Viewing page 16 of 28

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

courses and made them yeomen in the Navy; then we took ribbon clerks and made them pharmacist's mates. It didn't make any sense ..... Industry has suffered from that. You reached into our factories, took out superiors because they were less than 26 years of age, and put uniforms on them. And what did they do? They marched in the rear ranks as second-grade privates, whereas previously they had been accustomed to handling men. What did we have? We had fellows supervising people who ought to have been in the rear-ranks as second-grade privates..... If we are talking total war there must be less difference between the chap who carries a gun and the fellow who stays at home, between the fellow on the merchant vessel and the Navy gun crew that sits aboard."

Actually, Mr. Ward touches on the crux of the matter in his last sentence: The concept underlying Selective Service is outmoded by the concept of total war. In a future war, there can be no difference between the man in uniform and the home-front civilian. There can be no clear line between what is directly related to war and what relates to the civilian economy. In total war, each man, woman and child is obligated to serve where he or she is best qualified to serve in the interest of the nation. 

If effective utilization of manpower is to be achieved in a future war, proper military-economic balance must be assured; and those citizens who remain out of uniform must be required to render the service they are best qualified to render in support of the war effort. This requirement should be filled by the passage of a National Service Act, which would

12