There's a weird irony at work when Sen. Barack Obama, the black presidential
candidate who will allegedly scrub the stain of racism from the nation, vows
to run afoul of the constitutional amendment that abolished slavery.
For those who don't remember, the 13th Amendment says: "Neither slavery nor
involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime ... shall exist
within the United States."
In Obama's mind it must be a crime to be born or to attend college.
In his speech on national service last week at the University of Colorado,
Obama promised that as president he would "set a goal for all American
middle and high school students to perform 50 hours of service a year, and
for all college students to perform 100 hours of service a year."
He would see that these goals are met by, among other things, attaching
strings to federal education dollars. If you don't make kids report for
duty, he's essentially telling schools and college kids, you'll lose money
you can't afford to lose. In short, he'll make service compulsory by merely
compelling schools to make it compulsory.
When the right seeks to use government to impose its values, the left
screams about brainwashing and propaganda. When the left tries it, the right
thunders about social engineering. But when left and right agree - as seems
to be the case on national service - who's left to complain? As ever, the
slipperiest slopes are greased with the snake oil of "bipartisanship."
After all, Obama's hardly alone. Sen. John McCain is a passionate supporter
of Washington-led (and paid-for) "volunteerism," as is President Bush. Sen.
Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) and John Edwards both campaigned for the
presidency on compulsory national service.
Perhaps thanks to the JFK cult, which sees the refrain "Ask not what your
country can do for you ..." as an all-purpose writ for social meddling, even
the idealistic hipster crowd is on board. Devotees of Rolling Stone and MTV,
who normally preen over their alleged libertarianism when the issue is sex,
drugs and rock 'n' roll, see nothing wrong with involuntary servitude - as
long as we call it "voluntary."
Volunteerism is good. But why does every good thing need to be orchestrated
by government? Most people think churchgoing is a good thing. Does that mean
government should fund churches? That's what they do in Europe and -
surprise! - most pews sit empty.
Americans are vastly more generous with their time and money than Europeans.
According to social demographer Arthur C. Brooks, in 1995 (the last year
international data on giving was available), Americans gave 3 1/2 times more
money to charities and causes than the French, seven times more than Germans
and 14 times more than Italians.
In 1998, Americans volunteered 21 percent more than the Swiss and 32 percent
more than Germans - two countries with compulsory national service. Yet
we're told we should emulate them so that America, too, can have a "culture
of service." Continued... |