Repeating myself, you do not know what aristocracy means. In late Middle Ages England, I could be a copyhold tenant to the mesne lord, with the copyhold passed

Repeating myself, you do not know what aristocracy means. In late Middle Ages England, I could be a copyhold tenant to the mesne lord, with the copyhold passed on by inheritance to my heir, following the traditional inheritance scheme of the manor. I do not own the land - the mesne lord does. Yet I have the right to live there, and the right to pass on that right through inheritance. According to you, that makes me - a copyholder - part of the aristocracy?! No. That's an absurd re-definition. You may want the equivalent of new enclosure laws so that complicated traditional land use practices which give a peasant the inheritable right to graze a few sheep in the local commons is replaced by the simple exclusive control of a local lord. That's how lords and capital holders traditionally gain more power and control. That still doesn't mean it's meaningful to say those peasants were part of the aristocracy. You grew up in a culture which prioritizes a certain view of land ownership that dates back the feudal system, then over time the local lords gained strong control over the land and government, followed by the imperial era where land possession and exclusive control brought in untold riches. You and I come from an ex-colony of that imperial system, which respected private land and exclusive ownership only when it involved certain people - for others it could be taken by force. "A man's home is his castle" was only valid for rich white men, and those with implied fealty to rich white men (aka "real Americans"). Sweden never had a feudal system, nor (despite being a kingdom) a strong form of aristocracy. Socialism has a much stronger history here than in the US. Its traditions are therefore different. Don't try to interpret it all through what appears to be an understanding of 19th century English aristocracy. And even if I'm completely wrong, who care? Inheritable land ownership and nepotistic transfer of corporate ownership lead to extreme centralizations of power which cannot be matched by a Swedish rental agreement. The Wallenberg family controls a substantial fraction of the Swedish economy. A first-hand rental contract had limited use of about 80 square meters.