Well the Federal Service was "two years or as long as may be required" and wasn't necessarily military. Then you could go career by becoming an officer. But once the service was up under normal circumstances you were a citizen. Still you have people who "put in the time" and people who don't, and I could easily see an attitude of "Don't like it? Put in your time" emerging unless it was actively suppressed.
And it's a recurring thing we see in many such groups over history. The Thin Blue Line attitude for example. Or the old aristocracies. Possibly made worse because unlike those two groups in theory anyone and everyone can sign up to take the test and be a member.
Made worse because anyone by law can sign up to take the test, so if you don't do it it's either because you don't want to or you aren't good enough to pass the test. Either way you are the "other".
The latter is probably the more dangerous of the two, because it would be very easy to consider civilians "inferior" due to their inability to complete the service. There's no "there by the grace of God go I"; it's been replaced by "you have been measured, weighed, and found wanting"
I suppose another comparable system in modern society is the university system. With the public university system, it started out with an almost purely meritocratic system where pretty much anyone who had the grades could attend; and it was a good way to cycle elites because it allowed smart kids from poor families to work their way up to doing something more closely aligned with their potential than they otherwise would have done. But over time that system came up with a culture all of its own that ended up so insulated from the broader culture that became much less likely to occur. And of course it thinks less of people who aren't a part of that culture.
Again it may be the best of all possible solutions, but I'm trying to think about the possible failure modes since we now have the benefit of 70 years' worth of hindsight.
Well the Federal Service was "two years or as long as may be required" and wasn't necessarily military. Then you could go career by becoming an officer. But once the service was up under normal circumstances you were a citizen. Still you have people who "put in the time" and people who don't, and I could easily see an attitude of "Don't like it? Put in your time" emerging unless it was actively suppressed.
And it's a recurring thing we see in many such groups over history. The Thin Blue Line attitude for example. Or the old aristocracies. Possibly made worse because unlike those two groups in theory anyone and everyone can sign up to take the test and be a member.
Made worse? How would it be worse to be able to actively enter a "privileged" class simply by earning it?
You could never earn your way into being a royal.
Made worse because anyone by law can sign up to take the test, so if you don't do it it's either because you don't want to or you aren't good enough to pass the test. Either way you are the "other".
The latter is probably the more dangerous of the two, because it would be very easy to consider civilians "inferior" due to their inability to complete the service. There's no "there by the grace of God go I"; it's been replaced by "you have been measured, weighed, and found wanting"
I suppose another comparable system in modern society is the university system. With the public university system, it started out with an almost purely meritocratic system where pretty much anyone who had the grades could attend; and it was a good way to cycle elites because it allowed smart kids from poor families to work their way up to doing something more closely aligned with their potential than they otherwise would have done. But over time that system came up with a culture all of its own that ended up so insulated from the broader culture that became much less likely to occur. And of course it thinks less of people who aren't a part of that culture.
Again it may be the best of all possible solutions, but I'm trying to think about the possible failure modes since we now have the benefit of 70 years' worth of hindsight.