3 ms·
As far as I can tell, the rich have never stopped employing elaborate casts of servants; these servants just go by different titles now: private chef, personal
by drzaiusx11 9mo ago
As far as I can tell, the rich have never stopped employing elaborate casts of servants; these servants just go by different titles now: private chef, personal assistant, nanny, fashion consultant, etc.
- kbelder 9mo agoThe fact that it's a voluntary arrangement instead of forced makes a significant difference.
- drzaiusx11 9mo agoEmploying servants only recently fell out of favor in the years between WWI and WWII. Prior to WWI having servants was still in fashion for the wealthy. Naturally I meant paid servants. Enslaved and to some extent indentured servants obviously have little to no choice. That said many of those employered in service industries and to some extent the gig economy have limited options and their participation is barely "voluntary" in modern capitalism.
- drzaiusx11 9mo agoAside: seeing myself refer to the 1940s as "recent" is really highlighting my age. Soon I'll be relegated to a "grampa yelling at clouds" meme (but just the computer cloud variety)
- int_19h 9mo agoThose particular roles were voluntary arrangement for much of human history, simply because people who fill them tend to be significantly better off than those who don't directly serve the powerful (and instead serve their economic interests, like e.g. agricultural slaves or serfs).