After weighing the pros and cons of conscription, it is safe to say that the decision to implement conscription in 1917 was very ineffective. This statement can be supported by three major ideas, the main reason why conscription appealed to many wasn’t fulfilled, many that were involuntarily conscripted weren’t fully equipped and Canada’s reputation of a strong country was tainted by the internal conflicts that Conscription had created. The first reason why conscription was not effective is because one of the major reasons so many people were pro-conscription was because it was a way of bring back current troops from overseas. However, this was not the case because out of the 400,000 that were conscripted, 397,629 …show more content…
The second reason that supports the argument is how even though many anti-conscription voters did end up being conscripted, they were not properly equipped or give the right resources to help them succeed in the warfront. For example, many French Canadians were mistreated in the trenches due to language barriers amongst other soldiers and also because of the lack of manuals and maps that were in the French language. Also, many farmers felt they were poorly trained as they did farm during the majority of the war unlike the other men who were being trained for the majority of the war. This proves how ineffective conscription was because it wasn’t properly planned out and there was no guarantee for anti-conscription voters that they’d be safe at the warfront. The final reason why conscription was a poor decision is because although it did boost Canada's reputation as a strong nation, internally, it completely tore Canada apart. One of the many events that support this is the riot that happened on April 1st in Quebec, that was caused by French Canadians, this riot ultimately ended up killing 4 people and 10 were wounded. Another example is, how the anger and resentment that farmers felt fuelled to create many federal and political parties that had opposing views with the current