3 ms·
Yes they objectively were and yes late feudal lords did exert control over far away lands (early ones as well like Charlemagne and even Charles Martel to a less
by edgyquant 6y ago
Yes they objectively were and yes late feudal lords did exert control over far away lands (early ones as well like Charlemagne and even Charles Martel to a lesser extent.) Also the design of the US is to find a balance between a strong federal government and state governments. That is why the issue has dominated our politics, in one form the other, and we’ve had a two party system based around it, ever since.
- chrisco255 6y agoI don't think you understand the meaning of the word "objective". By what objective measure were they more corrupt than the CCP or the U.S.? Charlemagne exhibited control and influence over a smaller chunk of Europe than the current E.U. The U.S. can almost bankrupt any country at will by freezing it out of the banking system and imposing sanctions.
- edgyquant 6y agoI do. The local feudal lords were able to treat anyone below them however they wanted and could take bribes without any threat from above so long as they provided the number of soldiers and gold asked. At the risk of being pedantic, I think it is you who doesn’t understand the word corrupt. The US bankrupting nations it doesn’t disagree with is within the system of rules at play and isn’t corrupt even if it is morally wrong.