Fight the Rich Man’s Fight

I’ve been thinking about who fights our wars. I don’t know why I thought about it today, but its been on my mind since we discussed it in this quarter’s Vietnam section. The reality of the United States’ wars (and perhaps everywhere) is that privileged leaders and politicians decide our involvement but the impoverished youth give their lives.

Consider this, in the American Revolution, most people who fought participated through militias. They joined when the battle rolled through town, provided their own arms, and then disbanded. This worked for many men, particularly farmers who could not abandon their land for long periods of time to fight in the war. Logistically this was a poor system and George Washington knew it. He wanted (and had) a standing army. However, poor men (sometimes without their own shoes) filled its ranks and suffered the largest causalities. These men needed the salary (however trivial) the Constitutional Army provided because they did not have property.

Fast forward to the Civil War. Much of the nation resorted to a draft system to fight this horrendous war. More Americans died in this war than in all the other wars the U.S. has participated combined. However, wealthy plantation owners often sent their slaves to fight for them or paid others to serve their draft notice. And the poor took the cash and died. This happened across the Union as well, but seemed more prevalent in the South.

World War I partially fills this example, but the U.S. short involvement (just over a year) makes it a poor case study. And the Great Depression combined with the attack on Pearl Harbor made World War II a popular war to fight in.

Moving forward, the impoverished and minorities (often one and the same, due to Jim Crow and practiced segregation in suburbia) fought the first several years in Vietnam. In fact, part of the militant tone that overtook the Civil Rights movement in the latter half of the 1960s came directly from an understanding that African American men fought and died in the war at a much greater rate than their white counterparts. A draft that allowed college enrollment as a reason for deferral partially allowed for this discrepancy in the troops.

But the draft is over now. We are in locked in two (seemingly unending) wars. And yet, the impoverished make up much of our military troops (though not all). These men and women have little economic opportunities outside the military.

It’s an interesting historical dilemma. Invoking a draft (as has been done through much of our history) did not prevent class and racial discrepancies in our military. Removing the draft has left us again with a class discrepancy in the troops. For historians, it poses an interesting question: what does this demonstrate about military in the U.S.? What does it mean (or does it mean anything)?

For you readers: does it even matter?

Moving Toward Independence

Today in 1775, the Second Continental Congress met in Philadelphia. The men met with the intention to figure out the best way to protect the liberties of their respective colonies, independence or reconciliation with Great Britain. This was in direct response to the battles at Lexington and Concord from the previous month, the first battles of the War of Independence.
At this meeting, Congress authorized the raising of an army, printed money to pay for said army, and appointed George Washington its commander. The British responded to the Congress’ decisions, by declaring the colonies in a state of rebellion. They dispatched thousands of troops and ordered the closing of all colonial ports.
John Adams, the motivated lawyer from Massachusetts (where much of the rebellion had already occurred), felt that British abuses gave the colonies no choice. However, not all colonists felt this way yet, moderates and conservatives still felt strong opposition toward independence and would need to be convinced. Throughout the war, a minority of colonists remained loyal to Great Britain.
The road to independence was a long one. Two months after the meeting of the Second Continental Congress, in July 1775, John Dickinson of Pennsylvania drafted the Olive Branch Petition. The document affirmed the colonies’ loyalty to King George III and requested the king to renounce the previous acts of his ministers (those who had raised taxes on the colonies). The Second Continental Congress also issued a declaration denying that the colonies were planning to declare independence. Great Britain, knowing full well of the rebel army in place, did not attempt to marry the contradictions of the Congress. King George III refused to receive the Olive Branch Petition and British leaders were determined to destroy the colonies’ rebellion.
By the end of 1775, British Parliament had ended all trade with the colonies and ordered the Royal Navy to seize colonial merchant ships. Whether supported by all colonists or not, the path to independence had begun.