Introduction
In his article “Bring Back the Draft,” Ackerman argues that a draft would bring a more diverse and representative military force, ensuring that those who make decisions about war are more accountable to the wider public (Ackerman para7). Ackerman asserts that a draft is essential for the US to establish and uphold an enduring bond with its military and instill a sense of unity through shared service among citizens (Ackerman para 7). According to him, an all-volunteer military can lead to a disconnection from the greater society and result in war decisions being made without proper public consideration, and he believes implementing the draft could cultivate responsibility among citizens.
Ackerman’s Argument for Bringing Back the Draft
Bringing back the draft is essential for the US to maintain a connection with its military and for citizens to have a shared service experience. Ackerman believes the all-volunteer military is becoming increasingly isolated from the general population, causing a dangerous divide in American society (Ackerman para 7). He has argued that the all-volunteer military has generated a gap between those who volunteer and civilian society, further alienating them from their peers. This divide, he claims, is the result of the fact that only a small fraction of Americans bear the burden of defending the country, while the rest go about their daily lives without any tangible connection to the military (Ackerman para 7). By properly informing their citizens about the implications of war, countries may inadvertently expose them to unnecessary tragedy and upheaval.
Ackerman asserts that a revival of the draft would not automatically lead to sending conscripts into battle; instead, some could be trained for support roles in secure areas or help with humanitarian efforts abroad. He believes this offers youths exposure without endangering their safety; moreover, such action reinforces national security and fulfills our duty to safeguard American lives by establishing an enduring connection between citizens and military personnel.
Ackerman also claims that the all-volunteer military is creating a professional warrior class that is separate from the rest of society. He argues that this class has become increasingly detached from ordinary Americans’ values and concerns ever since the draft was abolished in 1973 (Ackerman para 9). Ackerman aims to foster a closer bond between America’s armed forces and its people through his initiative to reintroduce conscription. If successful, this could lead to greater military diversity- reflecting our nation’s complexity today.
The success of the All-Volunteer Military
The author passionately advocates for the draft, but it is also essential to explore how an all-volunteer military has successfully maintained and secured the nation’s safety. Since the introduction of the all-volunteer military, the United States has had the most powerful military in the world (Ackerman para 9). The remarkable success of the military can be attributed to its motivated and expertly-honed voluntarist forces devoted to honoring their nation through service. Furthermore, the all-volunteer military has successfully maintained high professionalism and discipline. Volunteers have chosen to serve and are more likely to take their duties seriously. In contrast, conscripts forced to serve may not be as motivated or dedicated to their duties.
The all-volunteer model also presents numerous economic benefits for society as a whole: without having to resort to mandatory participation, recruiting costs are substantially lower, which results in substantial savings for taxpayers and creates greater opportunities for military personnel thanks to improved salaries and benefits packages that incentivize enrollment without resorting compulsion. Ackerman’s opinion on the importance of drafts remains a valid point in considering how to sustain an effective military presence (Ackerman para 7). However, it is undeniable that there are many perks associated with an all-volunteer system that must not be disregarded when contemplating ways for keeping our fighting forces operational into the future.
Advantages and Disadvantages of the All-Voluntary Military
The United States made an unprecedented move to completely abolish a military conscription system and instead transition solely to relying on volunteers for defense forces. Compared to a military based on conscription, a force entirely comprised of volunteers will have a lower overall cost. In contrast to operating a draft system, which needs substantial resources, infrastructure, and bureaucracy, the cost of recruiting volunteers is far lower.
Another advantage of having a military entirely made up of volunteers is that it is more likely to recruit people with a genuine interest in serving their nation. Those who enroll in the military do it of their own free will, which indicates that they typically have a strong desire, enthusiasm, and commitment to serve their nation. These individuals offer a powerful sense of purpose and unwavering devotion to their profession, which can potentially increase the efficiency of the military.
However, the all-voluntary military has its disadvantages. One significant disadvantage is that it is not representative of the broader population. The all-volunteer military over-represents those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and rural areas while under-representing minorities and women. This lack of diversity can hinder the military’s effectiveness in understanding and addressing issues that impact the broader population.
Advantages and Disadvantages of the Military Draft
The military draft has long been controversial because citizens must serve for a predetermined time. Despite being subjected to much debate, one undeniable benefit is the potential for increased diversity. By requiring citizens from all socioeconomic backgrounds, races, and genders to serve, the military can create a force that is much more representative of society. This means that individuals from different age groups, educational backgrounds, and career paths can lend their unique perspectives and skillsets to the military’s operations. This provides the military with various abilities and insights and can also help promote cultural understanding within its ranks. Furthermore, having members of different races and gender identities can help to foster an environment of acceptance and tolerance that allows everyone to feel included and respected.
Another advantage of the military draft is that it can increase civic engagement and patriotism. When a country requires its citizens to serve, it reinforces the notion that everyone has a duty to their country. This sense of duty can instill a stronger sense of patriotism and civic responsibility in citizens. Moreover, military conscription has been linked to increased feelings of connectedness with national symbols such as flags and anthems. In studies conducted on college students, participants exhibited higher levels of attachment to national symbols after they had been exposed to information about compulsory military service. This fosters a unified sense of pride across all members of a community or country as they come together towards fulfilling their civic duties.
The military draft also has its disadvantages as much as it has various advantages. One significant disadvantage is that it can be expensive to implement and maintain. Running a draft system requires significant resources, including infrastructure, bureaucracy, and personnel. These resources can be costly and detract from other government initiatives. Additionally, the military draft can be unpopular with the general population. Many people do not want to be forced to serve in the military, which can lead to resistance, evasion, or resentment. Moreover, the military draft can be controversial and lead to protests, creating social unrest and further dividing society.
Experts’ Views on The Military Draft
In his article “Bring Back the Draft,” Ackerman argues that the all-volunteer military is disconnected from the society it serves (Ackerman para 9). He notes that less than one percent of the population serves in the military and that most come from lower-income families (Ackerman para 7). According to Ackerman, this results in a lack of understanding and appreciation for the sacrifices made by those who serve (Ackerman para 10). Ackerman also believes that a draft would improve the quality of the military by increasing the number of qualified candidates (Ackerman para 16). He notes that the military has trouble recruiting enough people with the necessary skills, such as cyber expertise and language proficiency. A draft would bring in a broader talent pool and reduce the strain on the current all-volunteer force.
Ackerman is not alone in advocating for bringing back the draft. The article “Bringing Back the Draft: 5 Possibilities for Future Military Conscription” offers several arguments for and against the draft. One similarity to Ackerman’s is that the article acknowledges the point that the all-volunteer force has created a disproportionate burden of military service on certain segments of society (Seck para 4). However, it also notes that the draft could be seen as a violation of individual freedom and autonomy. The article also points out that the all-volunteer force has led to a highly professional and effective military and that the draft could potentially disrupt this by introducing less motivated or skilled individuals into the military (Seck para 36). The article also suggests that there are potential benefits to reinstating the draft such as increasing diversity within the military. The article advocates for a model where those who are eligible would register with the Selective Service System and then potentially fulfill their obligations by serving in non-combat roles or providing social services instead of being sent overseas.
On the other hand, the article “Congress Considers Future of the Military Draft while Supreme Court Holds Off,” focuses more on the legal and political aspects of the draft debate unlike Arkerman’s. It notes that the Supreme Court has declined to hear a case challenging the constitutionality of the male-only draft registration system but that Congress is still considering various proposals for reforming or abolishing the draft (Margulies and Rutenberg para 1). The article acknowledges Ackerman’s argument that the all-volunteer force has created a warrior caste in American society, but it also notes that there are other ways to address this issue besides reinstating the draft (Ackerman para 9; Margulies and Rutenberg para 2). For example, the military could work to recruit more widely and create programs to help disadvantaged communities access military careers.
Conclusion
Ackerman ideally believes that Enforcing the draft is necessary for America to keep its citizens unified and maintain strong ties with its military. By requiring service from all, individuals can partake in meaningful activities that promote shared values of patriotism and sacrifice among our nation’s population. He asserts that this form of national service would have various benefits, such as instilling a sense of patriotism and pride among our nation’s youth, fostering greater understanding between different classes of people through a common goal, and promoting civic engagement and responsibility. Generally, all three articles agree that the all-volunteer force has created a disproportionate burden of military service on certain segments of society, particularly low-income and minority communities. Ackerman and Seck believe that reinstating the draft would be one way to address this issue, while Margulies and Rutenberg suggest that other recruitment and outreach strategies could also be effective.
Works Cited
Ackerman, Elliot. “Bring back the draft.” Time, 2019. Web.
Margulies, Max. and Rutenberg, Amy. “Congress considers future of the military draft, while Supreme Court holds off.” The Conversation, 2021. Web.
Seck, Hope H. “Bringing back the draft: 5 possibilities for the future of military conscription“. Military.com, 2020. Web.