4 ms·

I have learnt from a historian that when the elites adopt the modes of the plebeians, things go badly wrong.

ur-whale 3y ago
>I have learnt from a historian that when the elites adopt the modes of the plebeians, things go badly wrong. Interesting theory. Would you care to provide a couple of historical examples?
- willsoon 3y ago
  Well, you know. The emperor who fancies himself a music hall singer. What's her name again? There are some things that are common to a decline in an important understanding of history. There are 99, this is one of them.
  - dcx 3y ago
    This is so insightful! What did they believe the main process was, that was causing things to break? My guesses - this is about (a) inequality reaching a breaking point, where non-elites are starting to reject the social contract, making elite signaling dangerous, and (b) that elites at that moment don't have enough justification for their elevated status (mystification, misrecognition, etc)
    - username332211 3y ago
      Well, it can't be (a). The inequality in Rome had already reached a breaking point and was completely resolved problem by then. And by that I mean a revolutionary people's party had replaced a corrupt elected government with a divine monarchy. (I don't think I need to describe the wonders that did for equality in the Roman state. Archeological record indicates when barbarians conquered Roman lands, the nutrition of the lower classes often improved. But for some reason those same lower classes that had destroyed the republic never complained about inequality in imperial times.)
    - willsoon 3y ago
      Social contract. Every year I pay its passive. Can anyone tell me when the profits will be distributed?
      - r2_pilot 3y ago
        The profits were initially distributed before you were born. Every year more profits are added to the value of society (I assume you are a part of society; if not, I do apologize) because potholes are filled, food is verified safe to eat, electricity is regulated, and generally people leave you and your stuff alone so you can do whatever you want within the bounds of the social contract.
        dcx 3y ago
        FYI OP is answering my question on what the historian's theory was! (They were downvoted) This route makes sense to me; I do think the deal has been getting worse and worse lately, and periodic renegotiation is required to keep things running properly.
  - rsynnott 3y ago
    > The emperor who fancies himself a music hall singer. ... Wait, Caligula? That was some four centuries before the Western empire bit the dust, only a few decades after the _creation_ of the empire. I mean, I know people love blaming absolutely everything for the collapse of the Roman Empire, but delayed action of four centuries feels like pushing it.
    - willsoon 3y ago
      You don't read too much history, do you? Of course I can understand the confusion. Caligula was the guy who started running from sea to sea until he came back with a very long and unrecognisable beard. Also: that was the decline of the Roman Empire. Nothing to do with the other empires that went through the same process. EDIT: Sorry, I did not read the Western Empire thing. I guess the Egyptian empires exist to this day.
  - wsgeorge 3y ago
    This was not very helpful, to be honest. From what I gathered, what you mean is that when elites are concerned about showing off their status, by pretending to be non-elite, it means inequality has gotten to a breaking point. If that's it, then you could've been clearer.
Simon_ORourke 3y ago
Yes, definitely. See Lucius Sergius Catilina.
- FrustratedMonky 3y ago
  or Peter Turchin for a book on modern examples.
sixo 3y ago
Fortunately the 20th-century has seen deeply unprecedented cultural dynamics over and over, so these kinds of doomsaying trendlines aren't much use anymore.
VoodooJuJu 3y ago
It's a meme we've been hearing a lot lately: "We need better elites", and we really do need better ones. Modern elites are increasingly degenerating. Too many Kardashian's and no Washington's, no Gracchus's.

>I have learnt from a historian that when the elites adopt the modes of the plebeians, things go badly wrong. Interesting theory. Would you care to provide a couple of historical examples?

willsoon 3y ago
Well, you know. The emperor who fancies himself a music hall singer. What's her name again? There are some things that are common to a decline in an important understanding of history. There are 99, this is one of them.
- dcx 3y ago
  This is so insightful! What did they believe the main process was, that was causing things to break? My guesses - this is about (a) inequality reaching a breaking point, where non-elites are starting to reject the social contract, making elite signaling dangerous, and (b) that elites at that moment don't have enough justification for their elevated status (mystification, misrecognition, etc)
  - username332211 3y ago
    Well, it can't be (a). The inequality in Rome had already reached a breaking point and was completely resolved problem by then. And by that I mean a revolutionary people's party had replaced a corrupt elected government with a divine monarchy. (I don't think I need to describe the wonders that did for equality in the Roman state. Archeological record indicates when barbarians conquered Roman lands, the nutrition of the lower classes often improved. But for some reason those same lower classes that had destroyed the republic never complained about inequality in imperial times.)
  - willsoon 3y ago
    Social contract. Every year I pay its passive. Can anyone tell me when the profits will be distributed?
    - r2_pilot 3y ago
      The profits were initially distributed before you were born. Every year more profits are added to the value of society (I assume you are a part of society; if not, I do apologize) because potholes are filled, food is verified safe to eat, electricity is regulated, and generally people leave you and your stuff alone so you can do whatever you want within the bounds of the social contract.
      - dcx 3y ago
        FYI OP is answering my question on what the historian's theory was! (They were downvoted) This route makes sense to me; I do think the deal has been getting worse and worse lately, and periodic renegotiation is required to keep things running properly.
- rsynnott 3y ago
  > The emperor who fancies himself a music hall singer. ... Wait, Caligula? That was some four centuries before the Western empire bit the dust, only a few decades after the _creation_ of the empire. I mean, I know people love blaming absolutely everything for the collapse of the Roman Empire, but delayed action of four centuries feels like pushing it.
  - willsoon 3y ago
    You don't read too much history, do you? Of course I can understand the confusion. Caligula was the guy who started running from sea to sea until he came back with a very long and unrecognisable beard. Also: that was the decline of the Roman Empire. Nothing to do with the other empires that went through the same process. EDIT: Sorry, I did not read the Western Empire thing. I guess the Egyptian empires exist to this day.
- wsgeorge 3y ago
  This was not very helpful, to be honest. From what I gathered, what you mean is that when elites are concerned about showing off their status, by pretending to be non-elite, it means inequality has gotten to a breaking point. If that's it, then you could've been clearer.

Simon_ORourke 3y ago

Yes, definitely. See Lucius Sergius Catilina.

FrustratedMonky 3y ago
or Peter Turchin for a book on modern examples.

sixo 3y ago

Fortunately the 20th-century has seen deeply unprecedented cultural dynamics over and over, so these kinds of doomsaying trendlines aren't much use anymore.

VoodooJuJu 3y ago

It's a meme we've been hearing a lot lately: "We need better elites", and we really do need better ones. Modern elites are increasingly degenerating. Too many Kardashian's and no Washington's, no Gracchus's.