Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

285

I suppose another way of saying what I mean is , the idea of , to whom much is given much is required.

Another example of what I mean is it was always expected that young men from well to do families would serve in the Armed Forces.

I suppose another way of saying what I mean is , the idea of , to whom much is given much is required. Another example of what I mean is it was always expected that young men from well to do families would serve in the Armed Forces.

(post is archived)

[–] • 2 pts

For better or worse... Around 1776.

[–] • 1 pt

By serving in the armed forces, you mean filling an officer command role that they are not properly qualified for. They would not serve as enlisted men. The "merit" based system replaced this if you can still call it merit based.

[–] • 1 pt

They used to serve as junior officers , on the whole they were capable , but of course some were downright disastrous

[–] • 1 pt

Having them serve as junior officers does seem to be a practical apprenticeship. I imagine there was a marked decline in militaristic governments of the European nations following the advent of the nuclear weapons age coupled with intense jewish propaganda to make you hate your own country. All of this on top of the cyclical nature of the participation rate based on the quality of the leaders. I imagine popularity and fame of military leaders is actively suppressed as well because it is a political game. War heros like Washington, Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, and Eisenhower will have a dominant position in the political sphere if allowed to flourish.