5 ms·
> Aristocrats used to explain that they could not be dispensed with because they had superior value and were needed to administer and guide while exploiting the
by gilmore606 5y ago
> Aristocrats used to explain that they could not be dispensed with because they had superior value and were needed to administer and guide while exploiting the collective labours of the population. Modern large shareholders and executives explain that they can’t be dispensed with due to their superior ability
Isn't this evidence that the aristocrats were right? We beheaded them and new aristocrats sprang up in the same place, almost as if there must and will always be people in such positions.
- danaris 5y agoNo; it's evidence that some people will attempt to become that class of society, even after it's been abolished, so that they can have power over others.
- OrderlyTiamat 5y agoI'd say it's evidence that the class is self creating, but not specifically that the class is necessary for society to function. It could be for instance that it must necessarily exist, but only as a byproduct of society (e.g. some people have slightly more resources and therefore an advantage to press to get more resources etc.) Or possibly it's just a consequence of the kinds of society we've had up till now. Perhaps in [your favorite utopia] it's not necessary nor beneficial.
- MereInterest 5y agoOr that the positions are self-reinforcing, and whoever gets that position first holds it. Which is exactly why the systems that support aristocrats need to be dismantled, and not just the current crop of aristocrats.