Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1940-08-21
Wants CONSUMPTION
Approved at Once
Arguments Of Opponents
Rejected as Being
Without Merit
TO the Editor Of The Star:

TO the Editor Of The Star:
The main arguments against con-
scription seem to be that there is no
emergency in sight; that invasion OF
this country is improbable: that con-
scription is undemocratic. Considering
these points categorically, 1t should be
asked, first, Just how long 1t would be
between the time when an emergency
might come "in sight" and the time when
1t would strike And whether we can be-
lieve that this time would be long
enough to raise an Army. much less turn
1t into an effective fighting machine.
AS regards invasion, we should remind
ourselves, without hysteria, but just to
be practical, that Canada is at war. II
England should fall, Canada would be
the next enemy in line. The Canadian
coast is nearer Europe than our own.
The idea of air invasion by way OF Ice
land and Greenland has been expertly
ridiculed; yet our own Army flyers
proved this route feasible as early as
1923, when planes had much less range
than now. Moreover, II any one Is still
under the impression that 1t would be
sheer altruism for us to undertake the
defense of Canada, it might be worth
the effort to trace the course of the st.
Lawrence on any elementary map. II
the war came to Canada, it would be
impossible that 1t should not sideswipe
us. It Is also reasonably possible that
our Navy might be simultaneously occu-
pied by several created diversions" in
the Pacific. the Caribbean and the Canal
Zone, for instance, since the totalitarian
powers are opportunists, If not actually
working together. None OF these things
may happen; but 1t is no more than plain
common sense to prepare against the
worst, since hoping for the best has not
saved any country, so far.
That CONSUMPTION is undemocratic Is
Just plain quibbling. 1t is no more I'M
the population has the right to be sup
ported. the whole population has the
right to be defended Moreover. citizen
ship carries certain implicit obligations
In return for its benefits and advantages.
When the day comes that we refuse to
admit and assume these obligations. our
democracy begins to crumble; we defeat
ourselves before ever an enemy comes in
sight.
Finally, we have had CONSUMPTION be-
fore, and we did not lose our democracy.
We could lose 1t through defeat and the
imposition Of an undemocratic system
from without; but we shall not lose 1t by
our own act so long as the democratic
spirit resides within us. Refuse to give
up one small phase Of 1t and we jeop-
ardize the whole; lose 1t through defeat
and it is gone forever.
The question is: Do we care enough
about our democracy to be willing to
defend it? II we are willing. we are
Just as willing now as we shall be in
year, or on January LIST. or when emer-
gency arises The difference is, II that
willingness is put into practice now 1t
will be implemented, and possibly effec-
tive, then. If it is not to be called upon
until the need eventuates 1t will be alb.
solutely impotent. All the willingness in
the world will not stand up against a
modern, streamlined war machine.
The safety Of our country is important.
So much so that 1t is worth taking every
precautionary measure to insure it. No
one can absolutely guarantee that the
present explosive and unpredictable
world situation will not develop into
attack upon us. No one can absolutely
predict how long before that might hap
pen. We owe it to ourselves to make
every provision against the most re-
mote and unlikely contingencies.
And if we have CONSUMPTION now. and
no emergency develops, let us not pres
emily decry the waste Of effort and
money For it might be that the con-
script Army had done the very work for
which it was intended, by presenting so
formidable a front that all potential
enemies had been discouraged.
DOROTHY FORD MAYHEM.
Cambridge, Mass.