Conscription is forced military service, a regime wherein the government claims the power to draft individuals (typically young men) into the armed forces for a set period, regardless of consent, and under the threat of violence.

They’re often used interchangeably in everyday speech, but there’s a useful distinction:

Conscription is the system or law that gives the state the power to require military service from eligible civilians. It can exist even if no one is currently being called up.

Draft is the mechanism or event of actually calling people up under that conscription system (e.g., a lottery, notice-to-report process, mobilization order). People also use “the draft” as a casual synonym for conscription, but technically it is just the call-up process.

Mandatory military service is the compulsory service in the armed forces. It is probably the most clear way to refer to conscription, but it is a mouthful.

National service is more tricky. It is usually understood as a system of compulsory or voluntary government service. So it applies also beyond military (e.g. civil service) and it is not always clear if coercion of the individual is involved.

Conscription has wide downsides: it weakens military effectiveness (poor selection, evasion, lower quality andincentives), harms the economy (education loss, unemployment, exploitative pay), damages society and civil liberties (family disruption, abuse & hazing, crime, inequality, domestic violence), and worsens health outcomes (injuries, mental health issues, addictions like alcohol & nicotine).

So far we have almost 20 reasons to oppose forced military service, and more are coming! You can read more in the section: "The Case Against Conscription"

Yes, in fact forced military service is making Europe less safe, as it is wasting its resources on training unfit, unwilling, and undisciplined men, who may leave the country in the event of war leaving it defenceless.

There are many possible defence models. We are open to different perspectives on the proportion of reserves a country should train, but any approach can only be effective if the army is in the end manned by willing volunteers.

We hold great respect for men serving their countries in uniform. We believe they deserve just compensation for their service and freedom.

While humanity has seen an astounding decrease of war and military conflict in the last century, current geopolitical climate and Russian propensity for aggression against its neighbors, necessitates undertaking strong defence measures. Demilitarization is not an option.

No. NATO remains the cornerstone of security on the European continent and should remain a central part of the geopolitical landscape. NATO will be strongest when its member states embrace evidence-based force models and move away from conscription.

Yes. As prof. Bryan Caplan points out in his piece "How Could the Draft Not Be Slavery?":

From the Free Dictionary:

slav·er·y 1. The state of one bound in servitude as the property of a slaveholder or household.

con·scrip·tion 1. Compulsory enrollment, especially for the armed forces; draft.

To me, you’d have to be blind to deny the libertarian truism that “conscription is slavery.” Slavery is involuntary servitude; conscription is involuntary military servitude; therefore not only is conscription slavery; it’s a particularly heinous form of slavery that often ends in maiming and death.