Whose National Service?
Minipundit, whilst discussing Larry Sabato’s proposed constitutional amendments, makes a good case against universal national service — an idea whose undying support among some sections of the intelligentsia seems to be little more than baby boomer projection and guilt about weaseling their way out of Vietnam.
And maybe I’m saying this because I’m an able-bodied young American who would be affected by the service proposal, but forcing teenagers against their will to, say, mentor inner city youth or join the Peace Corps or (especially) join the military strikes me as counterproductive. You’ll just have a large number of unmotivated “volunteers” who won’t be devoting themselves to the task the way voluntary workers would. I doubt the military, the Peace Corps, or programs like CityYear would actually support a national service requirement, as I doubt they’d want the kind of workers it would produce.
All of these are fair points, but here’s the most important one — how many 18 year olds are clamoring for mandatory national service? How many of those who advocate for national service are going to have to spend 1-2 years of their life with a bunch of other unhappy teens in some poorly administered service program, or, even better, dying in Iraq? While I’m not a fan of the chickenhawk argument, it is very applicable when discussing national service. I didn’t volunteer to be an able bodied draft-aged American male, and I’d prefer if Larry Sabato didn’t take advantage of that.
My full brief against the draft is here.
