Response to Dan Rodricks "Require All Young People to Serve the Nation"

I think I need to read this article with a more objective perspective. On a first read, the idea that everyone 18-21 serve the country for two years seems ridiculous. I think that because I am 20 and fall within that age group I find the notion of leaving college to either serve in the military or serve a domestic or foreign assignment horrifying. I like college why would I want to do something else? That same idea, however, puts into perspective exactly what Rodricks says about my generation. That we only think about ourselves. I find this idea partially correct and partially totally off the mark. There are kids my age who only care whether they have the hottest gadget or the most expensive bag, but then there are the kids who devote their spring breaks to helping the underprivileged or help clean up the community. I would say that a good portion of my generation has a sense of civic duty, at the same time however, many do not. Its unfair though to criticize just the 18-21 year olds. The problem of only caring about yourself permeates all age groups. So maybe it would be good to require service at a young age so that my generation doesn't grow up to be like every other American. But in reality if this sort of "draft" was put into place there would be too much rebellion. Who decides whether you serve in the military or get to experience a foreign country volunteering? If given the choice I'd obviously choose public service over military service and I think that most of my generation would feel the same way. There would be mass protesting and dodging of the draft if this sort of thing ever was put into place. It's a good idea in theory but in practice, I feel like it would fail. As Rodricks says, many young men and women leave high school or college with no idea of the direction they want to take. Yes, that is true. But we should be able to decide the direction of our life without the "help" of the government placing us in a program. The problem that I think Rodricks struggles with is a problem of collective action. At the present time we benefit from the work of a handful of people in the military, Americorp and the Peace Corp. Why join these organizations when we're already benefiting from them? I don't have an answer to this problem unfortunately, but I don't think that Rodricks proposal would really solve it or the issue of my generation being too self centered.