[johnnygood]

I'm not trying to be harsh on your concept, but if one takes it a little further: "If the citizens can't be mustered to volunteer their taxes. . ."

One of the ideas behind government is that certain situations are prisoner's dilemmas and that a central authority can make sure that the situation comes out equally for all. Rather than having people volunteer taxes, we write laws forcing people to pay them so that some person doesn't get to skip taxes yet get the benefit of the taxes being volunteered by others. Likewise, Israel is compelling their citizens to do military service. Heck, if you're an American male, you were compelled to register for the draft from 18-26 years of age and notify them if you moved residences - under the premise that such registration would make a future draft more equitable.

I'm somewhat just playing devil's advocate here since I tend to think that putting one's life in jeopardy is different from being compelled toward other ends. Would you object as strongly if you were compelled to serve the military, but could choose a non-life-endangering position? Say, IT support? What if the United States compelled people to do Americorps for a year or two after graduation? Does that qualify as slavery?

I guess I'm curious whether your objection is a more libertarian "any time the government compels its citizens, it's a form of slavery" or a life-ethic "when the government forces its citizens against their will to put their life in jeopardy, it's wrong."

[iwr]

If the citizens can't be mustered to pay taxes, then that too is a condemnation of the state. Note that countries with high levels of corruption also tend to have high tax evasion among the tax base.

[JabavuAdams]

There are worse things than putting your own life in jeopardy -- like putting others' lives in jeopardy.

This is not a rebuttal to the bulk of your post.