.

So you certainly don't have to respect anything GUEST. But you are certainly able to do it from the safety of anonymity - most of the activists I worked with were more than willing to stand up and put their names and faces on the line with us.

What I do certainly respect is the inalienable right of dissention - and GUEST you certainly have earned my respect for your ability to encourage that. It's one of the things I believe I went off to war for. Whether it's true or not is a moot point - as I've already gone and returned.

So on the issue of conscription - I think it is something that is a reality here in the US. I also believe that I have a choice about whether or not I will be conscripted, or my children too for that matter, and am willing to do whatever is necessary to prevent any of my kids being sent off to do battle. But if they choose to go I'll respect their decision to do so. I've a daughter who is a Sgt. in the US Army, I'm very proud of her and her accomplishments, I've a daughter in the Peace Movement in Oregon, and I'm just as proud of her. I've a son who opted not to join the military and was willing to go to Australia to avoid service, and I'm proud of him also.

So I think you don't respect because you don't know - and are unwilling to research to learn. Maybe I'm wrong but you haven't shown me much except your willingness to exercise your right to dissent. And to point a finger at me and say I'm a war monger or a supporter of the militaristic approach is only a half truth. I support the military. I also support the rights of Americans, and anyone else, to question the validity of the use of the military. And that does not include demeaning names for officials making those decisions.

Well I've babbled enough here - I have a child sexual abuse case to go to work on - that's my contribution to helping the world today.

Steve

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Haruo
Date: 29 May 02 - 11:17 AM

Just a note to those doing searches for stuff on "Conscription" (songs or otherwise, here or elsewhere): Don't forget that (in the US anyway) we rarely called it "Conscription"; search for "Draft" (and be prepared to weed out the manuscripts, money orders, horses and beer), and the government outfit in charge was "Selective Service". Also a term worth searching for.

Liland

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: GUEST
Date: 29 May 02 - 11:19 AM

And getting back to the subject of thread, does anyone have any good information on songs of the Australian anti-conscription movement? The web has a lot of information on the movement itself which refers to songs, but I'm not finding much in the way of lyrics themselves.

Also, here are a few interesting sites I stumbled across when I went out looking for anti-conscription songs. Most don't have music content, but I thought might be of interest here in the thread.

One on WWI British COs in prison, here is an interesting set of postcards issued to gain support for COs:

http://gdl.cdlr.strath.ac.uk/prototype/redclyde/image017.htm

Many suffragettes were involved in British, Irish and Australian anti-conscription movements. Here are a few links related to them:

On Adela Pankhurst's British and Australian efforts:

http://www.wel.org.au/inkwel/ink964/964suffra.htm

Here is a fascinating page titled "Swarthmore College Peace Collection: Resources on Peace History" which among other fascinating details, has a link to a PBS documentary on WWII US pacifists and COs.

Swarthmore page is here:

http://www.swarthmore.edu/Library/peace/peacehis.htm#co

PBS' "The Good War" page is here:

http://www.pbs.org/itvs/thegoodwar/

And UC Berkeley has this interesting page from Emma Goldman's "Emma Goldman, Living My Life Volume Two CHAPTER XLV" which is all about her involvement with the No Conscription League:

http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/Goldman/Writings/MyLife/chapter45.html

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: GUEST
Date: 29 May 02 - 11:35 AM

Sorry I also intended to mention the ZNet Creative Lyrics song database, which has 1,328 song lyrics related to progressive, anarchist, radical left themes.

Additionally, it has it's own "add a song lyric" page, where anyone can add song lyrics. It's pretty cool, and it might be of some help to those who are still lobbying for changes to the way the DT database is being maintained. It isn't a solution to adding mistakes to the database, of course. But it does suggest that a page can be devoted solely to adding lyrics to the database, and nothing else. If all additions were edited from a page like that, I would think making accurate, edited additions to the DT database could be done quite efficiently by volunteer Joe Clone types. But I digress.

Anyway, here is the very cool site:

http://zena.secureforum.com/interactive/creative/lyrics_frameset.cfm

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 29 May 02 - 12:00 PM

In the early years of the American Civil War, and particularly after First Manassas, the cause of the Union was not an overwhelmingly popular one. In fact, had Lincoln not instituted the draft, it is quite possible that the North would have lost the war, settling for an armistice in the face of numerous early defeats. I would state that, because conscription effectively ended and preserved the Union, that the Great Emancipator was justified in his use of it, and that in this case, it was a good thing.

Disagree?

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: GUEST
Date: 29 May 02 - 12:07 PM

More song links:

The Radical Song Book by Peter Hicks:

http://www.trump.net.au/~glazfolk/archcat.htm

The Catbox Times' "People's Songs" Songs & Songbooks page:

http://aztec.lib.utk.edu/~pelton/music.htm

George Shrub/Dave Lippman song pages:

www.davelippman.com

"Non-violence requires more than the courage of the soldier of war."

-Gandhi

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: GUEST
Date: 29 May 02 - 12:09 PM

The no/anti-conscription movement in the wake of WWI was worldwide. It really was the first international anti-conscription movement, and is therefore the most interesting to me personally, hence my interest in the Australian anti-conscription songs. My guess is they are songs that likely migrated throughout the anti-conscription, anti-war movement of the era.

Anyone have any knowledge of songs of that era's anti-conscription movement, whether Aussie or not?

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: DougR
Date: 29 May 02 - 12:11 PM

It came in pretty handy at the beginning of WW2, also, LEJ.

DougR

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 29 May 02 - 12:28 PM

Too much logic, Doug?

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Mrrzy
Date: 29 May 02 - 12:45 PM

(Sorry, I misread this as the Anti-Constipation Movement. Sounded redundant to me!)

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: DougR
Date: 29 May 02 - 01:43 PM

That's funny Mrrzy! :>)

I wonder, Guest who posted this thread, why you felt compelled to start a thread as a "counter-balance" to the Memorial Day thread? I suppose it has never occured to you that one of the reasons you can post such a thread as this one is because many men and women from many countries sacrificed their lives in wars in order that we might be free to say and write whatever we bloody well please. Or perhaps you feel a Nazi regime would have been more lenient on it's citizens than are the governments of free people.

I rarely reply to guests who post threads primarily to incite others but I couldn't resist this one.

DougR

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: GUEST
Date: 29 May 02 - 06:35 PM

Actually, the historic anti-conscription movement is a fascinating subject. Too bad no one here can get beyond the fact that they are angry because someone had the audacity to speak their mind about Memorial Day and honoring veterans. It seems to be more important to members to shout down and silence the people they disagree with, rather than hold a conversation.

BTW, CarolC, it was the Almanac Singers who first became infamous for singing "C is for Conscription" and Pete kept it in his repetoire over the years--it has a pretty interesting story behind it. But it looks like Mudcat isn't a very welcoming place for discussing it.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 29 May 02 - 06:51 PM

Well, golly. I thought I made a legitimate post regarding Union Conscription during the Civil War as an example of a reasonable application of the draft. I'm neither angry, nor trying to shout someone down.

Sometimes, when you have an emotional investment in the Rightness of your Cause, any disagreement, logical or not, feels like you're being repressed, doesn't it? And if you state that you're being "shouted down" by pro-war neanderthals, it gives your cause even greater legitimacy and pathos.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Steve in Idaho
Date: 29 May 02 - 07:01 PM

Here's some legitimacy GUEST - go fuck yourself - you're a whining, cry baby, little asshole, who don't know shit. Probably got your little wimpy ass kicked enough that you are afraid to come and play with real people.

If the Nazi's were still recruiting you'd join to feel better about yourself. You had any sense at all you'd be Thanking some of the folks for helping keep your sorry ass in a position to speak openly. But you can't even do that can you? Climb off the cross ya jerk - someone else needs the space.

Steve

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: CarolC
Date: 29 May 02 - 07:24 PM

This is a pretty tricky subject, isn't it? On the one hand, it could be argued that conscription, and/or the draft, is necessary to protect us in situations like WWII. On the other hand, it could be argued that when governments have conscription and/or the draft available as an option, it becomes much easier for them to wage war for reasons that may not be very legitimate.

I don't have any answers except that I think it's necessary for there to always be a conscientious objector option available so that if individuals believe that a war is being waged for reasons that are not legitimate, they have a way to follow their conscience, just as those whose consciences tell them to fight have that option available to them.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: DougR
Date: 29 May 02 - 07:37 PM

I have no objection to one using their religious belief as a reason for not serving in one of the armed services. I do not believe one should be excused from the draft solely on the basis that they don't want to go to war. No sane person wants to go to war. Those who are deferred for religious reasons can serve in non-combatant positions, or serve their country in times of war in other capacities such as medics, etc.

Steve: Do you have any strong feelins on the subject? I don't think you should hold back :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: CarolC
Date: 29 May 02 - 07:54 PM

The main thing I would take issue with about your wording, DougR, would be the use of the word "religion". I think people should be able to use the conscientious objector option for reasons of conscience even if what their conscience tells them is not a part of any particular established religious doctrine.

In other words, if someone believes that their country is requiring them to kill people for reasons such as protecting oil interests for instance, rather than to preserve liberties, I think the individual should have a right to follow their conscience and not kill people for oil. (This is just one example. I'm sure there are many different scenarios where this would apply.)

I have no problem with the concept of "alternative service" in such a case.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Big Mick
Date: 29 May 02 - 08:10 PM

Yeah, Carol, I think that is an important distinction. For too long we have linked morality and conscience to established religions. But as you so correctly point out, there are many that are just opposed on the basis of their own values whether religiously based or not.

And GUEST, there you go again. You build that phony crap. I didn't respond because you just aren't correct and you are just baiting. Furthermore I don't want to see this thread hijacked by a no name troublemaker. Got a new guitar yet, BTW?

Back to the subject at hand. It is true that I believe that in this imperfect world things like the draft/conscription are necessary tools to use to protect the freedoms that are often taken for granted. But the key to not allowing the powers that be abuse them is a well informed citizenry with diverse views and the ability to express them. The war in Vietnam was ended because people had the right to protest, question authority and influence opinion. To be sure there were other factors but the protesters were a huge factor. Something we learn in political activism is that it is always a fight for the middle. The strident folks on the fringe are the ones that ultimately, through their questions and consciousness raising tactics, cause the middle to examine their positions. The anti-conscription movement is vital to this argument in order that the abuses don't occur, or if they do attention will be called to them.

Mick

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 29 May 02 - 09:27 PM

Conscription has been a fact of life in most civilizations that have maintained the tradition of a "citizen army". In ancient Athens and Sparta, in the early Roman Republic, and in other countries who prided themselves on their status as Republics or Democracies, mandatory military service was a way of insuring that citizens were responsible for the preservation of their own freedoms. The alternative to this philosophy was exemplified by the paid professional armies of powers like Persia, and by the mercenary armies of the Roman Empire. These professional armies posed two threats to the State : They tended to be independent entities with loyalties to their own generals and as such were constant threats to the standing government, and they created a disconnection between on the one hand rights and freedoms, and on the other the duty to protect them. For these reasons, professional armies came to be associated with totalitarian states.

The notion of a citizen army was a strong tenet of the young United States of America, but the scale of ensuing conflicts meant that an army of volunteers was sufficient. At the onset of the Civil War, numbers among the standing Union army were insufficient to suppress the Confederate rebellion, but the cause was unpopular enough to prevent the needed influx of recruits. For Lincoln, the answer was a draft. The abuses were many, including the use of paid substitutes by the wealthy, but the end result was successful.

Conscription or required military service is not necessarily the hallmark of representational government, though. The Prussian Army, one of the most effective of the 18th and 19th Centuries was essentially a conscript force serving under a brutal, repressive government.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Bobert
Date: 29 May 02 - 10:03 PM

First of all, yo GUEST and Steve. Chill! Give peace a chance and all that. Think, "win-win".

Now as for the ol' Bobert's favorite song and dance routine. Military thinking is: "Logistics, logistics, logistics." Conscription is just one facit of the overall logistical plan and in the thinking of those who see military solutions as a means of solving problems, is no more than that. (Just as long as it ain't their sons or daighters...)

Yeah, I think that peace is a second step with anti-war being the first. We gotta quit blowing up other folks and our kids over differences of opinions. We gotta dtep to the plate, as partisally enlightened Earthlings and say, "Hey, this war stuff don't solve too many problems. Might of fact, the danged stuff just creates more of itself..."

Well, how is this done? Easy. Not really. But doable. The US is is the world's "WARRIER NATION" and not too many folks in the US, irregardless of their beliefs, have any control over the US's appitite for blowing up other folks and their stuff. So, we gotta get alternatives on the table. And these alternatives have to have some credibility. A good start would be for the Green Party to get 5% in the 2004 presidential election so that in 2008 a Greenie would be in the election debates. That would give an alternative voice some crdibility and then maybe we, as USA'ers would take time to think, "Hey, maybe this war crap ain't all it's cracked up to be...?"

After that happens then maybe the USA'ers might just get to the next step and say to themselves, "Hey, what's the next step?"

Think PEACE

Vote Green

Bobert

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: catspaw49
Date: 29 May 02 - 10:23 PM

Two quick notes here.....First, there was a handbook printed in the 60's that covered the religion and ethics issue quite well and I recall it being titled, "Ethics As Religion." It was a difficult road to get CO status using ethics but it could be done.   On the other hand, for many serious protesters, myself included, CO was not the point whereas removing public support toward the war was. Worth mentioning is that anti-war people were a mixed bag and included the requisite percentage of complete flakes and assholes just as you'd find in other groups. These were the jerks who couldn't resist yelling fuck the war/Johnson/Nixon/the pentagon at every chance they got and being the ones responsible for the spitting incidents and other sad acts. There was certainly also a group consisting of those who had been there, the anti-war vets, and those who were actively standing against the government through civil disobedience. It did not seem them and does not seem now that these two groups made "strange bedfellows," but rather were a natural alliance.

In any case, the issue of ethics was a hot topic then and I was surprised not to be able to find that book or a reference to it on the net. And just for the record, I'm all for some kind of mandated service........Let them choose the options. Military of course, but then bring back the WPA and the CCC (still around actually) as well as VISTA and other newer programs....I can think of a few service areas! Frankly, I'd like to see a situation where no one could enter college til their service was up. I think you'd find a lot more serious minded students at our universities.

AND MICK......LMAO here! "And GUEST, there you go again. You build that phony crap. I didn't respond because you just aren't correct and you are just baiting. Furthermore I don't want to see this thread hijacked by a no name troublemaker. Got a new guitar yet, BTW?".....Not so oddly, I was having that conversation with another 'Catter concerning our Guest! (:<))

Spaw

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 29 May 02 - 10:25 PM

And of course, we all know what a favor Nader and the Green Party did for the country in the last election. That went well, didn't it?

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: DougR
Date: 30 May 02 - 01:52 AM

Yep, LEJ, I think it went very well! :>)

Carol C: "reasons of conscience." The problem with you reasoning, in my opinon, is that leaves a pretty wide door to go through. One could refuse conscription for almost any reason one could come up with. "I ain't going because I got to pick cotton." "I ain't going because I don't look good in olive drab." "I aint going because I hear the food is terrible." Religion, as a reason, has been a long established reason for refusing to serve in the military (ask Larry)and I think it makes sense to stick with that.

DougR

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: katlaughing
Date: 30 May 02 - 02:18 AM

So, Doug, are you saying that since I don't belong to an established "religion" I shouldn't be allowed to refuse to go based on my own sense of spirituality and sanctity of life, or even on my own deeply held convictions about same? Your argument about picking cotton, etc. is a bit facetious. I am sure there would be a lot more screening before any reason would just be accepted.

PLus, so much klling has been done in the name of the "established religions" it seems kind of ironic that some should be able to use that as a reason, while others who oppose both war and shun "religions" should be excluded.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: CarolC
Date: 30 May 02 - 02:59 AM

How about "I ain't fighting in this war because it is against my spiritual and ethical beliefs. But I will serve in your hospitals because it isn't against my spiritual beliefs to do that."

So I have to disagree with you DougR, and pretty vehemently, too. There are many, many people in the world now who have very strong spiritual and/or ethical beliefs, but who do not belong to any particular organized religion. I'm one of them. It would be no less wrong to expect me to violate my spiritual and ethical beliefs by making me kill people (especially if it's for any reasons other than the protection of liberties), than to expect me to violate religious beliefs for those reasons.

And I will take any challenge to my right to hold and honor my spiritual and ethical beliefs in the same way that a member of any organized religion would take a challenge to their right to practice and observe their religion. And by that I mean that I would not take such a challenge lying down.

The only difference between spiritual beliefs and religious beliefs in this context is the presence (or the lack of it) of a larger body that is built upon the shared spiritual beliefs of the group, and in some cases, the reliance upon a book or document of some kind as "proof" of the validity of the spiritual beliefs of the group.

Conversely, it could be argued that governments have a pretty wide door to go through when determining what constitutes a valid reason to send the citizens of their countries to fight in wars. I think it could be argued that the Vietnam War was entered into by the US on some pretty shaky moral and ethical grounds. The Gulf War also.

As much as I hate to say this, sometimes it's our own government that is the biggest threat to our liberties and to our democracy. And at those times, it's the ones who refuse to cooperate who are fighting in the front lines in the battle to preserve and protect the very qualities (freedom, liberty, democracy, etc.) that we say make our country great. At those times, it's the resisters who are defending our country and everything it supposedly stands for.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: GUEST
Date: 30 May 02 - 03:29 AM

Chuck all the little fuckers that like to hang out in gangs and shoot people into a war zone. When they get tired of violence, have them clear land mines for a living. Sometimes ya just gotta fight, there's no other solution. Human condition that wont go away.

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: PeteBoom
Date: 30 May 02 - 07:50 AM

Tried to post this last night - kept throwing errors - so, going to try again...

Just to be troublesome - I find it interesting that there was nary a word of protest over the threads on ANZAC Day or the various discussion on Eric Bogle's "No Man's Land."

Could it be that folks are upset specifically because Memorial Day was originally set aside to honor the War Dead of the US? That General Logan's (by the way, Logan Avenue in Lansing, Michigan was named for him) General Order whatever to the Grand Army of the Republic to set aside May 30, 1868 to place flowers on the graves of the dead marked the day indelibly.

I wonder if there will be a similar protest over Armistice Day/Veterans Day/Remembrance Day in November.

Conscription is rarely viewed as a good thing, particularly by those conscripted nation-states. Right? Conscription practiced by war-lords is kidnapping.

Invariably, in a free society that practices conscription, there will be change. The blood-bath that was the Gallipoli campaign resulted in the decline of the Colonial mind-set in Australia and New Zealand and a rise in the self-identity - national identity if you will - of those far-flung branches of the empire.

The conscription of WWI led to social changes in the UK following that war - which set up an entire series of changes that were accelerated by MORE conscription in WWII, which set much of Britain's class-structure on its ear. (Think its bad now? Try living in your great-grandparent's time... ick.)

Similar things happened in the States following both World Wars. Draftees returned home having seen amazing things. Some were terrible, others were amazing. They had walked through buildings hundreds of years old when the oldest building in their home town was maybe 75 years old. They were changed not only by combat, but what they sensed and felt. Many folks in the States on this board grew-up living in the society that resulted from those changes.

Returning Viet Nam Vets, who were conscripted, marched alongside anti-war protesters and eventually helped bring an end to that war. This also brought an end to the all-powerful view many had of the government. People began asking questions for the first time in generations. Some were hard to take and resulted in all sorts of amazing things.

Combined with the Civil Rights Movement, the anti-war/anti-draft movement shook the center of the nation to its very soul.

Do I criticize those who answered the "birthday present" of the Viet Nam era? No. Nor do I criticize those of the 1940's and 50's. Most (not all) went because it was a dirty job and felt that if they did it, maybe their kids would not need to. That is something that is not in vogue these days among the elite intellectuals - Duty, Honor. They are powerful words. Don't despise them because people have mis-used them to their own ends. They symbolize high ideals - among the highest there are among humanity.

My oldest grandson in 8 years old. I will do everything I can to see that he does not need to "study war" and that he might study mathematics and geography - so that his children might study philosophy.

Set rant bit off <_>

Pete

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: InOBU
Date: 30 May 02 - 08:30 AM

Hiya guys...
I am a little out of it today, had a wee biopsy on my right little finger, big crater, annoying when typing... but to the point... Religion and faith are two different things, as is faith and spirituality. One of my best friends who I used to teach (HA!) Quaker first day school, gave the following quote to a Quaker adult ed. course for new Quakers... "Universalist? Well... I'd like to call myself a Universalist, but in reallity, ... I don't believe anything!" he went on to say "but something in meeting makes it all clear to me, I have to live with reguard for others..."
So, what do we make of that in reguards to religious objection. There are things we can't describe, but we know we must not kill.
As to human nature, in the history of humankind, when one includes prehistory, war is a very recent development, tied to planting. In my openion, when India, Pakistan, Isreal, a mess like the former USSR, (and yes, even the us that is the US) has the ability to end life on earth, it is time to evolve - where is Tom Lehr when ya need him.
Peace (ouch) friends,
Larry

Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement
From: Hrothgar
Date: 30 May 02 - 08:38 AM

"...a free society that practises conscription..."

Um, no. Oxymoron warning!