Draft Dodging

This is a hypothetical question to see if our notions of patriotism have changed since I was a kid.

Suppose the draft is reinstituted because there aren’t enough volunteers to fight a hypothetical unpopular war that doesn’t seem to directly threaten the homeland.

Now suppose an individual gets drafted, and his profile is such that the odds of being in combat on the ground are very high. And imagine that this kid is a sensitive type of person who knows that an experience like that will likely give him mental problems for the rest of his life even if he is not wounded.

Some people think, correctly, that they are mentally strong and could come through a war okay if they don’t get physically injured. But others know with a high degree of certainty that experiencing the horrors of war would mentally cripple them for life.

So here’s the question. If a person is relatively certain that going to war will end his ability to enjoy the rest of his life, one way or another, and the war does not present a plausible threat to the homeland, is such a person unpatriotic for dodging the draft to save himself?

The obvious answer is yes, he is unpatriotic. If your country calls on you, you need to go. End of story.

On the other hand, what is the point of a being patriotic to a country that intends to kill you for its own marginal benefit? Such a country would be your natural enemy, not your friend, so any question of patriotism would be nonsense in this particular situation.

Is the draft dodger in this hypothetical situation unpatriotic or simply sensible?

Comments

[Courtney B]

sensible. And patriotic, in a way. He's supporting his countrymen, according to the polls.

[Jim Spahr]

I think we should institute a mandatory draft for all citizens in the form of a "National Service" commitment. This would give citizens the option of fulfilling their commitment through military or civilian service (National Park Service, Peace Corps, etc.). During times of hugely unpopular wars you might have trouble getting people to take the military option but at least you'd give conscientious objectors an out without branding them unpatriotic or criminal. And our National Parks would probably be in much better shape.

[Mike Arndt]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question

[donny]

Interesting conversation. Have to agree though, define patriotism.

Should George W, decide a pre-emptive strike against Iran was a great leaving office present, and need my conscription to make it so - I'd tell him to get stuffed.

Our country is more than the sum of all the idiots who have tricked us into believing we elected them. I will go to war to defend my COUNTRY from attack, not help some saber-rattling jackass score three pages in a history book.

[Conor]

Calling the dodger unpatriotic was your typical incendiary fare, Scott, but whatever, because I see it worked, as ever.

I'll toss my coins in the hat. I find patriotic that which best represents the interests of my country as I define both those interests and the notion of "my country." For instance, I think supporting the war in Iraq is detrimental to our nation, both politically and economically. Therefore it would be unpatriotic to sign up and intend to serve over there, according to my mindset.

[Chris]

"The obvious answer is yes, he is unpatriotic. If your country calls on you, you need to go. End of story."

I think it is very sad, in modern times, if people see any truth in the above statement. If that is the definition of patriotism the patriotism is a bad thing. Such unquestioning self-sacrifice for an abstract notion of State or Nationality has normally only been expected by, at best, imperialistic nations (1800's Great Britain) or, at worst, Facist nations. Modern democracies need people who are able to stand as educated individuals who can make autonomous decisions about what is best for them. If serving the state best ensures ongoing personal freedom and economic stability then and only then should you sign up.

[K. Larson]

The draft is a form of involuntary, uncompensated labor and as such is inherently immoral. Conscription is a violation of civil liberties and doesn't obligate its victims to comply. If a hypothetical country deprived you of freedom of speech for unsound reasons, you would have no obligation to comply with this unreasonable request or to "man up" and suffer the penalties for violating the unreasonable law.

Actually the relevant concern is this: if you dodge the draft, the State doesn't send one less person, they merely pick the next name down the list and send him instead. By dodging, you expose another person to the same risks you yourself have ruled unacceptable. Clearly, we can't be obligated to do something we know to be stupid because the next man in line may be too dim to come to the same conclusion, however, wouldn't a kind and sensitive person be willing to suffer in order to shield another person from harm?

[Glenn]

"Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious." Oscar Wilde.

[RPK]

A lot depends on your definition of patriotism. I believe that patriotism is wanting what is best for your country, even if it requires personal sacrifice on your part. (Especially if it requires such sacrifice!) Like it or not, there are times when that means fighting in a war. Other times it can mean doing what you can to keep your country out of a war. The situation that you describe seems to mean the country shouldn't be in the war, so it's not unpatriotic to avoid it.

As for being sensible, we are born with a strong survival instinct, and avoiding being put into a position where we could be killed makes perfect sense.

[Thrill]

"Bullshit. A country / Government that intends to take away my freedom and put my health at risk IS my enemy. End of story."

Then grab an AK and fight the government. Somehow, I doubt many people with your point of view have the guts to do that either.

[Kevin Carson]

It's not "your country" calling you. It's the gang of pigs running it. And generally when those pigs get us into a war, it's so their swinish friends on Wall Street can line their pockets.

As Edward Abbey said, a patriot is someone who defends his country against his government.

[jenny]

If he dodges he's unpatriotic. If he chooses to permanently leave the country that intends to kill him for its own marginal benefit, then it's a valid choice. You can't take all the good a country has to give then dodge the bad stuff and still expect to reap the benefits of a country you won't support. If you don't want to support the country (whatever that means) then leave and don't come back.

[Gordon]

Just read 'Catch 22'

[JimmyF]

I must say my dear, dear Dilbertarians, this is an excellent subject for debate. But my feelings about war are much like that talking computer thingy in the Matthew Broderick movie "Wargames." It relates the start of World War 3 to of all things Tic Tac Toe, "Interesting game Professor Vulcan, the only way to win is not to play."

Or as one of the greatest political and philosophical minds of our present generation, a man named Christopher Humphrey said... our goals should not be to fight and win wars but this:

"Start treating people's lives as something precious and irreplaceable. It's that simple,...and everything else follows from it: (1.) Protecting the environment, so that we, and everyone else can live in a world that is green and beautiful. (2.) Helping to stop disease in all of it's forms, so people can live happy and healthy lives. (3.) Helping to end war, and the bigotry and greed that leads to it; and realizing that no war is worth the cost..."

http://jviz.blogspot.com/2008/02/chris-humphrey-gives-us-answers.html

[Jimmy F]

I must say my dear, dear Dilbertarians, this is an excellent subject for debate. But my feelings about war are much like that talking computer thingy in the Matthew Broderick movie "Wargames." It relates the start of World War 3 to of all things Tic Tac Toe, "Interesting game Professor Vulcan, the only way to win is not to play."

Or as one of the greatest political and philosophical minds of our present generation, a man named Christopher Humphrey said... our goals should not be to fight and win wars but this:

"Start treating people's lives as something precious and irreplaceable. It's that simple,...and everything else follows from it: (1.) Protecting the environment, so that we, and everyone else can live in a world that is green and beautiful. (2.) Helping to stop disease in all of it's forms, so people can live happy and healthy lives. (3.) Helping to end war, and the bigotry and greed that leads to it; and realizing that no war is worth the cost..."

http://jviz.blogspot.com/2008/02/chris-humphrey-gives-us-answers.html

[bobbert]

People have way to much respect for civil authority. Who is the president to tell me when and who to fight? I am a free man. If I wish to defend my homeland from an enemy, I will. If I don't, I won't. This isn't a big insurance program, it's a nation. I don't have to "buy in" in order to live here, I just have to avoid unduly interfering with or harming my fellow citizens. A man who does nothing can wrong no one, and therefore no one can justly coerce him to do anything. Inaction may sometimes be immoral under religious or other above-and-beyond criteria, but it is never a violation of anyone's fundamental rights, and therefore the state should have nothing to say about it. If I want to join a religion (nationalistic or theological), I will.

[youth]

Did you just say "homeland"?

Do not EVER use that word in any non-ironic context ever again. Thanks.

-The Mgmt.

[Chris]

Next question: Does heroism, therefore, equal patriotism?

[dontbother]

This is a hypothetical question to see if our notions of responsibility have changed since I was a kid.

If my unmarried next-door neighbors make enough noise every night and day to drive me to distraction and, potentially, into a serious depression because they are screaming their heads off every time they have sex -- about six or seven times a 24-hour day, it seems to me -- when I am having none (not that I want any, mind you; I just want to be left alone to pet my cat in peace and do my daily work without having to listen to the grinding and moaning of others having fun when I'm not), may I use that potential mental pathology as as insanity defense or a self-defense defense in a capital murder case after I've beheaded, disemboweled, castrated, and cannibalized the cockerel, and beheaded, disemboweled, devaginated, and cannibalized the pullet next door?

I know this has nothing to do with patriotism, but I think that draft dodging has nothing to do with patriotism either. Both have to do with taking responsibility for one's actions.

[John Reedy]

LOL, I love that you say "hypothetical unpopular war".

http://awritersblock.com

[Al]

I think they should make a political statement and avoid service by saying that they are gay. If the war is not important enough to allow homosexuals then it must not be very important. There have been a lot of homosexuals with crucial skills kicked out already, and nearly every politician has said they would continue to not allow gays in military.

[danbert]

This situation truly is hypothetical - and weighted in a way that there is no way to answer "C"
I was drafted and went because it was the law of the land even though I wasn't very enthusiastic about where I might end up (shortly after entering service Viet Nam ended - go figure)
A high school freind of mine received his draft notice at the same time I did, and flatly refused conscription. He did not 'dodge' or 'defect' he 'resisted'. He flatly refused to sign his name or take the oath, and after a lot of hemming and hawing, they eventually called an FBI agent to arrest him. At his trial the judge offered him one more chance to sign up without any repercussions and he still refused, and was sentenced to four years in the Federal Pen (he served two and was paroled)
Fast forward a few years and Jimmy Carter granted amnesty to all the folk who fled the country to avoid the draft. My freind, who to this day is quite bitter and won't talk about his time in jail, is quite vocal about these 'cowards'.
To this day he insists that he loves his country, and since the draft was the law of the land, he conciously broke that law and took his punishment for it. The draft dodgers broke the law and suffered no punishment (Unless spending six years in Canada could be considered...naw let's not go there)
My freind dislikes former President Carter - but rabidly HATES draft dodgers who didn't have the moral courage to stand up for their professed convictions and take their medicine like adults.
So Scott - there IS a "C" answer...

[useless fellow]

( On the other hand, what is the point of a being patriotic to a country that intends to kill you for its own marginal benefit? Such a country would be your natural enemy, not your friend, so any question of patriotism would be nonsense in this particular situation.

Is the draft dodger in this hypothetical situation unpatriotic or simply sensible?)

LOL ! Reminds me of ' Catch 22' and Yossarian will be proud of reading this ! It doesn't matter which side you are, you are gonna get killed ! " It's not personal " . But what does it matter, personal or impersonal ? You are gonna get killed anyway.

Or.. you " will be disappeared ! " LOL ! Not even proper grammar but conveys the ' bullet' point !

Alas, Joseph Heller passed away. I wish he read your blog !

[Abhishek]

Tapan Karecha ....

go to the cartoon. Hit \"ALT\" + \"PRT SCRN\" button. Open a graphics package that can import images such as Word, Photoshop, Illustrator, Paint etc. and open a new file then hit \"Paste\". The image on your screen appears as a jpeg. Save and or print

Or... You could simply click on the Embed button, copy to clipboard, paste in Notepad, copy the direct link to the gif and save it using your browser.

[Petr]

You seem to infer/assume that "patriotic"="good" and "unpatriotic"="bad". Throw away this assumption and you'll see how silly your question is.

And then ask yourself, why did you think that "patriotic" is "good" in the first place?

[K]

I don't think draft-dodging is ever patriotic; I think the very concept of a draft is immoral.

[bill]

If a Police Officer knows that going to one more domestic abuse call and seeing a child that has been beaten within an inch of her life will do permanent damage do they go on the next call?

If a citizen knows that helping someone who is being mugged at knifepoint may result in physical or psychological harm do they still help?

If a psychiatrist knows that counseling one more drug addict will take them further into their own depression do they provide the counseling?

If a parent sees another person's child about to walk into traffic and realizes that if they try to help the last thing they will probably see is that child's face screaming in terror do they still try?

Are these people patriotic or unpatriotic for doing what the moment calls for?

[venkyx]

actually if a person dodges draft and remains mentally more healthy, s/he will be contributing more to the country overall during their life-span.

The impulsive idiotic patriot who rushes into draft may end up as a burden to the state welfare, economy, family members & neighborhood, and drags the whole country down...

Now you decide who is a patriotic in the long run?

[Dee]

Blind allegiance to an entity or country serves no one.

Dodge the draft and live to fight another day when there is really something to fight for.

[Jim Ourada]

As long as they leave and don't come back, (and don't whine about it), then that is always a viable choice.

Putting your life on the line for your country is one of the costs of our freedom. It has already been paid ahead for you by those that have come and done before you. But you have an implied responsibility for those that come after you to pay the same price. If you are unwilling or unable to make that payment, then you need to leave. Simple.

[Frigga]

I think this hypothetical boy didn't get beat up enough as a child. Life is not all pillow fights, some are real. Those who can't handle it die. War is war, the loser dies, plain and simple.

[quantum_flux]

The Fundie Invasion:

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5801410974377137535&postID=6781355296784567697

[Dave Oblad]

Does our country own us.. or do we own the country? I don't recall ever seeing any vote by the American people in regards to employing the draft. If we are short soldiers then perhaps we should pay them more than a $1502.70 per year. Since you are on call 24/7 that works out to be: 17 cents per hour. Even if it's 8 hours per day, that's only 51 cents per hour. That's for an E2 private under 2 years service. It usually take's almost two years to rise above the rank of E2. Ok.. they also get a bed and 3 meals per day.. same as a homeless person for free. Ok.. a green outfit too.. that's not much for putting up with being bossed around and punished by idiots, and a nearly complete lack of freedom while sticking your neck out without knowing why your doing it. Being in the army was exactly like living in a communist country. Funny how army Lifer's loved the army life and hated communists.. that really never made sense to me.

But Patriotism? That's like Nationalism. Faith and belief that your country is always right and better than other countries. These are the same as Racism, Sexism, and many others, all designed to separate you into a unique group, where you and your group are superior to the other groups. We humans need to stop grouping ourselves and recognize we are all part of a whole. The United Nations was a grand step in bringing all governments under one roof and a chance for peace to the world. But it was never given the muscle to force a settlement between idiotic factions. War is stupid. Stupid folks make war. Stupid folks can never compromise.

Again, Patriotism depends on who's asking you to to risk you life and why. To do so blindly is just stupid. Is it your government asking you to serve? Are they forcing your choice and what reasons are being given for your abduction and forced servitude. Do you trust your Government? Have they ever lied to you?

Remember that George Washington, Ben Franklin, John Hancock, Thomas Jefferson, just to name a few, were all traitors in their time. Our Government was England. Were they being Patriotic, when mounting a armed resistance against the Government? So much for Patriotism! It's defined by the times.

I was drafted and served in Vietnam. We (soldiers) knew we couldn't win because our hands were tied. Try being a boxer in a ring with your hands tied. Best you can do is dodge punches and hope the other guy gets tired of hitting you. After over a decade, we gave up and cut our losses to a few hundred thousand kids killed. What a waste.

When we leave Iraq, the puppet democracy we installed will fail and civil war will erupt. Many more will be killed. The majority there want a specific government and we won't let them have that option. Best we can do is hold the doors open and let everyone have a chance to leave that doesn't want to stay there. Relocating a few thousand people has to be cheaper than the cost of the war and all the lives lost. Afterwards, just leave them the hell alone. Isolate them if they won't play well with others.

So what's the patriotic choice of a young man or woman facing the draft? I say go fight and blame your folks for not controlling their government to the extent of giving better options. Besides, if your truly afraid to risk your life, the army allows you to request a safe desk-job by objecting to war and refusing a weapon. Of course the road is very rough for those kids. I knew a few.. I chose to risk my life over army harassment. That was 33 years ago and the nightmares of real flying body parts have almost gone now.

Best to all.. from Dave :^)

[David]

Here is the real answer and logical conclusion. If the kid is likely to be, as you state, have "mental problems for the rest of his life even if he is not wounded" which will leave him "mentaly crippled," then he should be on the front line where he is likely to be wounded or killed as that situation presents no further damage and no greater risk. It is likely that these are the same kids who re-enlist until they die in battle, literally, as they have died a bit during each tour. They are patriots upon whose sholders we all stand.

[Pat]

First: This country was founded on "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Make the decision you can live with -- patriotic or not.

Second: Killing off your young men is not a particularly intelligent way to solve problems. Read history. One of the leading causes of WW2 was WW1. Did Viet Nam really solve anything?

Third: We have all tried not to repeat the unsupportive treatment that was given the Viet Nam Vets. And that's good. Young men in the military risk a great deal and that should be respected. But there's a difference between respect and failure to look the truth in the eye. Is it unpatriotic not to go along with a mistake?

[ceolaf]

Last week, Scott Adams (the author of Dilbert) posed the following question on his blog:
If a person is relatively certain that going to war will end his ability to enjoy the rest of his life, one way or another, and the war does not present a plausible threat to the homeland, is such a person unpatriotic for dodging the draft to save himself?
Some of comments struck me as rather asinine. For example, they keep referring to you "your country calling you to serve," or questioning the value of patriotism. And yet, they don't actually get to the real question Mr. Adams is posing: What is patriotism?

Many arguing that patriotism itself is a bad thing seem to be operating under the assumption that patriotism mean blind acceptance of the president's views/beliefs/orders/desires. But plainly that can't be true.

Obviously, one element of patriotism is love of country. I would suggest that that is actually the root of patriotism, it's essence. Love of one political party over another is not patriotism, nor is love of a particular leader, though perhaps either could be compatible with patriotism.

Refusing to defend one's country against and existential threat is clearly unpatriotic. No question.

Refusing to enable internal powers to twist one's country to support their new goals or ends is not unpatriotic.

But the line is not clear. If you love your country enough, wouldn't you want to see its interests furthered? For example, if the United States needed to annex Canada in order to survive an energy crisis, it strikes me as being unpatriotic to refuse to take part in the invasion. Of course, allowing the country to get to point -- or enabling others to do so -- would also be unpatriotic.

An essential element of modern (liberal) democracies is the peaceful handover of power from one faction/party to another. George Washington stepped down after two terms, peacefully. And Al Gore refused to challenge the results of the 2000 election past the Supreme Court decision, though many urged him to and the Constitution allowed for it. Is it inevitable that power will change hands, and with that so will policy. Louis XIV said, "L'Etat c'est moi" (i.e. "The state is me"), but democracies' leaders cannot say such a thing. Therefore, aggrandizement of a particular leader or blind devotion to his/her policies cannot be patriotism, as both will change shortly, perhaps even radically.

Criticism of a leader is not unpatriotic, on it face. And refusal to serve an unjust cause that does not protect the nation or its interests is not unpatriotic, either.

Of course, one must come to some kind of answer of what it is that is loved, when on proclaims love of country. Is is the land itself? Is the original peoples? The powerful classes? The masses? The messy diversity that exists in that particular country, be it ethnic, socio-economic, regional, what have you? Their common denominator? Some set of value or principals or some sort?

I think that there are different kinds of countries and that there different answers for these different countries. I don't think that Iceland and the United States can have the kind of patriotism. Icelanders share a common language that goes back centuries, a homeland which their forbearers have inhabited for as least as long, a common culture and way of life. The US is almost entirely made of immigrants and their descendants. Has even a quarter of our population's families been here for even 100 years? (Half of New York City either immigrated here themselves or are the children of immigrants.) The French might love their common culture and language, both of which go back far further than this country's.

I think that this country, the United States, is especially a country of values. 230 years ago, it was not out ethnicity that set us apart from England, and yet we broke apart from the British Empire. Patriotism in the United States cannot simply be about our ethnic heritage, as that varies. It cannot be about the land, as we have grown through our history and out founding documents barely reference it at all. Clearly, the United States is largely about our governing values and principals.

However, I would not argue that the Constitution is the entirety of what matters about the US. There are other values that are a part the very fabric of this nation that do not about in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. Pluralism, the common school, economic opportunity, freedom from many areas of discrimination.

I acknowledge that there are some questions as to which values actually should be included in that group. Simply projecting all of my own values cannot work, as others have different values. There will always be arguments about what values are the essential American values, and some incontestable values likely can be in conflict with others, so the prioritization of those values will also be an area of debate.

But blind faith in the leader of the moment or the powers of the day? That is not patriotism. Temporary control over the levers of power does not make a group, however powerful, the same thing as state.

So, dodging a draft that exists to fight an unjust war that does not protect whatever it is about a nation that is loved when one is patriotic? That is not unpatriotic. And it might even be patriotic itself.

[izzy]

Tapan Karecha ....

go to the cartoon. Hit "ALT" + "PRT SCRN" button. Open a graphics package that can import images such as Word, Photoshop, Illustrator, Paint etc. and open a new file then hit "Paste". The image on your screen appears as a jpeg. Save and or print

[Justin]

On the other hand, what is the point of a being patriotic to a country that intends to kill you for its own marginal benefit? Such a country would be your natural enemy, not your friend, so any question of patriotism would be nonsense in this particular situation.

You hint at a more fundamental point: any country that seeks to control your life would be your natural enemy. Is that not what the government seeks to do? Pay taxes or face imprisonment (which is tantamount to taking some part of your life).

Patriotism is just a made up concept used to try and guilt people into adhering to their "natural enemy" -- an enemy not just in this situation, but in any situation where you are being forced to give up your life for their whims.

[carfree since '93]

I think the ones who can go to war and come home unscathed were already damaged before they got there.
The Draft dodgers are braver and more sensible. The government counts on people being easily led sheep, else the draft would never work.

CFS '93

[mike]

were you reading catch 22?

You'd be labeled unpatriotic but that's cool by me. The idea that it's noble to die for your country is silly. Whoever got that in the minds of the public pulled one hell of a joke. I happen to like living, if someone was a real threat to that they could do with an ass kicking. If not a harmless label isn't too much of an inconvenience. Let's get it out of the way now, i'm unpatriotic, now if the draft is reinstated they don't have to bother with me.

[Dan]

I agree with jp fielding's post.

If a war is truly necessary, I believe volunteers would show up.

Other posters commented that inaction is not a patriotic or noble answer, and that there is more to do in the army then shoot a gun. This is also true.

My grandfather knew how bad WW1 was and he didn't want anything to do with WW2. So he became an engineer and made himself more important to the war effort by staying behind then he would be at the front lines. He didn't need to dodge the draft.

Since the rise of "equality" I've often posed this question to feminists:

If there were a draft, should women be drafted?
If you, as a woman were drafted, would you fight?

I realize women were suppose to stay behind to have/raise children, but many women these days aren't doing that anyways.

[Matthew Kovich]

Perhaps it's insensible to be patriotic?

[Friendsofderek]

unpatriotic perhaps but is that such a bad thing?

just because you love your country doesn't mean you should let it away with doing bad things

maybe its unpatriotic to allow such a war in the first place?

[Regis McCock]

BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS
BALLS

[Rob]

where do you get this belief?

"The obvious answer is yes, he is unpatriotic. If your country calls on you, you need to go. End of story."

If some idiot politician calls on you to do something that is stupid (both for yourself and/or your country) then I'd say the patriotic thing was to avoid it. What is right for your country is not necessarily what the government says is right.

After all - in some countries (cough UK & US cough) you can end up with a Leader who was not chosen in an election.

Surely it is the vietnam protestors who were the real patriots?

[Joshua Jacobsen]

Compelling hypothetical question. It makes me pretty sympathetic to the draft dodger.

I'd still go with "unpatriotic," though. As others have said in the comments, a person can't ethically benefit from the choices our country makes, and then shirk his/her responsibilities while other people pay the price.

[Ibid]

My answers make certain assumptions about the war that aren't stated in Scott's example but apply in every real world scenario that parallels the example.

1) He's patriotic. The war is not in defense of the country and is actively harming it. To fight would be unpatriotic.

2) He's unpatriotic. His motivations were for his own mental health not the good or ill of the country.

3) He's not unpatriotic. He's being asked to fight for his corporations, not his country.

[Chuck]

Your country owns you and if you are a patriot it is not your place to question its decisions.

If your country wants you to go to war then you must go to war. If you don't go to war then you don't deserve to be a part of your country and you are not a patriot.

Being patriotic is black and white - if you contradict your country in any way then you are not patriotic.

Or is that brutally stark contrast between patriotic and unpatriotic not the crux of your scenario?

Americans have terms like "Patriotic" and "Homeland" rammed down their throats from an early age. Being "Unamerican" is among the biggest insults you can receive. It's sad really. The country that prides itself on being the land of the free and the home of democracy uses every trick in book for stigmatising being different and having a converse opinion.

So is it really so bad that your hypothetical person isn't a patriot? I think it's sweet that he tried to think for himself.

[john]

You think way too much.

[Grizzly Adams]

There are other countries you can live in. If this country requires you to fight, and you do not want to, then move on.

[Rack]

I don't see patriotism as bowing to whatever tyrants are abusing you at present. It would only be unpatriotic if the country itself were threatened. In either case dodging the draft would be sensible though.

[Matt]

The draft-dodger is a criminal. Simple as that.

[Not My Usual Alias]

Agreeing with j

I come from a family with a long history of military service. When I completed college, I embarked on a period of national service -- in my case, I taught English in China with an agency that was on the list of Peace Corps equivalents.

My Uncle, a Marine who landed at Inchon and fought his way back from Puson, was the first in the family to comment on my teaching English to his former enemy.

"Finally, someone in the family figured out how to go to Asia with carrying a rifle and getting shot at. I always knew the kid was smarter than his Dad and Jim." He wrote to me in China and asked if landing on an airplane was easier than exiting a landing craft to make landfall.

Was I unpatriotic by serving in an alternate way? During peacetime, I would say "no." I am encouraging my son (named after the Marine Uncle) to do some form of national service, whether it is the military or another skill set that can help to provide for the improvement of the planet.

[Dick]

You go to Oxford, then return to become President.

[Bertram]

My mental state is my home. I'd be patriotic to that.

[LordFoom]

What about being a conscientious objector? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscientious_objector#United_States

[simon]

If the drafts re-installed, surely the draftees are doing a job that the non-draftees are being paid for, and with the suplus of labour the combatents renumeration (leave, pay pensions, social standing etc) will be diminshed.

So being a draftee would mean that your not supporting your fellow contryman .... not very patrotic ....

[Robin]

In a democracy, patriotism is the only treason. Or something.

[Joce]

You want to start drafting the "myspace generation" to go and fight a war?

This should be interesting.

[Urs]

I'm saying BOTH, too.

[RuRu]

Oh well, humanity really is on the verge of killing itself, healing itself again, and ends up compromising.

[calle]

I think we nead just a tad more info about the person before e rigthly can jude him. forinstans i would like to know why any one would want to live in a country thats trying to kill him (yeah im aware that might not be a simple "Becuss" question but fairs fair if the guy is so aware of his surowndings and his own strengths and weakneses I can asume he must have considerd moving if the majority of the people in the country he lives in wants him dead. being willing to die for your country is not patriotic willing to live for your country is.

[neopolitan]

Actually this seems to be reflecting the average American's inability to deal with shades and nuances.

I wonder if it is because you have a linguistic fault in your use of English (possibly due to a partial importation of Germanic language forms) and that colours your comprehension.

You present the argument in these terms "You are either patriotic or unpatriotic". As some have already pointed out, this is not the full gamut of options.

You could be:

patriotic (you love your country and would kill and die for it),

not patriotic (you don't actually love your country, but wouldn't actively harm it),

unpatriotic (you dislike your country and would willingly harm its interests),

not unpatriotic (you don't actually dislike your country but you wouldn't kill and die for it),

disengaged (you neither love nor dislike your country and would not kill for or die for it nor actively harm it),

conditionally patriotic/unpatriotic (you neither love nor dislike your country but would kill for and die for it or actively harm it depending on the situation), or

cosmopolitan/intelligent (you realise that "patriotism" and "country" are concepts used by groups of people to manipulate other groups of people).

While this seven point scale is probably also a simplification, it does highlight that you have more than two options.

The linguistic thing comes from the annoying American use of a poetical grammatical structure for negation - as standard. "All that glisters is not gold" comes from Shakespeare, it is poetry. It is not a standard grammatical structure for telling us that sometimes something that glisters is something other than gold.

The negation (not) normally applies to the verb, subject, object, adjective or adverb which follows it. (A basic English sentences consist of a subject, a verb and, optionally, an adjective or object. "I" am the object, "am" and "kick" are verbs, "annoyed" is an adjective and "your scrawny butt" is the object.)

Analysis reveals that in "All that glisters is not gold" the (not) refers to "all", otherwise it makes no sense.

To point of this standard grammatical idiocy, I like using the sentence "All Americans are not intelligent". Americans won't be offended, at least not usually, because they think I mean "Not all Americans are intelligent" which patently obvious since every country has stupid people. Oddly enough, the sentence doesn't say that, the sentence tells us that all Americans are lacking intelligence (which I don't hold to be true, despite their inability to spell "colour" correctly, or "kilometre", or "exercise", inter alia, or to conjugate verbs correctly "forget, forgot, forgotten", "get, got, got" and "drive, drove, driven", "dive, dived, dived" .. think about that last one. If you want consistency across similar verbs why not use "diven"? "I found that my pants were missing after I had diven in the water.").

Anyway, this American grammatical structure for negation removes an option. If you use (subject+verb+negation+object) to mean (negation+subject+verb+object) then you have lost ability to describe a nuance. Each time you remove a structure like that from the language you need to either replace it with another structure or you lose the ability to adequately describe a idea. Then you lose the idea.

That's what has happened to you guys.

I am neither with you, not against you. Just learn to talk properly or you will end up as nothing more than dancing monkeys.

My dance is done,

cheers,

neopolitan

[Amol]

I agree completely with Miguel. Why do we have to feel 'patriotism' towards a piece of land, the people in it and the people who run it? Patriotism will only increase hatred, wars and all such things. Some other person's patriotism is the root cause that your own country is in danger.

If you have to feel 'patriotic', feel it for the entire universe (since that is the only biggest thing which our senses can perceive) and everything and every being that comprise it.

[understanding]

...
The old Lie; Dulce et Decorum est
Pro patria mori.

[Wilfred Owens, writing about WWI]

[Chris]

You talk about a lack of patriotism like a it's a bad thing.

I'm unpatriotic and happy to be so. I would defend my country, because I enjoy the standard of living it gives me. But I don't feel an allegiance to my country (Australia) simply because it's the country I live in. I don't feel more "attached" to someone simply because, through geographical fluke, I happened to be born within the same political borders as them.

Patriotism is for fools who don't want to think independently about the actions of their country.

[Brian]

"ive come to realize that the draft is unnecessary. when a war is 'necessary', volunteers show up, if not, they dont."

I'll join the chorus saying "both", but I feel the need to disagree with the above quote. This goes against the group mentality that makes any group strong. If part of the whole is threatened, there will be some people who don't want to risk their own safety to fight the threat. Forcing people may be necessary for the greater good.

Of course, that only applies to fighting a threat.

[Venkat]

Highly sensible. (not just a sheep)

[Mark]

If dying for your country is patriotic, paying more taxes is definitely patriotic.
I doubt anyone links taxes with patriotism, but dying in a godforsaken place:
-sure! Why not! Yeah Rummsfelt!
-What?! More taxes? Goddamn m*therf*ck*** moron!

I doubt anyone will using the bumpersticker:
I support our taxes :)

On a more serious note: it's really strange how sometimes the discussion is framed using the talking points.

[Vijay]

I have given up on all belief systems like nation, religion, community etc. The only belief system that I have is my gender :)

[Andie H]

I feel that the term 'being patriotic' has turned into nothing more than a marketing scheme to get people to buy stupid knick-knacks that inform people to support the troops so they don't feel guilty about not actually helping. (I do have to leave out those who wanted to serve, but were unable)

I believe the hypothtical man just built himself an excuse to deny a challenge that was set before him that wasn't one he created or wanted. Some soldiers, airmen, and marines may go over there and think the worst of the situation, and they come home okay; sometimes the opposite happens.

Someone who is drafted who truely doesn't want to be is going to find a way out, no matter how hard it is these days. However, until people get involved they are not going to understand or respect the men and women who have and are serving in theaters world wide.

Patriotism is the voice of the people that was lost a few decades ago. If the draft were instituted, and everyone were to get involed like the WW's, maybe the really knowing would help with that voice for..umm..CHANGE!!!

[Nicki Lagrange]

Patriotism is not the same as blind allegiance. Refuing to fight in an unjust, illegal and stupid war is the height of patriotism in my book. And also quite sensible. Win, win.

How do the lyrics go? 'A walk on part in a war, or a lead role in a cage.' The dude in the cage is the real hero.

[karen]

I equate it to the bully and his pals at school. Do you fight them because they are a strong force and they are asking you to fight or do you walk away knowing that you are the smart one?

[Peter]

Some clever people have hit the nail on the head.

I think it is ridiculous to assert that patriotism to one's government should come before patriotism to one's country. Politicians are, by and large, people who are heavily invested in their own self interest. Anybody who thinks the government always chooses to take actions that are moral, right and in the best interest of the country's people is not paying attention.

I love my country and would defend it to the hilt. But the government we just ousted was a travesty that brought shame to me. Let's hope the next one does us proud.

I will not show blind loyalty to a group of people that does not represent or particularly care about the people that I love. I will, however, continue to love my country.

[Tutu]

Sounds like a future President to me...

[Roby Bang]

I would draft dodge, and claim I'm being patriotic. As a citizen, I should do what would be in my country's best interest. If they spend tens of thousands of dollars to get me into shape, train me in complex, expensive weaponry, feed, house, and clothe me, it would suck if I were to die or have a nervous breakdown the minute I hit the battlefield. That wouldn't be in my country's best interest. They want buff, brave people to protect our dignity. So by draft dodging, I'm only stepping out of the way so a more capable person to take my place, which is very patriotic.

[tom]

As an outside observer (I'm Canadian, and the draft question seems to be mostly an American one), the American devotion to "patriotism" is a little bizarre.

Your country was founded by the cardinal unpatriotic act (revolting against the fatherland). Yet there is a devotion in your society to your country that I don't see anywhere else in the world. The whole concept of protecting freedom, justice, etc. is so linked in the minds of so many Americans with defending the country that they are willing to give up those values to defend the country that upholds them. Its paradoxical and confusing.

A nation and its associated trappings, such as government, are only worth anything so long as they uphold the interests of their people. As soon as your hypothetical country engages in a war that is not beneficial to its people (through the whole getting shot thing), without substantial benefit to outweigh the costs, it is a person's duty to not just draft dodge but to actively seek the destruction of their own nation, if only to build a new one that actually works.

Once the social contract is breached, all bets are off and patriotism is irrelevant

[jwhaak]

Dude,

Why don't you ask a question that has some relevance for the future......like.....oh, I don't know.....what if mankind, in order to survive another generation, every man, woman, and child older than the age of three would have to begin smoking a pack a day of cancer sticks.....

Would it still be a crime against humanity to work for a tobacco company?

[Borjan]

How about the real situation instead of hypothetical?

I was drafted and the danger for my homeland Croatia was real - the war was on our turf and one third of our territory was under occupation (or rather not accessible to the forces of Croatia's law enforcement).

Did I think I could make it through the war? Hell yeah! (that was then, now I know a little bit more and my opinion has changed)

Did I dodge the draft? Hell yeah! (through some luck, connections and bribery).

Did I feel unpatriotic? Not one bit - I didn't vote for the party who - let's face it - led us to war. Maybe it was unavoidable, but in my opinion we surely could've done something different from the very start...

Why did I do it? Because my father was already in the army (he was an officer in reserve), and my mother told me that she didn't want me to go too. She added that - unless volunteering - just one male per family needed to oblige the draft. I didn't check on that, but since my mother didn't want me to go, that was all I needed.

Patriotism = stupid, as is any other dogma.

Why should I go to war for a bunch of invented borders that mean so little to me compared to what my mother means to me?

As for your "hypothetical" situation, you obviously have a lot of "patriotic" people who can't see the wood from the trees...

[Ari]

Look at this like an economist, and you'll consider future value and returns:

He could be patriotic if he felt he'd be more useful to the country in the post-war years. Thus, he's acting so he can benefit the country MORE, an act of patriotism.

Plus, if he was so susceptible to mental trauma, he wouldn't be doing his unit any favors by freezing up in combat. In effect, he would be protecting his unit by not joining it.

[Per]

He's both unpatriotic and sensible. In the modern world, the word "patriotic" (like "religious") hardly carries any positive connotation anymore.

[Mokkery]

The practical definition of a patriot is:

----------
patriot [noun]

Someone who thinks exactly like me when it comes to matters of his/her country.
----------

That's why George W. Bush and Cindy Sheehan both consider themselves patriots. And more importantly, why they each consider the other to be unpatriotic.

[Larry]

Focusing on your specific question: "If a person is relatively certain that going to war will end his ability to enjoy the rest of his life, one way or another, and the war does not present a plausible threat to the homeland, is such a person unpatriotic for dodging the draft to save himself?"

Wars don't threaten homelands; enemies do.

1) If the war is "unjust", you must dodge, even though that is unpatriotic. If you serve and are ordered to violate the law of war, you must refuse. It's difficult-to-impossible for a young draftee to determine either of those.

2) Getting drafted by no means ensures that you will be put in harm's way. Even in today's often asymmetric warfare, most soldiers don't see combat. So the "relative certainty" point is a stretch.

3) Looking into the future, I doubt we'll ever see a draft. The military hates the idea for good reason. More importantly, we are rapidly replacing humans with machines in combat. It is easy to foresee a time in which human soldiers are used almost entirely for after-the-fact stabilization operations, after the robots have eliminated the combat power of our enemies. This change won't occur overnight, but it is already underway.

[ramki]

Your argument for anti draft-dodging sounds kinda weasely.. you could have tried and come up with a better one.

[Warfreak2]

"Is the draft dodger in this hypothetical situation unpatriotic or simply sensible?"

Both.

[Szocske]

If you are patriotic, dodge the war only.
Sign up for non-military service. In my country you can serve your time as a firefighter or border patrol. Heck, I even faintly recall an American BW silent movie about some train engine driver who could not sign up for military service because his job was considered service or something...

Like the Dilbert strip website: if you think it needs a fresh look, create one, but keep the old one available on another URL.
That way you can serve both your new target demography of 10 year old Japanese girls, and us old farts too.
That way you could even swap out the characters to overweight pandas or blushing mice with heart-shaped ears in the flash version! Then instead of the lines, they could be repeating their nonsensical but cute names instead of all this nish-market office group dynamics/corporate inefficiency crap so few of us like anyway :-)

[Kirado]

oh and your new website? Was it designed by retarded inbred space monkeys.. in a word, the people you hired.. should be fired.

If you wanted it like that you should fire yourself from making those kinds of decisions.. now that it's impossible to see your daily strips online.. brilliant functionality that. I live in a country where the only newspaper that publishes your strip does it in the business section and it's like 3 months old and they leave it off half the time there is a boring business story about some rubbish. FIX IT!

[Kirado]

Well the answer to the problem is this. Armies have long since realised that drafting people is a dangerous waste of time. Yes, even if they need more soldiers.. but if your country is at that point when they need to draft, then your about to be invaded and lose anyway.

They now work on a basis of wanting trained professionals who will do what they're told. They really don't want people who are not prepared to shoot at the enemy and follow orders etc. Not even for cannon fodder.

In fact, it is dangerous and inefficient to have soldiers who don't want to be soldiers. So that basically nips your idea in the bud before you get to hypothesize about it. I suggest reading more about how modern armies function first before coming up with hypothetical situations. I'm sure there are lots up to date ideas out there.

So in conclusion it would be unpatriotic of the army and government to draft useless soldiers.

[nondescript]

Easy, he is sensible.

Sacrificing your life to save people you care about like protecting your family is a good thing. But if your family and everyone you care about is in no real danger, giving up your life to improve the life of complete strangers is pointless. (So serving to stops nazis conquer the world - patriotic, serving to make oil millionaires into billionaires - your just being taken advantage of.)

Its also better for the country, as a person such as you described is not likely to be a great soldier anyway, so would not benefit the army much but would be a loss to society as if messed up afterwards he would not be as productive a member of society as he would have been. So all loss no gain for individual and the country, so in fact his decision would be better for country as well and therefore he is actually being patriotic.

[dontbother]

Wouldn't a functional democracy -- you did claim that the USA is or has a "functional democracy a while back, didn't you? -- solve this problem in a way that would satisfy most of its citizens? The first thing it would do, I suspect, is vote to suture, Chang-Eng style, a clinical psychologist to every combatant so that their psyches wouldn't be all alone and vulnerable while fighting the war. The next would be to guarantee a pacifier until the combatant's tour of duty ended. The third would have to be adequate post-combat care in Dubai or some other Club Med-like location.

The most important, however, would be to guarantee that the USA would not send its children to fight stupid, useless, unnecessary, and venal wars.

[B]

Just wanted to say goodbye. I'll check back in a few weeks to see of the gawdawful flash crapfest gets taken down. If not, good luck. It was nice while it lasted.

The little bit of joy I got from reading your strip just can't compete with the blinking flashing hyper shitstorm that the Dilbert front page has become.

My eyes still hurt.

[Thrill]

Unpatriotic. When your country calls, you answer. Thankfully, we don't have a draft, seeing as how only a tiny portion of the American population is in any way physically or mentally fit for military duty.

[ZombieNinjaBot]

It is important to realize the difference between supporting your country and supporting your government.

[AC]

Switching the daily email format is a really bad thing to do. Now I can't view it anymore. I want to unsubscribe, but I can't even do that in a simple way. I'll just mark it as spam as that's all it is to me now.

[John S]

He's being very unpatriotic. We need sensitive people to be drafted so that holywood can boost the economy by making movies about them. Catch 22, Apocalypse Now, Platoon, Saving Private Ryan, Full Metal Jacket, all needed those sensitive characters to make the movie whole.

And lets not forget M.A.S.H.

[zaki]

The obvious answer is yes, he is unpatriotic. If your country calls on you, you need to go. End of story.

Its a question , i want to answer , you confuse my brain , make bob sad .

[Anarchy In Your Head]

Dodging an unjust war (which is most of them) is the only patriotic thing to do. But to answer your question, a draft is horrendously immoral. Resisting slavery is always a sensible thing to do and being enslaved to risk your life in a horrifying situation such as that is even worse than being enslaved to do tedious labor. To even briefly consider that a draft has any place at all in a supposedly civilized society is proof of how effective the brain-washing of government schools truly is.

[Bob]

The answer is simple. Stop being a judgmental jerk. A man has to make his own decisions.

I served my time, voluntarily, and for my own personal reasons. I would never pass judgment on someone who chose differently, draft or not. Life is tough, and you have to make tough decisions.

The last time there was a draft, they were only drafting men between the ages of 17 and 25. If it ever returns, it will probably be men between 18 and 25. Most of you are safe from any hypothetical draft.

[Kevin Davin]

Four words answer this question: Civil Disobedience, Henry Thoreau.

"The government itself, which is only the mode which the people have chosen to execute their will, is equally liable to be abused and perverted before the people can act through it."

Patriotism to a corrupt government is unpatriotic.

[Shane]

Being a Canadian, I am more than happy to have more Americans emigrate up here; as long as you're willing to adapt to our way of life. However, my only reservation stems from the old adage, "change comes from within". If a segment of the American population (who are opposed to a draft) resist it by leaving, how does that fuel a grassroots rebellion against such a medieval Doctrine in your own country from resurfacing?

In closing, patriotism and fighting a (hypothetical) war for oil are two totally separate things. I have a concern that it may be offensive to some service-persons to paint them with the same brush. Is it patriotic to go to war in Afghanistan, I'd say yes. As for Iraq, I'd say that war isn't related to patriotism.

How about the Vietnam war, was that considered to be a war based on patriotism?

[cb]

I love how apolitical this blog is!

Refreshing.

[Douglas]

Hey, Scott, I think someone's stolen your dilbert.com domain and put a junk ad-stuffed site up there instead. The page has so much stuff on it, and the comic is the last thing to load. I can't imagine a writer signing off on a web site that puts his comic last, someone must have stolen your domain name. I'm reading the comic at Yahoo now, hopefully you'll get dilbert.com back for Dilbert comics! (Yahoo link: http://news.yahoo.com/comics/dilbert)

[Bobby]

I guess my return hypothetical question is...

Why would someone want to live in a country if they feel the government wants to kill them for marginal benefit?

[Al]

If said individual is an American, it would be unpatriotic to COMPLY with a draft. Nothing is more ant-American than a draft, or any other kind of involuntary servitude. We addressed that hypocrisy with the abolition of slavery.

[David]

It's patriotic not to go even if you will be fine afterward if you don't think it's right.

[Woody]

You make a giant leap of faith to expect an eighteen year-old to be able to determine the threat and his chances. Our representative form of government does a better job of evaluating that than does a kid out of high school.

[Javarrito]

Unpatriotic? Yes. But, what is patriotism but a kind term for nationalism?

Sensible? Yes. Why should someone make sacrifices for something that they do not believe in?

The question is, what is more American--standing behind the US no matter what, or acting as an independent individual? I always believed it was that latter.

Whether a war is worth fighting in or not should be up to the individual. I'd fight in a war if I believed in the cause. If someone tries to say that I don't have the right to make that decision? Well, there's always Canada.

[Preston]

Yes, that person is unpatriotic.

It is unpatriotic to not follow the law since one of the founding principals of this country is the rule of law.

In this hypothetical situation, the draft was instituted by due process of the law. ANY failure to follow that law is unpatriotic no matter what your "feelings" about the war are.

If you don't like it, GET INVOLVED in the forming and making of that law or get the hell out!!

[Kevin]

Completely off topic, but this is the only way to get through to you without registering: Apparently Mordac has taken over the Dilbert website. The combination of 910 incredibly bad redesign, (2) registration requirement, and (3) no prior notice (for a while, I didn't know if your site was broken, my browser was hacked, or I had some nast malware). Yuck!

What were you thinking?!

Let us all know if/when your site is back to some semblance of sanity. Until then, I won't be back.

[Jan]

Here come the slashdotters...
http://entertainment.slashdot.org/article.pl?no_d2=1&sid=08/04/19/1842208

[TruthTaco]

Im not going to bother reading the other comments.

The Draft is slavery.

You dont owe your government shit.

Love you country but never trust your government.

I dont care what war or what cause, i dont believe in murder or violence unless its in self defense.
Everyone tells me that we have to go to iraq to save the people from the horrible dictator. They say they are better off without the dictator, well these people have so far chosen to LIVE under this dictatorship, many of the people that chose to live under the dictatorship instead of DYING will DIE when you decide you should trot over there and save them. Are the people that are Dead better off? I dont think so. You have no right to go to some other country and kill people and say they are better off. if they wanted to risk death for freedom then they would have already done so. many people choose living under a dicator over death and i dont blame them.
Furthermore the government (the US) has no right to steal money from other people to fund the war to "save" other people, let alone put them in slavery to save other people.

whats with this crazy logic, you were born here, not of your choice and yet your morally obligated to die for something some politican figures is best.

If people think we have to go save some other country so much, then you wont have any problems raising the money via donations. which we will never see that happen because when it comes down to it, war is far too expensive... the only reason we have war is because the government has a monopoly on the money supply. They can create as much money(debt) as they want to fund their wars. who cares if inflation goes way up, or if future generations are saddled with debt for eternity.

www.freedomainradio.com

[Nick]

Patriotism is just an idiots excuse for not having any sense of self and responsibility. I find the hand on heart salute the flag , my country is right whatever type attitude is just something ignorant twats hide behind because they don't have enough self worth to stand up and say what they believe.

[Yottabyte]

It doesn't matter whether he's either or both or neither. Since he had no free will, his decision to dodge the draft was predetermined.

Therefore, sense and patriotism are both concepts that don't exist so it's useless to discuss them =P

[Old timer]

He is hypocritical. If he truly believes his country is wrong to fight to protect the liberties we all enjoy, he should give up his citizenship and leave permanently.

[Arby]

Patriotic is one of those warm fuzzy words that mean different things to different people. However, dodging the draft is a legal issue not a social issue. You are either an illegal alien or not, you are a speeder or not and you are a murder whether you were high on Twinkies or not.

Way too many gray lines are drawn where black and white is the answer, no matter how painful. It is easy to draw up simplistic scenarios to make any point a person wants to make. Hard and fast solutions and their consequences are only evident viewed with hindsight. We mere mortals do not have a crystal ball to see clearly their end results. We just do the best we can.

[Fafnir]

I'd call it sensible, myself, but then I'm in the UK and we're a bit more relaxed about patriotism than the US.

[Robert]

The US has always allowed the wealthy to avoid the draft when it chooses to have one. In the 19th century you just presented a cheque (I think in your civil war it was $300) or paid a volunteer to attend the draft office on your behalf; In the Vietnam era and later you just paid tuition to a college of your choice. Either way your working classes fought and died while your monied classes paid their way out - or served valiantly in the National Guard.

[Phillip]

I would not say that draft dodging is unpatriotic, but that it's a crime. Which would make that person a criminal. I don't really care about what someone thinks about this war (I'm kind of undecided), but they need to follow the law.

I would say that we do not need a draft, as a volunteer military is best. I raised my right hand and enlisted (and no I don't sit behind a desk in my job). I would would not want someone who did not want to be there with me. They could get me killed.

[alex]

If we are a product of our environment, and we are "moist robots", then free will is merely an illusion, as you say. What happens if you realize this, want to change yourself, and change your environment accordingly in a way that will alter your behaviors the way you want them to? I.E. Tired of being an alcoholic go to AA. Spending all your time around lucky people so the subconscious behavior that leads to their luck will be subconsciously learned by you? I know this comment is about a year too late, but I'm still curious. You could argue that your impulses tell you to self-improve, so you will. How can we explain the people who have enough self-control to refuse acting on impulse? By that I mean, how can we explain the people who are really really good at self-improvement? Are they good at overriding other instincts? Is every fit person one who is naturally inclined to exercise and eat right, or do they constantly long to just sit around all day and veg out? Maybe you'd agree that if everyone evolved into beings with great self-control we could ignore out impulses and be exactly what we want to be. Or do you think that self control is like free will - an illusion? I think for the most part, we are moist robots. But every once in awhile, our self control intervenes and we can override our impulses. To disprove that they'd have to look at parts of the brain that relate to self-control and all that, and that will happen, so we shall know soon enough!

[Demetrius Of Pharos]

Patriotism is nonsense to begin with, especially in contemporary America.

Patriotism - as it seems to be defined today, especially by conservatives - means blind allegiance to whatever corrupt and moronic law/order/draft/government lunacy happens to be in place at the time.

Consider the Founding Fathers. We are indoctrinated from a very young age to believe they were the most patriotic people ever, when in fact they rebelled against a tyrannical government and refused to follow their laws anymore. People who rebel or disagree with government today are considered un-patriotic.

Taking that example, the only patriotic people left in this country are those who - rather than follow blindly - tend to think for themselves, and occasionally disagree with the law or government. The most patriotic are those who protest against those things they disagree with - in the grand tradition of the Founding Fathers.

So to answer your question, your hypothetical person would be both sensible patriotic - this person is merely protesting against something he doesn't believe in.

I also fully expect to get flamed for this opinion.

[Gavin]

I think it should not matter if others think you are patriotic/unpatriotic, sensible/insensible. If the draft dodger believes in his own right actions then who cares what others think. At the end of the day, its his life at stake.

If he believes that he is better off being in the army and fighting in the war, so be it. Its his choice and he has to choose for himself (hopefully he gets the chance to) and not because it is the 'patriotic' thing to do.

[Frank Drake]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZHrzDiTdf9s

[Skyler]

Darwin said,

"I'm sorry, but vulnerability to "psychological damage" in a grown-up is not a trait we should allow to propagate."

I couldn't agree more.

You didn't say it was an immoral war, simply that it was unpopular.

In our nation roughly 50% of the people will disagree with each and every decision. If you're on the losing side of that decision, the principles of democracy hold that you must submit to those that won. Otherwise our nation cannot stand.

The exceptions are when the nation is doing something evil or immoral. This is not a charge to be tossed around lightly. Your hypothetical does not suggest that our nation has transformed into such an evil state.

As for the effete nature of the man, screw him. Wars suck. There are all sorts of casualties. I think a man that gets killed would have preferred to be alive. A man losing his legs would prefer keeping them. These men have no ability to influence their condition. Your hypothetical sissy has the power to overcome his hurt feelings, he can get better. I've no pity for him. He should pretend he's a man and do what's right.

[Rohit]

I agree with A. Nonymous. The new site design is quite user un-friendly. Please roll back to the old one, or come up with a better one.

[midnight]

Using conscript soldiers is a sure way to create an ineffective army.
There are varying levels of patriotism from the lowest level of taking care of yourself to be a consuming/producing unit all the way up to giving your life for your country. People are capable of different degrees of this and it is just a limit on how far up that scale they can or are willing to climb. The reasons for a war are not for the pawns to judge. I don't want my hammer disagreeing with me about which nail to hit.

[Clair]

Think of the past famous civilizations that have failed because the people become too self absorbed, rich or otherwise unwilling to protect the wonders that they had created. I have been there and come back, yes, without hurt but oh so happy to have done the job so that the kids can enjoy and by some sort of miracle they feel that way too.

[exalted wombat]

Your new-look dilbert.com is pretty. But all I need it for is to view your Sunday strips which don't get mailed out for some reason. This was easier before.

[Jen]

Not hiding but standing up and refusing to go because you don't believe in the war, even if you get sent to jail, is just as patriotic as going off to fight. You're making a sacrifice for what you believe the country should be.
Deciding you want an easy life and running off to Canada is still unpatriotic and selfish no matter how sensible it is.

[Hacker Kitty]

I think both. I'm a dyed-in-the-wool pacifist. I like my country a lot, I think we've got a lot of things going for us here, but I'm definitely not patriotic in the slightest. Is it really sensible to accept being told that other people's lives are worth less than yours because they were born somewhere else? That's just silly.

[Francesco Orsenigo]

"Patriotism (nationalism) is beliving your country is better only because you were born there."

War is ultimately a way to transfer huge amounts of money from lesser citizens to corporations.
everything can be expolained through economics.

Going to war is UNpatriotic.

The concept of patriotism has a stronger value in the US than in other countries in my experience.

These days it seems to be mostly wielded as a control mechanism. And interestingly supported by other abstracts like "your country calls on you". As if a country does anything of the sort.

Such abstracts appear to be a mechanism to subvert critical thinking. Ultimately a small group of people make a decision about whether a country goes to war, and they are directly the people "calling on you".

If you concur with their assessment of the situation when provided with the same information, then make your decision based on your moral standing.

If you are not provided with the same information - you'd have to question why it was being withheld - having your security based on obscurity has been understood as nonsense for decades. Make your call.

But to accept your thought processing being bypassed: "Try not to think about this too much, trust us that we are right - and we represent your country; and risk your life because we tell you it is important" is nothing more than dogma.

If you are willing to suspend critical thinking and accept this, then you should be