No one should need reminding that this week will mark the sixth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks. We were all shaken, and we remember exactly where we were, and what we did; Who we called, and what we feared, and for some of us, who we lost.

But this is not an article about the Sept.11 attacks, at least not directly. Despite those attacks and the outpouring of togetherness we felt, six short years later, we are back to our old games.

The old tensions of rich against poor, red against blue, and ethnic minority against ethnic majority are in full swing. We are as divided as ever.

In the Sept. 10 issue of Time Magazine, Richard Stenger writes about the rise of National Service among Americans in his article “A Time to Serve.” He points out that at this moment, Americans are becoming less and less involved in the government.

Paradoxically however, Americans are becoming more and more engaged in their communities. Last year, 61.2 million Americans dedicated 8.1 billion hours of service.

Many of the current presidential candidates attempt to capitalize on this sentiment by making it part of their platform. Characteristically, the Republican candidates take a libertarian stance, opposed to any form of mandatory service. Many of them back the idea of offering incentives for high school graduates to engage in service.

Meanwhile, Democrats are equally opposed to the idea of mandatory service. Senators Joe Biden (D-Del.) and Clinton (D-New York), support the creation of a Public Service Academy, which would offer subsidized education in return for several years of service.

Several of the Democratic candidates would also require a portion of these volunteers to work in “green” areas, such as energy conservation and “Greencorps.” The over-arching sentiment is to use the carrot instead of the whip, or to offer incentives rather than mandatory service.

But the time for carrots has passed. The latent amount of animosity that exists between the different groups in this nation is dangerously high.

Despite the end of segregation, if one walks into a high school cafeteria, they no doubt see students are organized ad hoc by one of two parameters: social group or race.

The hostility between those of opposing political values is at an all time high, perhaps equal to that preceding the Civil War, according to Orson Scott Card.

Rather than using a National Service Corps as a method to give back to the community, why couldn’t it be a method to building a new American Community.

Cullen Murphy, in his book “Are We Rome?” observes that unlike the empire we tend to compare ourselves to, America does not have the esprit d’corps that existed in Rome. Murphy concluded that unless Americans could regain their sense of “national self,” the nation will fall apart.

His solution was some form of mandatory service for all American citizens, male and female. While he noted that a military draft was political suicide, a National Service Corps would afford young Americans a chance to give back to their society and have an investment in it.

Nations such as Israel, Germany and Taiwan have instituted compulsory military service, but with ample opportunities to go into a service unit instead. Israel’s program is extremely effective. Its program has only been compulsory for secular Jews, but support among Arab citizens has widened the requirement to include those Arab citizens.

In Germany, according to Time, half of the 180,000 men drafted each year opt for non-combat service.

Why shouldn’t the U.S. government institute such a system?

A universal and compulsory system would allow all young Americans to engage in some form of service that would allow them to interact with fellow Americans from a varying array of backgrounds of experience. They would work with others who may of a differing ethnicity, sexuality, political bias or socioeconomic status.

There should be no unnecessary exemptions from service. Unlike the Selective Service registration, where young women are exempt, but young men are required under penalty of law to register by the age of 18, all young Americans, regardless of gender or socioeconomic status, would be required to engage in some form of service.

What harm can mandatory service have? Many critics will say that making service mandatory would take away the “warm fuzzy” feeling of volunteering. But this may be the problem. Service is not an extra thing to do, but a civic responsibility.

It is our duty to help those less fortunate than us. It is our duty to make the world better.

Our grandparents, Tom Brokaw’s “Greatest Generation,” experienced the Great Depression, and then went on to fight in one of the most cataclysmic struggles in human history, but they did it because they saw it as their duty.

Our grandmothers worked in factories, making planes, tanks and maps. Our grandfathers fought in North Africa, Western Europe and the Pacific.

Again, they saw it as their responsibility to do their duty to their nation and to their world. Why should we not do the same?

Staff: - 09/12/07