3 ms·

I'm not sure it's actually the rich and powerful necessarily drive much. Of course, there are car obsessed rich people who enjoy driving. I know some Swedish e

I'm not sure it's actually the rich and powerful necessarily drive much. Of course, there are car obsessed rich people who enjoy driving. I know some Swedish entrepreneurs who are like that, but I also know similarly successful people who never decided to get a driver's license and who lived in Gothenburg and take the tram everywhere. I think the car is a middle class thing, but then peasants were upper middle class, but I assume that's not what you meant.

thaumasiotes 2y ago
> but then peasants were upper middle class Maybe in a modern context. In the terminology of the time peasants were lower class. The middle class was merchants, and "middle" referred to their social status, not their economic status - it would be unsurprising for members of the middle class to be much richer than members of the upper class.
- impossiblefork 2y ago
  No. Farmers were respectable landowners who had employees themselves. They were seen as the foundation society stood on and contrasted with the landless and the rich.
  - defrost 2y ago
    The word used was "peasant", in English usage: A peasant is a pre-industrial agricultural laborer or a farmer with limited land-ownership, especially one living in the Middle Ages under feudalism and paying rent, tax, fees, or services to a landlord. In Europe, three classes of peasants existed: non-free slaves, semi-free serfs, and free tenants. ~ wikipedia a poor smallholder or agricultural labourer of low social status (chiefly in historical use or with reference to subsistence farming in poorer countries). ~ Oxford Dictionary So .. limited land ownership (if any) and almost always a rent paying tenant.
    - impossiblefork 2y ago
      Ah. Here in Sweden the peasant class was rich and influential, but I they, since they weren't rent paying, were more properly a farmer class.
      - defrost 2y ago
        Fair enough & interesting to know :-) It's always worth checking for cultural differences in word usage when such things arise on internet forums.
        Gud 2y ago
        That’s because the other poster is using the word “peasant” wrong. Sweden was indeed organised differently than most countries in those days, with the king having his power base from the farmers(and not aristocrats as in most other European countries).
        Ekaros 2y ago
        I think most apt comparison for peasant would be Backstugusittare or torpare. At least comparing to Finnish system.
      - samatman 2y ago
        The word you're looking for is "yeoman", btw. Peasantry is a larger concept which also includes serfs, but the yeoman farmer was exactly what you're describing. "Rich" might be pushing it in an Anglo context, but land owning and powerful, though not in comparison to the aristocracy.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

thaumasiotes 2y ago

> but then peasants were upper middle class Maybe in a modern context. In the terminology of the time peasants were lower class. The middle class was merchants, and "middle" referred to their social status, not their economic status - it would be unsurprising for members of the middle class to be much richer than members of the upper class.

impossiblefork 2y ago
No. Farmers were respectable landowners who had employees themselves. They were seen as the foundation society stood on and contrasted with the landless and the rich.
- defrost 2y ago
  The word used was "peasant", in English usage: A peasant is a pre-industrial agricultural laborer or a farmer with limited land-ownership, especially one living in the Middle Ages under feudalism and paying rent, tax, fees, or services to a landlord. In Europe, three classes of peasants existed: non-free slaves, semi-free serfs, and free tenants. ~ wikipedia a poor smallholder or agricultural labourer of low social status (chiefly in historical use or with reference to subsistence farming in poorer countries). ~ Oxford Dictionary So .. limited land ownership (if any) and almost always a rent paying tenant.
  - impossiblefork 2y ago
    Ah. Here in Sweden the peasant class was rich and influential, but I they, since they weren't rent paying, were more properly a farmer class.
    - defrost 2y ago
      Fair enough & interesting to know :-) It's always worth checking for cultural differences in word usage when such things arise on internet forums.
      - Gud 2y ago
        That’s because the other poster is using the word “peasant” wrong. Sweden was indeed organised differently than most countries in those days, with the king having his power base from the farmers(and not aristocrats as in most other European countries).
      - Ekaros 2y ago
        I think most apt comparison for peasant would be Backstugusittare or torpare. At least comparing to Finnish system.
    - samatman 2y ago
      The word you're looking for is "yeoman", btw. Peasantry is a larger concept which also includes serfs, but the yeoman farmer was exactly what you're describing. "Rich" might be pushing it in an Anglo context, but land owning and powerful, though not in comparison to the aristocracy.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]