/lit/ - Literature

>Why did we abolish aristocracy, again?
What are you on about? Aristocracy is still alive and well, it just had to be obfuscated due to universal literacy. You can't very well have the plebs realize that they're mindless cattle that are being controlled by the higher class can you? Everyone is still controlled by the rich and powerful as always, except they're told that it's a conspiracy if they ever figure it out.

>>16553151
I meant the formal class of Nobility. You are correct, though. By abolishing aristocracy a much worse system was created which has none of the good qualities of the old but has all the undesirable ones to an extreme degree. That higher class you talk about, whatever it is, is not noble.

>>16553167
Do you have any proof the nobility was ACTUALLY noble or were they just talking out of their ass and putting on an air of nobility while actually being the exact same as the people who rule now. Maybe the only difference is that the ruling class is more honest about being evil bastards now.

How many on lit would be nobility if it was restored?

>>16553196
They had nicer buildings tbqh. Im not even one of those people that dislikes 20th century architecture either

>>16553196
The true roots of nobility lie in a time where civilization was in active communion with the higher worlds. Once that bridge was broken the nobles and subsequent classes degenerated into mere barbaric struggle for material scraps, with no other justification for their existence.

>>16553196
My only knowledge comes from Goethe's descriptions of the court he lived in as well as the way he characterized them in his artworks (a part of which you could see in OP). The European nobility of the time seems to have been very much concerned with high culture, whereas everyone today, including the rich, fit what Goethe in OP described as the middle class of his time.

>>16553200
nobilities aren't restored lol, they're produced by conquest

Anyone seen Barry Lyndon by Kubrick? Watching it right now and its highly based

>>16553226
So how many anons will leave basement to secure a dukedom?

>>16553200
Growing up I knew several nobles with lineages going back hundreds of years.
I live in Canada though so the government offers no formal recognition of First Nations nobility.
They're all alcoholics and drug addicts now. I think if they were given an estate and titles things would have turned out different.
At least it would add some flavour to life. Here the parliament is madly jealous of anything that could challenge it's authority, but also too weak and distrusted to exert any authority of it's own, so we all live under its feeble boot while it taxes or legislates away anything potentially interesting.

>>16553122
They ceased to be an Aristocracy if ever they were such (the best of the citizens of a state) and became an oligarchy (the most avaricious/best at hoarding in the state). On top of that, the mass death of menial workers and the expansion of a mercantile and economically capable middle class following the waves of black plague in Europe eroded much of the power which they used to hold almost completely to themselves.
Their positions now are filled by the mega-wealthy and the bureaucrat classes.

>>16553222
But the true modern nobility are the jews who control the upper class. And they're based.

>>16553319
They might very well be 'based', but they evidently don't care about art and culture at all. If anything, they actively oppose anything of high value.

>>16553335
I'd say that they care about art and culture but realize that by letting the masses have art and culture those things will be devalued, so the best thing to do is preserve what exists and make sure that the plebs can't access it.

>>16553200
I would be without a doubt. I have a kind of meta-dominion over average people for whatever reason, my ancestors were also royalty. In a different political setting i would be aristocratic, today I am just a simple land lord.

>>16553167
>which has none of the good qualities of the old but has all the undesirable ones to an extreme degree
funnily enough the word meritocracy was coined by a socialist named Michael Young who had a very similar viewpoint.
by telling people at the very top that they got there because they're a special class of person with merit (and equally, that the poor and destitute are just without merit.) based largely on arbitrary educational testing (designed by that same class) which pigeon holes you for life, you wind up creating an elite class of meritocrats who feel no moral qualms about taking everything they can get because they have no sense of social obligation of the sort that aristocrats got from their bloodline and the poor used to get from working class organizations.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/jun/29/comment

>>16553247
i do

>>16553496
>I have a kind of meta-dominion over average people for whatever reason,

>>16553554
I’m 22 years old, I own a small real estate monopoly, have no debt, received no inheritance and will never work a day in my life. I’ve just always had this way with people. I’m convinced if you put me on an island with a 1000 people i would end up their leader or at least very high up the social hierarchy. The truth is some people are just chosen to be at the top, if you aren’t you will never understand me; everyone who knows this feeling—knows it.

>>16553122
Because you know how annoying it is when media decides what you can say and what is good to think? Same shit but aristocracy. When it was abolished nobody cared to save it

>>16553587
Being the leader is a chump's job, it's why I hate tripfags besides butts

>>16553167
You would be the guy shovelling these people's dog shit, dude.

>>16553793
That might be true, but if the world was a better place I'd be all the more happier for it.

>>16553776
Cope

>>16553847
Absurd cope

Why? Unironically this.

>>16553210
Good post

>>16553210
Huge cope

>>16553948
dilate

>>16553928
Why work in front of the scenes when behind the scenes yields more freedom?

>>16553931
Why? I'd rather shovel dog shit for the aristocrats than to do it for the capitalists. Who are you to say otherwise? Are you a marxist per chance?

>>16554137
Imagine being this poor and sad.

>>16554147
Imagine being this intellectually dishonest. If you don't have any arguments, fuck off

>>16554149
What is there to argue? You proclaimed proudly your subordinated role in society and I looked down at you with a pity. What sort of response were you after?

>>16553210
>Cope, the post

>>16553587

>>16554244
Cope more poor fag

>>16553122
1. goethe was no aristocrat.
2. we abolished it because they , although much better than us, weren't our friends but our masters.
3. not all aristocrats were the same. you have 3-4 generations old families and you have centuries old families. the former were like us commoner filth, the latter were basically another race, phyisically taller and stronger, more handsome, more intelligent, more sensible to art and beauty, endowed with a different higher morality. a fruit of natural selection.

>>16553587
This guy knows what’s up.

What do you plan on doing with your wealth and time, friend? Any interesting goals? Lotta life ahead of you to fill.

>>16553776
>being a leader is a chump’s job

I really doubt you would know either way.

>>16553933
Go on

>>16553496
>>16553587
Cringe

>>16554820
>it's another "I, aristocrat" episode

>>16555666

It won’t be an episode until that dude who “collects” “antiquarian” books stops by. It’s all for him.
Do you feel that, anon? Do you? That’s electricity in the air.
GOD I can’t wait.

Stop impersonating me.

>>16555687
guess the dude hit a mark kek

>>16555687
>>16555708
Take your meds, schizo.

>>16555687
>Vincent seems to have run the car into a ditch. And one seems to notice.

>>16555777
I think this is the first time in 10 years or so you have quoted me directly.
2020, man. What a loony time.

>>16555796
With triple trips no less.
How are you?

>>16555813
Not bad, thanks. And yourself? Read anything particularly good lately?
Hoping you’re the real butterfly. Always enjoyed your presence, if only from a distance.
Either way, hope all is well in your neck of the woods (California, yeah? Miss it.)

>>16555796
>>16555831
>it's a "simp" episode instead

>>16555831
I have been very lucky avoiding this virus and hope to keep it that up.
I’m restless but kept back because of it (and habit, I suppose) so I seem to read less. I want to distribute copies of Herod’s Getting Free To all these protesters. (One of the points in the book is that protesting does not work) a boom of strategy and not theory. At last!
I am the left coast woman from way back. I’ll let everyone assume I’m from there, that’s fine.