Conversation
Notices
-
My immediate family for example has three houses and 4 cars, and so many of this hostile lower class would then consider us rich assholes that don't understand the struggles of the working class for it, despite the fact that all of that was earned with two generations of hard work, often two jobs at a time, and barely taking any vacation outside visiting an uncle or the like. We don't make more money than many of them, we're just smart with money. Any trucker makes more money than any of my family members. This is why I'm really hostile to class warfare: it's rarely properly aimed.
Tuesday, 14-Feb-17 01:11:59 UTC from web-
Class warfare is (right there in the name) mugging ten "rich" people on the assumption that one of them is "undeserving." @nerthos
-
@somercet If I were actually rich you can be certain I'd spend a fair bit of my money on getting back at them and making them have it as hard as they say they have it until they apologize for being dicks. Which they never will.
Tuesday, 14-Feb-17 01:34:21 UTC from web -
-
But Marx wasn't against the "nobility," his Europe had already moved on from "Feudalism" to "Capitalism." He hated the industrial and merchant bourgeoisie. @ajr @nerthos
-
@somercet @nerthos there were still serfs in russia under the romanovs. and industrilatzion had not really penetrated russia. they people took strength and attacked.
-
-
@somercet @nerthos Serfdom was abolished in 1861, but its abolition was achieved on terms not always favorable to the peasants and served to increase revolutionary pressures. Between 1864 and 1871 serfdom was abolished in Georgia. In Kalmykia serfdom was only abolished in 1892.[23] The serfs had to work for the landlord as usual for two years. The nobles kept nearly all the meadows and forests, had their debts paid by the state while the ex serfs paid 34% over the market price for the shrunken plots they kept. This figure was 90% in the northern regions, 20% in the black earth region but zero in the Polish provinces. In 1857, 6.79% of serfs were domestic, landless servants who stayed landless after 1861.[citation needed] Only Polish and Romanian domestic serfs got land. 90% of the serfs who got larger plots were in Congress Poland where the Tsar wanted to weaken the szlachta. The rest were in the barren north and in Astrakhan. In the whole Empi…
-
@ajr @somercet The people didn't take strength and attack, they were convinced by extremists to become muscle for their insurrection and coup, and ended up paying for the mistake with the blood of dozen millions.
Tuesday, 14-Feb-17 02:02:33 UTC from web
-
-
-
@ajr Yes, but the concept doesn't exist anymore legally. It exists in practice in many places but that's just corruption.
Tuesday, 14-Feb-17 01:54:22 UTC from web-
@nerthos Not really corruption its nature. the strong rule over the weak. however sometimes someone born amongst the weak is strong so they compete with the strong to replace them.
-
@ajr What I'm saying is that modern feudal lord-serf systems exist nowadays in somewhat overlooked areas of constitutional countries as political leaders hold populations hostage by forcing them to vote for them to ensure they get basic services and public work, ans well as welfare in poorly developed areas.
Not talking about the classical "strong rules over the weak" thing but rather corrupt government officials misusing state resources to perpetuate themselves in power.Tuesday, 14-Feb-17 02:06:57 UTC from web-
@nerthosok i understand what your saying. what im saying is theres a natural struggle/competeion amongst people trying to pretend that people arent viscous pack animals is lieing to your self.
-
-
-
-
-
-
