Prescription conscription

Conscription, or compulsory military service, has a controversial past in Australia. In 1909 conscription for boys as young as 12 was legislated, and by 1915 there had been about 34,000 prosecutions and 7,000 detentions of trainees, parents, employers, or other persons required to register who had resisted doing so. The conscription issue created a deep divide in this country, segregating those who disagreed as anti-conscriptionists. Sound familiar?

Military conscription is forced labour, or involuntary servitude. Proponents of conscription have likened it to paying taxes; however a person doesn’t owe military service to the State. All benefits to the State are already paid for in taxes.

Our income is taxed, but we choose the job we want to do. Our taxes go toward public education, roads, hospitals and the like, so conscription of those who received “free” education doesn’t stand up.

In conscription you are forced to do a job that you may not agree with. Let’s say your beliefs and values don’t align with the reasons, or with the concept of war at all. And let’s not forget that in war you are risking your life.

Conscription cannot be deemed appropriate just because the State thinks we owe them our duty. This notion is absurd. Even when conscription has been imposed, it is still involuntary service.

Delve into the ethics of conscription and we realise that supporting conscription is supporting slavery. Slavery is illegal because it is immoral and unethical.

We have the right to our own lives, and to choose how we wish to work, without interference from the State. Unless you are looking at it through the lens of communism or socialism, which opposes a free market, looking through the lens of ethics one must conclude that it is unethical, and has no place in a genuine democracy. Conscription steals your control of your body and how you choose to use it and gives it to the collective.

This year, mandatory vaccination has arrived on our shores like a foreign invader threatening our freedom. To think Australians would not try to counter this threat is short-sighted. But the enemy is cunning and presents itself as a saviour, using public health as a form of conscription to their prescription for the diagnosed “illness”.

When comparing military conscription with forced vaccination, the same principals are at play: the inference is that the State has the power to interfere with your life and your body, and that it steals your control of your body to give it in service to the collective.

The notion these mandates are a form of slavery is reinforced by vaccine passports, which now require ongoing booster shots, effectively enslaving you to the State for life. These boosters are only necessary because the experimental agents they call vaccines are ineffective. The real reason is more likely to be about control.

In a population with such high vaccination rates - if you believe the government rhetoric regarding the take-up and efficacy of the vaccines - then locking out the unvaccinated is disproportionate to the risk they pose.

Looking through the same moral and ethical lens, we arrive at the same place. Forced vaccination is no different from forced military service, and Australians have every right to resist a life of enslavement.

Anyone who tries to reduce this issue to “anti-vaxx” is foolish: they do not see the threat because subscribing to conscription is submission to slavery.