It seems that the idea of "national service" came up in the minds of many conservative. Even
the great anti-militarist Andrew Bacevich showed some signs of approval for the idea.
Scott Lazarowitz, one of my favorite libertarian bloggers, gives
his comments on this issue:
The truth is, many amongst the “national service” crowd really believe in the idea of sacrifice. They say you must sacrifice some of your time and labor to “serve” others. But, as Ayn Rand noted, they really mean sacrifice for the sake of sacrifice.
But really, to the nationalists we owe a sacrifice to the State. We have something, such as freedom and opportunity, for which we must show gratitude by being compelled to “serve,” something that the State hasgiven to us or provides for us, and that we owe something in return. That is the underlying premise of the “national service” crowd.
Why there would be a resurgence in calls for “national service” at this time, after 12 long years of Afghanistan and Iraq, and now the tyrannical ObamaCare, is beyond me. You want us to serve THAT? That monstrous Leviathan?
And why do these "national service" people seem to be hostile to libertarians. Scott Lazarowitz points out that "
the 'national service' crowd seem to believe that we should be grateful for our enslavement. That is why so many of the nationalists, collectivists and statists are so resentful toward libertarians. We libertarians actually appreciate the idea of freedom of choice, freedom of movement, self-ownership, voluntary association and voluntary contract. You see, when you let people have their freedom, then the State has less control over your life, and the nationalists, collectivists and statists whose self-identity is closely linked to their love for the State also feel a loss of control."
