The Meaning Of Conscription

I've been contemplating doing a post describing my thoughts on Bermuda's mandatory military draft for a few months. When I was 18 my mother found my name on the long ominous list of new recruits that's published in one of Bermuda's news papers. I was not a happy camper. I was playing basketball for Bermuda College and training in martial arts multiple days a week at that point and I knew that devoting my time to the regiment would mean giving up at least one of my interests. I did 2 weeks of basic training that resulted in more frustration than personal growth so my view of the draft is one of skepticism. Soon after basic training I was deferred so that I could pursue my education and haven't looked back since. I now live in Canada but I still owe the Bermuda Government my 3 years of service and have to send a letter to the Bermuda Regiment every year that includes proof that I no longer reside on the island. While doing my daily rounds on Facebook last week I came across this great post by one of my high school mates, Eugene Johnston. He described the issues surrounding this controversial issue far more eloquently then I ever could so I had to use this as Be Glitterati's first guest post. I'd love to hear your thoughts on this topic (Supportive or not). Read more after the Jump.






Nothing has a greater value than choice. Freedom and choice are inseparable. One cannot exist without the other. From the beginning of time humans have exercised their right to choose. They worship their own deities. They determine what is important to sanctify. They choose their leaders. They decide who to venerate after death.

We agree that it is important that we have the right to choose who represents us in Parliament. That we choose our professions. Religions. What we can and cannot say. From the way we dress down to how we keep our hair.

Our babies are born with an instinctive understanding of choice. When the child is unable to do for itself, it demands assistance. And when the child matures enough to do on its own, it protects its right to continue doing those things. Children walk when they are ready. Talk when they are ready. But only then. They passionately seek answers to the World’s questions. They dig. They prod. They turn houses upside down looking for clues to their existence. If you have ever tried to stop an inquisitive child from going into things you will have seen how adamant they are to protect their freedom.

For this reason, as a society, we should do everything to protect everybody’s right to choose. Our Constitution merely touches on it. It says that people have the right to believe what they wish, to act how they wish, to move about as they wish. These rights belong to all of us. Our country has no business hindering those rights unless there is an overwhelmingly compelling reason for doing so. It is not for a person asserting a right to convince others that he has the need to exercise it. That would mean the slave would be made to justify why there should be no slavery. The person accused of crime would have to prove his innocence. And the woman would need to establish something so obvious: that she can do more than tend to the home.

So what does this have to do with conscription? Quite simply this: conscription is the antithesis of choice.

Under the present law the Bermuda Regiment (“the Regiment”) need not care about the sanctity of Bermudian male freedom. The law is familiar. It is like all the other laws that imply that the Bermudian male is of no consequence to decision-making. It strips us of our humanity. And it does so when there is no prevailing need. There is no war that requires a limit on our rights. There is no civil unrest. In fact, the reality is that the Regiment’s functions are largely ceremonial. In essence then, for pageantry alone this country has been willing to sanction the wholesale abuse of an entire segment of this community.

That may be the point. What is the importance of that pageantry? Does it exist to solidify our colonial position? Could conscription be the means that is used to reinforce our position as a non-nation?

Blacks should find conscription a more difficult pill to swallow than whites. We have a collective history replete with examples of similar action being taken against us. We know the stories of slavery and colonialism; and how the forces at the head of those institutions attempted to dehumanise us. We are versed in these tactics and others. How a country’s laws can be shaped in a way designed to hinder us. How it is always the case that a reactionary policy is detrimental to us as a people. For these reasons Mr Marshall Sr was right to liken conscription to “20th century slavery”.

There is a further two points to make. Firstly, by giving women the right to choose whether they can join the Regiment, while at the same time making it compulsory for men, the message could not be clearer. The value of our women outstrips that of our men. For some reason we appreciate that women’s freedom alone has worth. This is the message we are uploading into the brains of our men.

 Secondly, some of those in favour of conscription have used loose reasoning to justify the policy. They claim that conscription is the only way to ensure successful clean-up efforts in times of calamity. These people know little about our motivations. They do not understand how to create, nor maintain, the impetus that glues communities together. It cannot be right to rob a person of something so important to them; and at the same time demand they come to the table as a brother and friend. Responsibility is reciprocal: State to person; person to State.

If history is any guide, I can already see the end of conscription. You can dress thousands of men in green uniforms. You can make them march in perfect unison. You can line them up on Front Street. But none of your demands can kill their spirit. You can imprison them. You can talk badly about their upbringing. You can molest them. But none of your misconceived militancy can kill the quest for freedom. You can physically abuse them. You can force them into gas chambers. You can deprive them of benefits. But you can never destroy the idea that freedom is worth standing up for.

It is unfair to characterise the opposition to conscription as “14 men on the writ”. The cause is bigger than any of those men—individually or together. The anti-conscription campaign is not Larry Marshall Sr’s alone. It does not belong to a radio personality or an exceptional distance-runner. It belongs to all of us. Men, women, and children. Like anything else, what we do in relation to this issue will have consequences for our future. Do we continue to assault the most marginalised sector of our community?

That is why the conscription debate is so important. It is not just about the Regiment. It is not simply about a person’s responsibility to their country. And it is not about three years and two months of service. Conscription is about demanding that young men throw down their right to choose when there is no justifiable reason for making such demand.

This debate is about how we view our men. It is about what they really mean to us. What value they actually have to our community. 

Special Guest Post by Eugene Johnston