3 ms·

The “fall on hard times” crowd hasn’t always lost their homes. For instance, it doesn’t matter how bad the famine was in feudal times, the lord wasn’t going to

• ineedasername 6y ago
  That isn't quite true. It was not uncommon for the British lords to kick Irish off their lands. I have a hard time believing that was a unique circumstance throughout the history of various forms of feudalism. See also the practice of "Enclosure" for an additional example. In addition, being a peasant often had some properties of slavery: no freedom of mobility or choice and sometimes lack of pay, with the express approval of the local lord required for many things. See the Revolt of 1381. The Lord-Peasant relationship is really not a positive example of preventing homelessness, but either way, let's face it: It was the Government supporting those people. Arguing from the historic example of feudalism as a method that prevented homelessness would mean you're arguing that the government should be directly supporting the homeless.
  • earthboundkid 6y ago
    1. “Enclosure” is the defining act of modernization, so it doesn’t really say anything about feudal times. 2. I’m not arguing that feudalism was good. I’m arguing that homelessness is a historically embedded phenomenon, and was essentially non-existent in pre-modern times and then it became markedly more prevalent in the last 40 years. I’m not sure about all the causes of or solutions to homelessness, but I do think if it were the priority, homelessness could be resolved at the price of imposing some other trade off problems (which might be worse on net).