Evening star., 1945-10-27

the President 'S-propoSal lor uni
versal military training are object
ing earnestly to the use OF the WORD
''conscription." They seem to con-
slider it an ugly word or, at least, to
fear that people generally SO con-
slider it. So they say the plan isn't
for conscription; it is only for
training. And it is true that moth
ing but training is intended and
that, the million or so of boys to be
given training each year would not
really be in the Army and could not
be sent off to war; that Congress,
in case of war, would still have to
take direct action in the matter, or,
in other words, enact real con-
scription law.
For Good of the Nation.
But it is conscription, neverthe-
less. The 18-year-oldS would be
conscripted for military training
just as children up to the age of 16
are now conscripted for education
by most States and compelled to go
TO school. If it were realized that all
the happy little boys and girls tod
ding off to school are conscriptS,
perhaps conscription wouldn't have
such an ugly sound. And if the peo-
pie can be convinced that conscrip-
ton for training, like conscription
for education, is wholly for the good
of the pupils and the good of the
country, it might not be resisted any
more than education is resisted
The best argument for peacetime
training is two-fold. First, that it
would offer assurance that this
country would be prepared to defend
itself instantly in case of attack
and would not have to depend on
foreign allies, If any, to hold off the
enemy until we were ready. Sec
ond, that only a strong and mill
starily prepared country can make
Its power for peace felt
Both of these arguments are con-
v1ncmg, although the second re-
quires complete confidence in Amer
ican diplomacy, confidence that our
power< always will be used intel
ligently and in the interest of world
peace. "a
But they do not meet the problem
that is uppermoSt in the minds of
millions of American boys and their
families, the personal problem of
the effect that giving up a year for
military training may have on their
lives, Immediately and in the fu-
ture. The boys and their families
are concerned with the sheer ques-
ton OF livelihood. Most boys of 18
have to earn part or all of their
own living, many have to help their
families, some have actually to sup
port their families. Others, whose
parents can give them higher edu-,
cation, are chiefly concerned with
preparing themselves to earn their
own living.
Radical Departure.
So, while great deal can be said
for universal training, it cannot be
separated from the whole business
of living and making a living. 1t
proposes, in fact, a radical depar-
ture from the American way of
life. Therefore it may be neces-
sary to make other radical de-
partures in order to fit it into our
national scheme of things.
Congress is considering one such
radical departure and it is one
which the President has supported
as warmly as he now supports the
plan for universal training. 1t
bears the name of the Full Employ
ment Bill-not meaning, however,
the emasculated version passed by
the Senate and now in the hands of
a lukeWarm House committee.
The acceptance by the Govern
ment of responsibility for a peace