None whatsover, if it would take the same amount of force to make you march under one flag as it would to march under the other.
But was “collectivist draft style military strategy” employed by the opponents of Sauron? I recall many “call to arms”, but I don’t remember any reference to whether any, all, or none, of the participants were forcibly conscripted. I do seem to remember times when people joined in or stepped up voluntarily. I read it many times but not in the last decade or two 
Also, I would say that the strategy employed was: to destroy the Ring. The Fellowship of the Ring was certainly not conscripted. Well Frodo had to be “pursuaded”, but the rest all volunteered or insisted to go. If that failed then all the other military strategy, collectivist or no, would not withstand Sauron eventually.
Cheers, John
if you are going to be forced marching to someone else’s orders, and deserters die; what difference does it make which of the two warring flags you march under?
If side A’s victory means your family and village will be undisturbed, while side B’s victory means your family and village will become orc slaves, it makes a difference, no?
if you love your family enough to side with A then why would side A need to ‘draft’/‘press gang’ you…
Because you ignore the obvious public good problem.
oh really?
yeah, totally!
i think not.
This is an argument against libertarianism, surely discoordinated libertarian militias could not stand up to the massive onslaught of those legions,
I think it’s funny that statists feel they can assume that a libertarian army would be disorganized. Meanwhile, FedEx can get a package to Papeete in 3 days, roughly the same as ambulance response time in NYC.
I think that there are good arguments for a libertarian interpratation of LOTR (like the rings being viewed as allegories for political power).
Riggenbach makes some good points in his podcast:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poVOtChxTgg
>>>Take a look at the Shire, the Hobbits live peacefully, and there’s no sign of rule or law.
This is not one such argument. Do not use the Shire as an argument in favor of an anarcho-capitalist society. Tolkein-enthusiasts may catch you and hold your feet to the fire. To illustrate why, I will pose as the devil’s advocate:
The Hobbits were being protected by the Rangers of the North even though they did not know it. This illustrates the free-rider problem, namely that the Rangers were incurring the costs of protection without compensation. Luckily for the Hobbits, the Rangers did not expect any because they are selfless heroes.
However, in the real world, there are no Rangers of the North to protect you from foreign invaders. In the real world, a powerful central state is needed to protect citizens from foreign invaders and high taxes are needed to fund this state.
Catch my drift?
Here’s a look at the LOTR from strike-the-root.com: http://www.strike-the-root.com/abolitionist-argument-in-35-seconds