3 ms·

> Needs a miracle breakthrough technology (graphene? quantum computing?) - a literal moonshot - to reverse this decline No chance of that with the aristocratic

> Needs a miracle breakthrough technology (graphene? quantum computing?) - a literal moonshot - to reverse this decline No chance of that with the aristocratic Toffs who monopolize the UK establishment. The aristocracy that was broken in Europe after the French Revolution is still alive and well in the UK and its plaguing 'the commoners'. They will never allow anything that could affect their tax-dodging wealth to happen. Its better for them to financialize the entire island and sell it out to US corporations wholesale for even more profit. And they already started that with the NHS...

robertlagrant 4y ago
How many of them are aristocrats?
- unity1001 4y ago
  An appalling percentage of them are actual aristocrats. The broader segment seems to consist of relatives, aristocratic bastards, their broader 'gentleman' circles and so on. Basically what constituted the elite in Britain in the past ~300 years. What's incredible is that this is an aristocracy that is consciously kept alive and in power, with this aristocratic class vigilantly protecting their class consciousness and power. The below, very insightful description of this by a Brit is taken from a Quora post, an answer to a question "Why does the British ruling class hates Yuri Gagarin, Russians and other nations": --------- British guy here. Etonians and the British upper class in general have an innate sense of superiority-it’s taught to them at school and the notion is pervasive throughout our whole society. Mr Finnegan is absolutely correct when he states that any contradiction of this is anathema to them. So although the whole society is rigged in their favour they still think that their achievements, wealth and money are all self earned. The idea that a bunch of Russian yokels could lead armies to defeat the Nazis or take humans into the cosmos-Yuri’s parents were peasants-shows this lie for what it is. I read a book recently by Rutger Bregner. In it he discusses an experiment where two people played games of monopoly but one was given specific advantages which essentially guaranteed them to win. What the scientists found was that after a while the people who were given the advantageous rules actual started to believe they were better at playing the game even though they were fully aware that the game was rigged in there favour! So when people tremble at the possibility of wealthy people leaving the country due to some policy which disadvantages them in favour of the majority-I say good let them go there are plenty of people from the working class with more talent willing to what they do under fairer circumstances. (Marcus McNary)
  - robertlagrant 4y ago
    Fair enough. The Quora answer you quote seems quite absolutist, or at least only scoped to rich people they don't like. I can see how someone's worldview could develop from such experiences, though. The "broader segment" as opposed to the genuine aristocrats - this seems like the natural working of society as it re-segments imperfectly. I don't know that anyone has devised a perfect society that helps and rewards in ways that have no bad outcomes. Maybe it's France, which was contrasted earlier with the UK. I would be keen to understand what it could be.
    - unity1001 4y ago
      > The Quora answer you quote seems quite absolutist, or at least only scoped to rich people they don't like Its a Brit's concise explanation of a major social phenomenon. It can also be more academically explained, but it would require a longer discussion. That Brit's simple summary is the best I have ever seen in putting a lot of words into those few paragraphs. > The "broader segment" as opposed to the genuine aristocrats - this seems like the natural working of society as it re-segments imperfectly Privileged segments tend to form in every given society due to inequal dynamics. However, this is different from the system being set up in that direction. The UK is still an aristocracy, with royals with actual power... https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/14/secret-papers-royals-veto-bills https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/14/secret-papers-roy... ...unelected, hereditary, aristocratic house of lords having de facto veto power through the power to send back bills to the parliament an infinite times, and the FPTP system. The Toff-producing public schools just feed this system. > Maybe it's France, which was contrasted earlier with the UK Yes, compared to the UK, France is much more egalitarian for a simple reason: The French Revolution originated in France, whereas it was never able to reach Britain. Hence, whereas the French Revolution and its Napoleonic aftermath wiped out entire Europe from the hereditary aristocratic houses and the power structures that kept in place (even with Napoleon's !appointed! psuedo-aristocracy), the medieval aristocracy lived on without interruptions in Britain. This is the major reason why the UK still keeps not only these aristocratic power structures, but an undisrupted, entitled aristocracy that still has its late medieval mindset. As I said, this is a gigantic history and political science topic. Also mixes in sociology, inevitably.

robertlagrant 4y ago

How many of them are aristocrats?

unity1001 4y ago
An appalling percentage of them are actual aristocrats. The broader segment seems to consist of relatives, aristocratic bastards, their broader 'gentleman' circles and so on. Basically what constituted the elite in Britain in the past ~300 years. What's incredible is that this is an aristocracy that is consciously kept alive and in power, with this aristocratic class vigilantly protecting their class consciousness and power. The below, very insightful description of this by a Brit is taken from a Quora post, an answer to a question "Why does the British ruling class hates Yuri Gagarin, Russians and other nations": --------- British guy here. Etonians and the British upper class in general have an innate sense of superiority-it’s taught to them at school and the notion is pervasive throughout our whole society. Mr Finnegan is absolutely correct when he states that any contradiction of this is anathema to them. So although the whole society is rigged in their favour they still think that their achievements, wealth and money are all self earned. The idea that a bunch of Russian yokels could lead armies to defeat the Nazis or take humans into the cosmos-Yuri’s parents were peasants-shows this lie for what it is. I read a book recently by Rutger Bregner. In it he discusses an experiment where two people played games of monopoly but one was given specific advantages which essentially guaranteed them to win. What the scientists found was that after a while the people who were given the advantageous rules actual started to believe they were better at playing the game even though they were fully aware that the game was rigged in there favour! So when people tremble at the possibility of wealthy people leaving the country due to some policy which disadvantages them in favour of the majority-I say good let them go there are plenty of people from the working class with more talent willing to what they do under fairer circumstances. (Marcus McNary)
- robertlagrant 4y ago
  Fair enough. The Quora answer you quote seems quite absolutist, or at least only scoped to rich people they don't like. I can see how someone's worldview could develop from such experiences, though. The "broader segment" as opposed to the genuine aristocrats - this seems like the natural working of society as it re-segments imperfectly. I don't know that anyone has devised a perfect society that helps and rewards in ways that have no bad outcomes. Maybe it's France, which was contrasted earlier with the UK. I would be keen to understand what it could be.
  - unity1001 4y ago
    > The Quora answer you quote seems quite absolutist, or at least only scoped to rich people they don't like Its a Brit's concise explanation of a major social phenomenon. It can also be more academically explained, but it would require a longer discussion. That Brit's simple summary is the best I have ever seen in putting a lot of words into those few paragraphs. > The "broader segment" as opposed to the genuine aristocrats - this seems like the natural working of society as it re-segments imperfectly Privileged segments tend to form in every given society due to inequal dynamics. However, this is different from the system being set up in that direction. The UK is still an aristocracy, with royals with actual power... https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/14/secret-papers-royals-veto-bills https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/14/secret-papers-roy... ...unelected, hereditary, aristocratic house of lords having de facto veto power through the power to send back bills to the parliament an infinite times, and the FPTP system. The Toff-producing public schools just feed this system. > Maybe it's France, which was contrasted earlier with the UK Yes, compared to the UK, France is much more egalitarian for a simple reason: The French Revolution originated in France, whereas it was never able to reach Britain. Hence, whereas the French Revolution and its Napoleonic aftermath wiped out entire Europe from the hereditary aristocratic houses and the power structures that kept in place (even with Napoleon's !appointed! psuedo-aristocracy), the medieval aristocracy lived on without interruptions in Britain. This is the major reason why the UK still keeps not only these aristocratic power structures, but an undisrupted, entitled aristocracy that still has its late medieval mindset. As I said, this is a gigantic history and political science topic. Also mixes in sociology, inevitably.