Mandatory national service = citizenship? Your thoughts?

[mckitterick]

Re: this:
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/alert/?alertid=5834001&content_dir=ua_congressorg

and this:
http://snopes.com/politics/military/draft.asp

Y'know, I would have no problem with requiring two years of national service right after high school of anyone who wishes to be an American citizen. Remember Heinlein? Sorta like that. But I disagree with Heinlein and others that it must be military service. In fact, that would counter the notion that this is good for America, because people would be force to do something they might be morally opposed to and cause protests.

However, most people (yes, most) right outta high school (or new to the country and seeking citizenship) ought to spend some time doing good for their country. Two years of paid volunteerism, seeing how the bottom half lives while becoming part of the country and learning who they are: That seems like a good idea.

If this resolution spelled out that the individual could pick their path (community projects, working with the homeless, cleaning up industrial spills, you name it), then I would support it! Honestly, how many kids are ready for college at 17 or 18? But I, for one, would have fought being forced into the military; heck, I would have bitched about having to do other service, but then kids of that age bitch just on principle.

How about you? Would you support mandatory national service where the hopeful citizen would be able to choose their path? A true rite of passage to citizenship. I predict it would increase the percentage of voters, too.

Chris

Comments

The Draft

[bobhowe.livejournal.com]

I think as long as you have armies, you have to have a draft. I don't come to this lightly: conscription is slavery. But I think the system we have now could be called economic conscription. The second-worst thing you can ask a person to do is die for their country (the worst thing is to ask them to kill for it), and I think it's neither fair nor socially responsible to leave the burden to those who have few other economic prospects.

It seems to me the All-Volunteer Army has become the Disposable Army. You'll probably never see a system that's airtight enough to draft the sons and daughters of senators or millionaires, but if you draft the sons and daughters of enough Americans--bluntly speaking, you hold them hostage--the political cost for committing troops to battle becomes much higher.

I'm not naive: this can have negative consequeces, too. Americans are remarkably slow to commit troops to humanitarian crises as it is, especially in Africa and Asia. But I think compulsory military service spreads the human cost of war much more evenly, and will make for a more healthy body politic: you have a much bigger stake in the system when you (or your kids or siblings) has to serve at its pointy end. And yes, the vast majority of soldiers, sailors and aviators are noncombatants, but they're closer to the point of the spear than the Wall Street trader reading the New York Post and nodding his head in agreement with the idea that it's time to kick some Arab ass.