The 50th anniversary of World War II events are cropping up lately, begging for some reflection upon that time of conflict. Reflection couldn't come at a more appropriate time, as the nature of government is being reconsidered.
The government, to fight the world war, instituted a draft. It called upon its young men to fight, bleed and die for the political institutions of the United States. It had instituted a draft before and it has employed such a device since. At any given time, the government can summon young men to what is considered the individual's duty to the government.
But what is the government's duty to its people?
Ironically, upon the anniversary of the massive sacrifice for the government by individual citizens, conservatives argue there are only the strictest of obligations of the government to the people.
Aside from providing the common defense (which is actually provided with the sweat and blood of the citizens, not the government), the government owes little, if anything to its people.
The government, the conservatives contend, doesn't owe its citizens a standard of living, health care or even access to higher education. They argue there are no such things as "entitlements."
Why?
If a government can oblige an individual citizen to lay down his life, why can he not ask for something in return? Often times, Washington politicians are accused of having no real comprehension of the value of money. The real problem, however, is that politicians don't realize the value of the human lives to which they lay claim.
My life is worth a great deal, and I'm not going to just give it away. If some entity such as a government asks for my life, I will ask a just and fair price for it. Anything else would be authoritarian robbery and make John Locke spin in his grave.
In return for the government's ability to draft, I ask for access to an education and a minimum standard of living that includes a social safety net of welfare benefits. I also ask that the country - for which I am placing my life on the line - be one worth dying for. This means that a degree of economic and legal justice be done for all its citizens. (Something returning black WW II veterans argued when they undertook reforming a racist America.)
I have standing for such things because the government has a long-term claim to my very existence. I am entitled to fair compensation as long as the government asks for access to the most valuable of all my possessions: my life.
History has shown that in wartime, those most likely to serve in combat are the poor. In the Civil War, the practice of rich men paying poor men to serve in their place was rampant. Since then, a variety of devices from student deferments to Dan Quayle-esque national guard duties have allowed the poor to fight in lieu of the rich.
If any group in society has grounds to demand something from its government, it is the poor. Slapping them down and stripping them of their pitifully small number of benefits is outrageous. Particularly when the savings from these slashed benefits are headed toward corporate tax breaks. When did a corporation ever place its life on the line for defense of the nation?
If the government were to forfeit its power to draft at any moment, rightful demands upon the government would correspondingly decrease. However, as that is very unlikely to happen when the Republican leadership often speaks of military options as the first response to incidents like Iraq's seizure of two American hostages, there is no reason for the people not to require something in return. (Additionally, talk of reinstating the draft has gained a great deal of currency as the lawmakers grapple with the problem of juvenile delinquency.)
After WW II, the government recognized its debt to its people and constructed a welfare state to meet its obligations. As parts of the welfare state have fallen into disrepair, the answer is not to dismantle the entire apparatus but to correct those programs that need refinement. To abolish the welfare state is to have the state fail to meet its social obligations.
Editorial Cartoonist Alex DeGrand is a political science graduate student.
©Copyright 1995, Kernel Press Inc. All rights reserved.