defend the indefensible: ARISTOCRACY

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
"my warlord ancestor Rolf of Bad-Assistan could beat yer peasant ancestor Ivor the Illiterate Dirt-Farmer."

really, has aristocracy EVER been a defensible way to organize society ... now or ever?

Eisbär (llamasfur), Saturday, 6 March 2004 20:11 (twenty-one years ago)

I will always defend....

http://www.affichescinema.com/insc_a/aristocats.jpg

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Saturday, 6 March 2004 20:25 (twenty-one years ago)

I agree. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.

Johnney B (Johnney B), Saturday, 6 March 2004 20:27 (twenty-one years ago)

has aristocracy EVER been a defensible way to organize society ... now or ever?

Sure, as long as you have enough money and guns.

Oh wait, you mean morally defensible. Well see, that's exactly the kind of question your average aristocrat finds entirely beside the point.

spittle (spittle), Saturday, 6 March 2004 20:59 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh wait, you mean morally defensible. Well see, that's exactly the kind of question your average aristocrat finds entirely beside the point.

then why did we have such concepts as "divine right" and "lese majeste"?

Eisbär (llamasfur), Saturday, 6 March 2004 21:01 (twenty-one years ago)

could Plato's Guardians be considered an aristocracy

ryan (ryan), Saturday, 6 March 2004 23:04 (twenty-one years ago)

actually, no. since it is not a hereditary position.

ryan (ryan), Saturday, 6 March 2004 23:10 (twenty-one years ago)

B-b-but, without an aristocracy, how can anyone ever be considered better than anyone else???

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Saturday, 6 March 2004 23:31 (twenty-one years ago)

B-b-but, without an aristocracy, how can anyone ever be considered better than anyone else???

see yer average graduate of an ivy league college or oxbridge.

Eisbär (llamasfur), Saturday, 6 March 2004 23:34 (twenty-one years ago)

B-b-but, without an aristocracy, how can anyone ever be considered better than anyone else???

Fear not, Spencer, I know implicitly we're both better than everyone else!

Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 6 March 2004 23:36 (twenty-one years ago)

defend the indefensible: MERITOCRACY!

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Saturday, 6 March 2004 23:36 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm now imagining a bunch of guys in crested blazers singing: "I'm blue-blooded, check it and see!"

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Saturday, 6 March 2004 23:37 (twenty-one years ago)

I like the idea of Spencer overseeing an equivalent of the ancient Chinese civil service exams, only the questions are all: "Which graphic design firm of the nineties was the most innovative?" and "Explain in two hundred words why the Jesus and Mary Chain were not goth."

Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 6 March 2004 23:37 (twenty-one years ago)

who says that the ivy league or oxbridge is meritocratic?

mandarins are also aristocrats, fwiw.

Eisbär (llamasfur), Saturday, 6 March 2004 23:38 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.juvalamu.com/crust/

Kerry (dymaxia), Sunday, 7 March 2004 04:28 (twenty-one years ago)

Aristotle: The end of democracy is freedom; of oligarchy, wealth; of aristocracy, the maintenance of education and national institutions; of tyranny, the protection of the tyrant.

So, presumably, if you are willing to trade a bit if freedom (and equality, I'd add) for the sake of certain (cultivated and institutionalised) values, then aristocracy is for you.

run it off (run it off), Sunday, 7 March 2004 08:46 (twenty-one years ago)

following Aristotle, the West wants democracy in politics, oligarchy in commerce, aristocracy in education and culture, and tyranny in emotional life.

run it off (run it off), Sunday, 7 March 2004 09:33 (twenty-one years ago)

OK, this will get laughed down because it's a Masonic writer talking about why the "Masonic Experiment" of the US Republic wouldn't work, but it's fairly poignant at this point...

"History had, of course, seen Republics before. Indeed, the concept of a republic dated from classical times - from ancient Greece and from Rome in the period prior to the Empire. But, as the delegates of the Constitutional Convention were only too painfully aware, all such previous republics had been subject to problems as chronic as those which had plagued monarchies. Chief among these perhaps was the propensity of republican governments to fall into the hands of dictatorial individuals or dynasties, who would then become so tyrannical as any sovereign or royal house, sometimes even more so."

(my bold, but really freaking appropriate in the view of the current American political climate, no?)

BTW, did anyone else see "Status Anxiety" on C4 last night, or is this thread only full of Americans? Any weekend Brits, or maybe I should start its own thread... (Any TV docu-thing which mentions Veblen within the first ten minutes is OK by me.)

The River Kate (kate), Sunday, 7 March 2004 12:00 (twenty-one years ago)

No, didn't think so. Sigh.

If the British didn't have the aristocracy, and the class system, and the remnants of Feudalism to blame for their social economic problems, who would they have to blame? Themselves.

Because get rid of the aristocracy, and you *don't* get rid of inequality overnight, any more than getting rid of religion would get rid of war. At least having the aristocracy and having the class system guilts the middle and upper classes into actually providing for the NHS and government housing and all the other things that make being a peasant in England slightly more bearable than being a peasant in the US.

The River Kate (kate), Sunday, 7 March 2004 13:52 (twenty-one years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.