The Political Officer: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Jason taylor (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Jason taylor (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 114:
* When Rome was a republic, the senior officers of the roman army were apointed by the senate, or directly elected by the people's assembly. Many politicians were also generals, like Ceasar. There are a few other historical periods when the officers were elected: At the beginning of the french revolution, in some republican units during the spanish civil war...
* The British Army on the Northwest Frontier(Afghan border) in Victorian times had an officer with a similar title. In a subversion he was not their as a watchdog over the general but got the title because he was part of the Indian Political Service. His function was to keep the general up to snuff on the sociology and politics of local tribes, and his duties are better described as intelligence advisor then as what is normally implied by the title.
* Political Officers of the stereotypical manner tend to arise in revolutionary regimes that haven't satisfied a claim to legitimacy. Of course the real claim to legitimacy in any long running state is, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" but most states want something that sounds better and of course a revolution is obvious evidence that something is "broke" but not yet evidence that it is "fixed". And the fabled problem of "guarding the guardians" is more strained when said guardians might not take the regime for granted.
----
[[Running Gag|*BLAM!*]]
| |||