Aristocrats Are Evil: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 437:
* During the 18th and 19th centuries, when the concepts of democracy and liberalism were beginning to catch on in the United States and Europe, the aristocratic families of Europe were, for the most part, opposed to liberalism because it meant giving the common people a say in government, and if that was allowed, then they would no longer have absolute power.
* The very existence of aristocracy is based on oligopoly of violence. The concept of nobility is the elite of violence—be they knights, samurai, sipahis, rajputs, narts or savaran—that is, elite soldiers who are stronger than the oppressed masses and are able to subjugate them and live off their work. The alternative for aristocracy is usually either [[plutocracy]] (domination of elite of economy), theocracy (rule by the clergy), or [[Anarchy Is Chaos]].
**Every state is based on an oligopoly of violence. More to the point, no one can help their ancestry and it is not unknown for any given aristorcrataristocrat to be harmless or even useful in the present. What is morecloser to themaking this [[Truth in pointTelevision]] is that aristocracies tend to reflect conquests or robberies in the past. In other words aristocrats are hardly automatically evil but a good many of their ancestors were.
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Royalty and Nobility Tropes]]