3 ms·
To be fair, inter-generational military families / military caste was de rigeur long before we switched to an all-volunteer force. The McCains are a good recen
by MisterOctober 8y ago
To be fair, inter-generational military families / military caste was de rigeur long before we switched to an all-volunteer force. The McCains are a good recent example.
Personally, I dunno if I necessarily oppose the phenomenon -- if we accept military work as a legitimate field, I guess that wisdom passed through generations is desirable, even if it comes with similarly inherited attitudes. As example from other disciplines: farming and doctoring families are common and undoubtedly benefit from the dynastic nature of their trades.
- billfruit 8y agoI read somewhere that during the early years of the US government, well into the 19th century, the govt was very wary of such a military caste getting established, and many well qualified individuals were denied commissions because their fathers/grand fathers/other immediate family had held commissions.
- MisterOctober 8y agoNo doubt they were wary -- in fact, that attitude persisted well into the 20th century at least - for example, while he doesn't explicitly call out family dynasties and the military caste, those concerns clearly inform Eisenhower's thinking in his famous "military-industrial complex" cautionary speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyBNmecVtdU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyBNmecVtdU
- int_19h 8y agoThe problem is that it's not any other field. It's people with guns, by design more powerful than anything else anybody else has. And, as Mao said, "all political power comes from a barrel of a gun". Which is why civilian control of the military is so important to preserve, and why the signs that the tail is wagging the dog (worship of all things military in US) is so disturbing. With regards to family legacy of service, it was common for officers, but not quite so much for the enlisted ranks.