When A Great Democracy Politicized The Military

American Thinker ^ | 3 Mar, 2021 | James S. Corum

[MtnClimber]

President Joe Biden has embarked on a revolutionary program to replace constitutional freedoms with a new social justice agenda. Supporting the radical agenda is his defense secretary Lloyd Austin, whose top priority is to politicize the military to eliminate “extremists.”

So, what happens when the hard left takes control of the government of a great democracy and decides that the desired social revolution requires the destruction of conservative institutions and leaders, and then institutes aggressive policies to expel conservatives from the military? We have a good answer when we look at France from 1899 to 1914 when hard-left governments were in power.

France was fairly evenly divided between left and right in the three decades after the demise of the Second Empire and the founding of the Third Republic during the Franco-Prussian War. The military officer corps was mostly from the conservative middle class with a considerable number coming from the old aristocracy. In 1890 more than 20% of the cadets at some of the elite military academies came from the old aristocracy and a high percentage of Army officers were educated in Catholic schools. However, the Army also had many liberal supporters of the Republic in the officer corps and republican reforms in the 1880s had greatly benefitted the French Army by setting higher officer education standards and funding unit training.

Through the 1890s the French left increased its position in the National Assembly and in 1899 the Left Bloc, a coalition dominated by the hard left, formed the government. Top leftist political leaders wanted to use their power to utterly break the power of the conservative half of France, which meant going after two key institutions: The Catholic Church and the military officer corps.

[Reily]

“.... led by a bunch of panty weights. .....”

That’s probably teh future. (if things don’t change!)
However its currently led by “Harvard Business School” thinking !

Panywaists might actualy make better decisions. Like “run away” at least its a decision !

[Wallace T.]

Red states need to establish or improve the strength of their State Guards as a counterpart to the Federal military. The President is the commander in chief of the militia when called into Federal service, as outlined in the Constitution. Presidents have called the National Guard into Federal service in the past against the will of state governors, e.g., when Eisenhower and Kennedy took charge of the National Guard in several Southern states during the integration controversy.

For all the banter about secession, the fact remains that the states have little real control over the National Guard. Unlike 1775 or 1861, governors and legislatures have little but the state police to resist the Federal military.

[Petrosius]

Yes, but I do believe that the appointment and promotion of officers in the National Guard called to active service still falls under state control. If anyone knows otherwise, please correct me.

[Jacquerie]

History repeats:

<>Top leftist political leaders wanted to use their power to utterly break the power of the conservative half of France, which meant going after two key institutions: The Catholic Church and the military officer corps. The Church was the main target. Inspired by fanatically anti-clerical Émile Combes, French premier 1902-1905, the government passed new laws regulating the Church in 1901 that required all education to be secular. Ten thousand Catholic schools were shut down. Many churches were closed, and convents were closed on the order of the government.<>