We might take this opportunity to empathize with an emigre (immigrant) still proud of her or his homeland.
The reason for the change in citizenship had nothing to do with disloyalty or dislike, and now comes the age of national service (in this science fiction, it exists). Besides, many have dual citizenship. Triple?
In which nation's service does one serve? Wouldn't this be an excellent time to go back and tie off loose ends by serving the old country?
Fast forward and we're in a world where you're welcome to commit your years of national service to the nation of your choice.
How is this different from the US Peace Corps for example?
Woah, that was pretty fast! How do we get there from here?
Individual families won't agree with some policy-making body -- such as the US Congress -- on who the enemy is. The Trumps don't hate Russia enough, a big problem for some in Hicktown, USA (not for others) and their elected representatives.
That's but one of many examples.
The bottom line is junior wants to serve in the military of an avowed enemy of the United States. That's how it looks to the president.
New this Fall, on the TBD network i.e. what a soap opera.
Right, I get the point: if the "service" is pointing guns at one's fellow human beings and threatening to pull the trigger, or even pulling it, that's not really the kind of service we mean.
The youth wishing to serve in Japan might be a dog lover, but she's not there to hurt Japanese, much the contrary.
And how do we know? Because Japan manages the service wherein foreigners serve Japan.
This isn't outsiders reaching in with their institutions, so much as families allowing their loved ones to make a difference on the planet under the auspices of cooperating services.
Will this ever happen? That's a matter of translation.
Foreigners flock to US based universities, as students, faculty, administrators, technicians, janitors, health and food service workers, the list of roles goes on and on.
The technicalities of paperwork, whether these be people on visa, green card, citizens, obscure what is consistent across many psychologies: a loyalty to the US and/or a subculture therein, and the values thereof.
Perhaps it's really Harvard they care about?
It's all in how we apply filters, as to who shows up in our samples. Which is kind of my point: the patterns I'm suggesting are already evident, just under the guise of other namespaces (they're described in other terms).
The context required for such programs to make sense is one of mutual advantage and symbiosis. We all benefit to the extent humans are prospering in a sustainable manner, not at the expense of an exploited group (i.e. of one another).
Trading young people around, of their own volition, and not only young people, in a context of their committing to national service, is a shared investment in greater mutual understanding and compatibility down the road.
That's a pretty-enough sounding political speech (the stuff & fluff of world diplomacy); usually a good sign when it comes to bridging the bright light of actual day, with movie theater science fiction aesthetics.
