It wasn’t slavery as they were paid and could be expected to be discharged at the cessation of hostilities.<p>Conscription is as old as society itself.
> It wasn’t slavery as they were paid<p>Being paid <i>some</i> amount of money doesn't magically make it not slavery. Obvious counterpoint: what if a plantation owner "paid" each slave a single modern-day penny a year, would that make it okay?<p>> and could be expected to be discharged at the cessation of hostilities<p>Being let go when you're no longer needed doesn't stop it being slavery either. Would you no longer be a slave if the plantation owner released you after the harvest season? You'd just be re-captured for the next harvest, of course - either by the same owner or a different one.<p>> Conscription is as old as society itself.<p>So is slavery. That doesn't make it okay.<p>Definitions of forced labour, like the ILO Forced Labour Convention of 1930 for example, have to explicitly include "by the way, it's <i>totally</i> okay if it is done as part of mandatory military service" clauses for a <i>reason</i>.<p>There are <i>obviously</i> differences between traditional slavery and conscription, but conscription is still way closer to forced labour than it is to consensual service. Just look at what happens when you try to leave, for one!
I mean, to be fair, so is slavery.<p>I think it's important to acknowledge that conscription <i>is</i> a violation of human rights, and absolutely a violation of human autonomy and dignity.<p>The reason it exists is because historically, the primary source of military power has been the number of armed humans you can put on the battlefield. That's much less true now, but even in WWII the technology wasn't yet up to that point.<p>And while the US did not end up being materially at risk in WWII (aside from some very small exceptions like Pearl Harbor), that was not a guarantee going in. The Nazis were hellbent on wiping out all opposition to them, and the fear that, if Europe was lost, they would cross the ocean to attack us was not at all crazy. Furthermore, our allies absolutely were under existential threat—and in such a situation, it's frankly irresponsible of a nation not to use conscription if that's actually likely to make a difference.<p>Either saying "conscription is slavery, therefore it is never justifiable" <i>or</i> "conscription is nothing like slavery, soldiers get treated well" ignores enough of the truth that they're misleading at best. Sometimes you really <i>do</i> have to deal with nuance.
Yeah, they were paid!! Plastic ocarinas!
You're both right. We don't want to water down the term "slavery" by using it for draftees, but it is a form of temporary slavery. Slave's have always been "paid" in the form of room and board (however meager), but it's still slavery.