Selective Service Bullies: ‘We’re not here to serve you, you’re here to serve us.’

When the threat of force is your first argument that somebody should do something, you have no other. And there is no reason for Selective Service to exist, as exemplified by their tweet:

Before discussing the Tweet, I should acknowledge that I don’t believe Selective Service should exist. Conscription is kidnapping. It’s involuntary servitude. Although we don’t have the draft today, Selective Service leaves open the possibility. It’s repugnant to the concept of a free society. It’s repugnant to the right to life.

And it’s not necessary to defend the country, as the territory of the U.S. hasn’t been threatened since the War of 1812. We all know if the draft was re-instituted, it’ll be for a failing foreign occupation, not because foreign troops are invading us.

I’d go beyond abolishing the draft. To the extent the US should have military forces at all, I’d raise the enlistment age to 21. I don’t like the idea of a young man going straight from the authoritarian school systems to the authoritarian military. There should be some life experience in between. A more fully-formed adult is in a better position to judge whether military life is suitable for him. There may be even greater reluctance to carry out illegal orders.

(Of course, to carry out illegal orders is why the politicians and military brass want unquestioning teenagers. I don’t have the same values as them.)

That said, what particularly offends me about this Tweet is its threatening, bullying nature.

If Selective Service tweeted, “When your country calls, it’s an honor to serve. When you turn 18, remember to register,” I’d have no complaint. (On the other hand, the tweet probably wouldn’t have been brought to my attention.) Instead, its tone is “Do this because we said so, and we’ll take you away in handcuffs if you don’t.”

With this Tweet, the Selective Service is saying, “The government isn’t here to serve you, you’re here to serve us.” And the government resents that some people think laws and government suck? It just provided evidence that it does.

I’m not saying young men shouldn’t register for Selective Service. I did; when something is compulsory, it’s probably in your best interest to do it. Just remember that when you do, it’s the start of an adult life with never-ending government edicts.

You’re here to serve them.

James Leroy Wilson writes from Nebraska. He is the author ofRon Paul is a Nut (And So am I). Follow him on Facebook and Twitter. Support through Paypal is greatly appreciated.

13 thoughts on “Selective Service Bullies: ‘We’re not here to serve you, you’re here to serve us.’”

      1. Yea, it is a verb that lasts the rest of your life. The VA helps, some.

        (ETS- End Term of Service)

        You ETS to become a PFC- Proud Fucking Civilian
        or SPC -Stoned Proud Civilian

        I was already an SPC(Specialist) so when I ETS’ed I was still an SPC.. Though since I am old school I was actually an Spc-4 when I left and got promoted to PFC/SPC.

  1. should all the people in central America and world wide that intend to come to the USA both legally and illegally be counted on our censes ? This could give us a more accurate censes that is only done once ever 10 years .

    1. Thanks for the gratuitous right-wing-talk-radio non-sequitur. Those damned immigrants! I mean, Trump says they’re an emergency, and I believe everything a Republican president says. I’m still looking for those WMDs in Iraq!

      1. “I believe everything a Republican president says.”

        I think it might be wise to question everything a president of any political party says.

  2. Agreed. It gives you a peek into the mentality of those running the gov’t when they choose this as the Official voice in which to speak their piece.

  3. I volunteered at 17- no SS needed. On the other hand, after 12 years of seeing what we were being used for, it was time to go.

  4. I recall something about a massive bombing in Hawaii, an invasion of: Wake island, Guam, Alaska, etc. So the US was invaded since 1812. Totally agree with the point, though, Do we need nearly a score of aircraft carriers and a half million standing army to protect us? No. We need those, as you say, for foreign entanglements.

      1. True, but no one said they were, and I’m wondering why you think that’s relevant. The story used the word “Territory”, I suppose countries at any era, or any size have an interest in protecting, well, lets just say ‘their interests,’ and are willing to go to war to do so. Not trying to troll, I think the story has an excellent point- It’s just things like this tend to detract from such points.

        1. Agreed. We’re just picking at nits here.

          Let me put it this way: If Cuba invaded Puerto Rico, I doubt most Americans would think of that as “invading the United States,” even though Puerto Rico is a US territory, its people are US citizens, and it’s likely, at some point, to become a state.

          Technically, invading Puerto Rico WOULD be “invading the United States.” As would forcibly entering and taking control of a US embassy anywhere on Earth.

Comments are closed.