Message from @Pelagius

Discord ID: 401409357172047872


2018-01-12 16:10:17 UTC  

Ohai guys

2018-01-12 16:12:01 UTC  

Aristocrats weren't really in power in the 17th century.
You forget that by the renaissance, effective power was switching to bankers and investors, more than pure aristocracy.
Aristocracy had a certain function and title, but they were certainly not completely in power. Even kings had to bow down to the banks.

2018-01-12 16:13:10 UTC  

What is needed is a true caste system, where money handlers are servants.

2018-01-12 16:14:25 UTC  

Who are effectively an aristocracy 😒

2018-01-12 16:14:25 UTC  

From the middle ages to the 20th century, it is not just discrete moments that cause the loss of power of the monarchy, but rather a slow, gradual change.

2018-01-12 16:14:38 UTC  

No. You confuse "got power" with "aristocracy"

2018-01-12 16:15:07 UTC  

you are using the confused, generic term for "aristocracy" as "whoever is up there"

2018-01-12 16:15:15 UTC  

It's a pants shitting retarded distinction. Who owns the productive economy?

2018-01-12 16:15:22 UTC  

nope

2018-01-12 16:15:27 UTC  

it is not a retarded distinction

2018-01-12 16:15:34 UTC  

it is a qualitative distinction

2018-01-12 16:15:39 UTC  

like the term "noble"

2018-01-12 16:15:46 UTC  

aristocracy is made up of nobles

2018-01-12 16:15:59 UTC  

nobility is not made with money (alone)

2018-01-12 16:16:01 UTC  

yeah muh meritocratic ______would never do stupid things

2018-01-12 16:16:41 UTC  

You brought up money not me

2018-01-12 16:16:51 UTC  

In terms of power

2018-01-12 16:16:53 UTC  

What I am getting at, is that you are conflating

2018-01-12 16:16:56 UTC  

confounding

2018-01-12 16:17:11 UTC  

No it's called political economics

2018-01-12 16:17:28 UTC  

Simplifications that obfuscate the truth.

2018-01-12 16:17:40 UTC  

you can say "the upper class", if you like

2018-01-12 16:17:48 UTC  

but "aristocracy" and "nobility" mean something else

2018-01-12 16:18:08 UTC  

in today's world , the "upper class" is an ascended merchant class, not a "nobility"

2018-01-12 16:18:22 UTC  

dude political economics was a field of study

2018-01-12 16:18:52 UTC  

"dude", that doesn't change the meaning of what we are discussing

2018-01-12 16:19:01 UTC  

you know what else is a "field of study"? Women's studies

2018-01-12 16:19:11 UTC  

K?

2018-01-12 16:19:50 UTC  

the point being, that doesn't mean they got this right, at least not completely

2018-01-12 16:20:05 UTC  

that flattening of terms and doing away with quality is a Marxist thing

2018-01-12 16:20:30 UTC  

Boogeyman

2018-01-12 16:20:34 UTC  

no

2018-01-12 16:20:35 UTC  

scurryyyyy

2018-01-12 16:20:42 UTC  

I am giving you reasons why it is wrong

2018-01-12 16:20:53 UTC  

it flattens out and erases distinctions that are meaningful, and functional

2018-01-12 16:21:20 UTC  

an aristocratic class does things differently than an ascended MERCHANT class, for DIFFERENT REASONS, and WITH DIFFERENT GOALS

2018-01-12 16:21:49 UTC  

You aren't giving anything substantive other than semiotics over labels

2018-01-12 16:22:01 UTC  

I've made claims

2018-01-12 16:22:05 UTC  

here follows more

2018-01-12 16:22:46 UTC  

Please no more

2018-01-12 16:22:47 UTC  

an aristocratic class is concerned with the preservation of structure and excellence, with quality in society, and thus is interested in the really long-term effects