Argument Against Conscription In Australia

Words: 201
Pages: 1
Open Document
Introduction:
Conscription – Conscription is compulsory enlistment for service, typically in the armed services.
At the outbreak of the First World War, the number of people volunteering to enlist for the Australian Imperial Force was so high that recruitment officers were forced to turn people away. However, as the war went on, casualty rates increased and the number of volunteers declined, so that by 1916 the AIF faced a shortage of men.
First Referendum:
Despite opposition from his own party, Labor Prime Minister Billy Hughes decided to take the issue to the people in a referendum. The nation was asked to grant the government the power to make citizens serve overseas during the current war (conscription). The referendum provoked furious debate within the Australian community. It was held on 28 October 1916, and the proposal for conscription was narrowly defeated …show more content…
Hughes asked for another referendum on conscription. This conscription campaign was just as heated as the first, with the most prominent anti-conscription activist being the Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne, Daniel Mannix. On 20 December 1917 the nation again voted against conscription, this time with a slightly larger
Show More

Related Documents: Argument Against Conscription In Australia

Sam' File Essay

discuss conscription, but they have very different opinion about whether Australia should bring back conscription. According to Blythe, Australia has faced serious threats while there is a shortfall in numbers of military, and join to army can benefit young people in many ways such as learning teamwork leadership and responsibility and improving job-related skills. He also points out that conscription is fair because it does not regard any personal background. As De Souza, he is strongly against conscription…

Words 573 - Pages 3

Treaty of Versailles and 3.1 .2 France 3.1 .3 United States Rejects Treaty 3.1 .4 Essay

assessed at 132 billion Marks (then $31.4 billion or £6.6 billion, roughly equivalent to US $442 billion or UK £284 billion in 2013), a sum that many economists at the time, notably John Maynard Keynes, deemed to be excessive and counterproductive. The argument by Keynes that the terms were too harsh—a "Carthaginian peace"—convinced many British and American leaders, but left the French unmoved.[2] However, historians have judged the reparations to have been lenient, designed to look imposing but were in…

Words 4982 - Pages 20