some general strategies for the military conscription resolution

The NFL's 2009 national tournament resolution, "Resolved: military conscription is unjust," is deceptively simple, but in reality offers a wide range of options for both sides.

Affirmative Strategies
Although it always seems weird to me to affirm a negative statement, that's what the resolution demands, so that's what we have to do. There are at least three overarching positions to take, with options under each.

1. War is itself unjust, so anything that promotes war is unjust. (Pacifism.)
Corollary: Even in peacetime, the draft increases militarism and ethnocentrism, which leads to further conflict

2. Military conscription is instrumentally unjust--in other words, it leads to unjust outcomes.
a. It ruins society or otherwise decreases social utility.
b. In practice, it is unfair or exacerbates social division.

3. Military conscription is intrinsically unjust, violating liberty / autonomy / dignity / rights. (A deontological framework.)

Negative Strategies
1. In response to pacifism...
a. Just war theory, linked into notions of national self-defense and the necessity of conscription
b. Argue for the moral necessity of war, and that social benefits, to be fairly deserved, should be fairly won
c. Argue that it unfairly broadens the resolution and is a time-suck.

2. In response to instrumental arguments...
a. Attack utilitarian notions of justice (although this might be tough for the Neg to pull off)
b. Agree with utilitarian premises, but show how they lead to the opposite conclusion

3. In response to rights- or liberty-based arguments...
a. Deny the framework, and fight back with utilitarian, communitarian, or other notions of justice
b. Accept the framework, and show how the draft does not violate liberty / rights / etc., perhaps via social contract reasoning (Rousseau might be good here).

Of course, there are other less traditional approaches that might work as well. Feel free to suggest your own in the comments.

Resolved: Military conscription is unjust.

The NFL has released the topic for 2009 nationals:

Resolved: Military conscription is unjust.

(I corrected the typo; the original states, "Resolved: Miitary conscription is unjust.")

Analysis, links, and more to follow in the days ahead. For now, some initial thoughts.

1. Libertarianism, anarchism, pacifism, isolationism. Emma Goldman. Ron Paul. Foucault.
2. Either communitarian or utilitarian justice schemes will be common for the negative. Rousseau's "general will" lines up nicely here. How about Hegel?
3. Note that the resolution is not time- or culture-bound, so watch out for conditional affirmation involving age, gender, etc.
4. More libertarianism: Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman, "draft is slavery," involuntary servitude, freedom as the highest value.
5. Rawls on the neg could be interesting.
6. This has to be--nay, is--the shortest resolution in some time.

As I start to develop my thoughts, feel free to suggest your own ideas, questions, and comments.

Analysis
1. I suggest some general strategies for the Aff and Neg.
2. Joe Nusz has two articles available: one about finding a fresh angle for your case, and the other on the connection between conscription and Thoreau.