National Service?

He hits her, chokes her, threatens
her with a knife. She flees.
He sets her bed on fire.

Never mind domestic terrorists, Obama is now seen pallin’ around with war criminals. He was seen (in public no less) spending time with George W. Bush, a known war criminal. This does not, I fear, bode well for the future. Of course I know that under the circumstances he has no choice but to cooperate with Bush on the transition, and I also know that Bush is very personable in person to person interactions, and is apparently serious about helping Obama make this all important transition. I just think it is weird and I worry that Bush/Cheney will not be held accountable for their many crimes. The fact that Obama has asked Reid to allow Lieberman to continue caucusing with the Democrats I think is also not a very good omen. But of course we will just have to wait and see how this all plays out.

The subject of National Service has now been brought to my attention. Most everyone I know seems to be against this idea. I am not so sure. I think what they seem to be most against is the thought that National Service will be mandatory, like the draft. Another objection I perceive on the part of some is that the idea is linked pretty specifically to military service. Many just think that forcing people to do anything is just plain wrong, violates their civil rights and individual liberties and so on. I think this is a much more complicated issue that most people realize.

Could we have a successful system of National Service that is not mandatory? Would it have to have a military bias? What other kinds of service might be both possible and desirable? How would it be funded? How long would it last? What obligations would be entailed on the part of those who participate? How might it be funded? Who would be responsible for it? What, precisely, would it consist of?

We do have some programs already that involve National Service. The Peace Corps come readily to mind. I know there are others as well. I understand that some of these are reasonably successful. But they represent only a tiny fraction of the relevant population, that population being primarily younger people, probably in the range of 18 to 20 years of age. I have not thought deeply on this subject as yet, but certain things do come to mind.

It is not uncommon in many cultures for young people, when they reach a certain age, to have to undergo initiation ceremonies. These are often quite violent and involve physical ordeals that are often brutal. The brutality aside for the moment, these ceremonies also function to instruct the young people in the duties that will be expected of them now that they are becoming of age. They are urged to marry and settle down to gardening or hunting or whatever they do to survive, to have and raise children, to protect the community from dangers, and so on. The brutality is used to reinforce the importance of these lessons. These rites are said to be mandatory but there are sometimes exceptions made for youngsters that are believed to be not quite up to the ordeals. Fathers and/or mothers brothers are often responsible for seeing the initiates through the various ceremonies. As these young people up until that moment have often just run wild, with no duties or responsibilities, it is important to impress upon them the new responsibilities they will have, etc.

Obviously when people here speak of National Service they do not have these kinds of rites in mind. But it might no be a bad idea to impress upon our youths many of the same things – cultural values they should observe, the duties of citizenship, the importance of voting, and so on. This much could perhaps be mandatory.

The service beyond this I believe should probably not be mandatory. The young people should not be forced to perform activities that might be anathema to them. Certainly we should not have a military draft. But some, if so inclined, could volunteer for military service. Others could volunteer for all sorts of other activities that would help train them for careers they might be interested in. Some could even volunteer to work on public projects such as road building or other kinds of construction. Some might wish to pursue interests in nursing or medicine or art and literature. They should be encouraged to improve their lives in ways that are important to them.

Obviously this is a topic that could easily run to book length. But the most basic problems are twofold. First, we would have to know what values and goals should be pursued from the standpoint of having a healthy and functioning culture. Second, how would you motivate the young to pursue such goals. That is, if you want to have a smoothly functioning and worthwhile culture you have to have citizens that are motivated to WANT do what it is they NEED to do. This would require rather massive changes in our current cultural values and goals. Materialism would have to change to idealism. Me first would have to change to country first. Football coaches would have to cease being the most highly paid members of universities. Education and learning would have to be pursued for its own sake. Science would have to take precedence over fairy tales. There would have to be a cultural revolution of sorts. Is this even possible now? If not I fear for what lies ahead of us.

LKBIQ:
On a group of theories one can found a school; but on a group of values one can found a culture, a civilization, a new way of living together among men.
Ignazio Silone

TILT:
The White House has 135 rooms.