A proposal that would help young Americans understand that civic duty is not
restricted to the military.
A version of this article appeared May 30, 2013, on page A15 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Lincoln's Call to Service—and Ours.
My father first took me to Gettysburg when I was 12 years old. He was a
lieutenant colonel in the Army, home from the first of two tours in Vietnam. I
remember in particular the hundreds of obelisks poking over the berms, the
oxidized plaques attached to rocks and the statues lining the roadways. All
spoke for the thousands of men and boys who had died in the grass and dirt
serving their nation. I was young, but I recognized the gravity of the place.
Though I went on to have a career in the military, the visits to Gettysburg
with my father were not preparation for soldiering as much as they were early
lessons in citizenship—a particular understanding of citizenship that President
Lincoln defined and challenged us to fulfill when he delivered his famous
address there. It's a citizenship that does not simply reflect upon the
sacrifices of others, but that honors their sacrifice through action: "It is for
us the living, rather, to be dedicated to the unfinished work which they who
fought here have thus far so nobly advanced."
Today, as ever, the task is unfinished. Yet the duties of citizenship have
fallen from the national agenda. Talk of service is largely confined to buoyant
commencement ceremonies. And too often it is just that: talk. Less than 1% of Americans serve in the military—a historic low during
wartime—leading to a broad, complacent assumption that serving the nation is
someone else's job. As we've allowed our understanding of service to be so
narrowly limited to the uniform, we've forgotten Lincoln's audience: With the
armies still fighting, the president exhorted a crowd of civilians on their duty
to carry forward the nation's work.
It is right that we send off the young Americans graduating this month from
high school, college and professional schools with speeches. They should be
congratulated for completing the many exams now behind them. But we must
remember another test—Lincoln's test of citizenship—and begin to mark these
important junctures in life not just with words, but with real-world commitment. Universal national service should become a new American rite of passage. Here
is a specific, realistic proposal that would create one million full-time
civilian national-service positions for Americans ages 18-28 that would
complement the active-duty military—and would change the current cultural
expectation that service is only the duty of those in uniform.
At age 18, every young man and woman would receive information on various
options for national service. Along with the five branches of the military,
graduates would learn about new civilian service branches organized around
urgent issues like education, health care and poverty. The positions within
these branches would be offered through AmeriCorps as well as through certified
nonprofits. Service would last at least a year.
Returning military veterans would be treated as the civic assets they are and
permitted to use a portion of their GI Bill benefits to support a period of
civilian national service, since such service helps them transition to life back
home. The new service opportunities would be created in accordance with the smart
rules that have guided AmeriCorps since its founding in 1994, which allow that
program to field tens of thousands of service members without displacing workers
and who fill vital niches their paid colleagues do not.
Serving full-time for a year or two needs to be a realistic option for all
young Americans, regardless of their family's finances. So civilian service
positions would be modestly paid, as AmeriCorps positions are now. (Most
AmeriCorps service-members receive a $12,100 stipend for the year, and if they
complete their term of service, a $5,550 scholarship to help cover tuition or to
pay off student loans.) Government agencies focused on the challenges that these
service-members address, as well as the corporations that will benefit from
employing Americans whose leadership will be cultivated by service, should step
up to fund these efforts. Instead of making national service legally mandatory, corporations and
universities, among other institutions, could be enlisted to make national
service socially obligatory. Schools can adjust their acceptance policies and
employers their hiring practices to benefit those who have served—and
effectively penalize those who do not.
More than most Americans realize, the demand to serve already exists. In
2011, there were nearly 600,000 applications to AmeriCorps—a program with only
80,000 positions, only half of which are full time. The Peace Corps received
150,000 requests for applications but has funding for only 4,000 new positions
each year. This gap represents democratic energy wasted and a generation of
patriotism needlessly squandered.
Some, particularly after having just observed Memorial Day, might think that
only war is capable of binding a generation and instilling true civic pride. But
you don't have to hear the hiss of bullets to develop a deeper claim to the
nation. In my nearly four decades in the military, I saw young men and women
learn the meaning and responsibilities of citizenship by wearing the uniform in
times of both peace and war. They were required to work with people of different
backgrounds, introduced to teamwork and discipline, unified by common tests, and
brought even closer by sacrifice. Some discovered, often to their surprise, that
they were leaders.
This transformation is not exclusive to the military. Those who disagree need
only visit young teachers working 18-hour days together in the Ninth Ward of New
Orleans. In rural Colorado health clinics, in California's forests, or Midwest
neighborhoods devastated by tornadoes, skeptics would see teams of young
people—affluent and poor, college-educated and not—devoting their days to a
singular, impactful mission.
Universal national service would surely face obstacles. But America is too
big, and our challenges too expansive, for small ideas. To help stem the
high-school dropout crisis, to conserve rivers and parks, to prepare for and
respond to disasters, to fight poverty and, perhaps most important, to instill
in all Americans a sense of civic duty, the nation needs all its young people to
serve.
Whatever the details of a specific plan, the objective must be a cultural
shift that makes service an expected rite of citizenship. Anything less fails
Lincoln's test.
Gen. McChrystal, a former commander of U.S. and international forces in
Afghanistan and of the Joint Special Operations Command, is the chairman of the
Leadership Council of the Franklin Project on national service at the Aspen
Institute.
CLASSROOM ACTIVITY
1. INDIVIDUALLY READ General McChrystal's ARTICLE. Once your read the speech, in class you will create a draft outline for the speech and for homework you will refine the speech and research it for time. It is recommended that you read & re-read his article a number of times in the refinement of your speech.
HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT:
PREPARE a one minute and thirty second (1:30) long speech agreeing or disagreeing with Gen. McChrystal's opinion about national service. Ensure there is an introduction, a few specific points supporting your concurrence or non-concurrence and end with a conclusion. Your speech will be given in class on Tuesday. Your grade will reflect the quality effort of preparation and speech execution within the confines of 1 minute and thirty seconds.
