Aristocracy Would Their Death Be Good?

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 11:05 PM
link   
Should we be at war with the aristocracy? If the aristocracy were killed and it was believed to be in the common good and afterwards was proven to be so, would it be OK? The fact that hereditary titles exist means that some countries have something very wrong with them.
It would increase social mobility.
Reduce class discrimination.
Free wealth.
Close the gap between rich and poor.
edit on 12/3/12 by masqua because: all caps in title




posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 11:19 PM
link   
There's no need to shout. Unless you're a devout practicing communist, then there will always be an aristocracy. Or...more likely..even in a case of all money and wealth being removed from the world...there would still be a similar thing.

The people I picture when you say aristocracy are those who...regardless of the circumstances feel they are better than everyone else.
Shooting everyone who exists right now would never eliminate that problem. You'd just get another batch of stuck-up snobbish jerks born within the very next week,



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 11:20 PM
link   
They have titles.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by s12345
They have titles.


You can have all the titles you want. Respect is earned. Arrogance is acquired or learned also. Titles mean nothing to most people. Except those who have them..and those who wish they did...



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 09:10 AM
link   
I think we shouldn't be at war with them...i think we should allow them to teach and guide us...i think people will be happier when they learn to bow down to those that are quite clearly superior.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by michaelbrux
I think we shouldn't be at war with them...i think we should allow them to teach and guide us...i think people will be happier when they learn to bow down to those that are quite clearly superior.



WHAT!!? SERIOUSLY!!? There is no one "better' than me. Smarter? Yes. Better athlete? Yes. But there is no one that deserves to rule over me just because they were born with a title. Please go join the line that leads to servitude. I'll stay here and enjoy what freedom I have.
edit on 12-3-2012 by DAVID64 because: error



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by DAVID64
 


they don't rule over you because you gave them permission...so they must have something you don't.

when you figure out what that something is...you also understand that war is senseless.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 01:21 PM
link   
If you met some of these people you would realize some are idiots. They are their because titles is part of the fabric of some countries. Once a group of people has wealth and influence and will help other members of that group: any member of the group losing money can quickly gain it back again.A lot of the titled people got their wealth from War or the slave trade. I do not think this makes them superior. The poor people of the uk at least never got anything positive from the slave trade: why employ a person when a slave somewhere else can do it cheaper: they did et unemployment. The rich however made lots of money off the slave trade. Are these people superior because they have lower morals and care less about their fellow man?
edit on 12-3-2012 by s12345 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by s12345
 


we're talking about two separate groups/type of people.

you focus on man made aristocracy...I'm talking the bona fide spirits...immortal divinities.

that group you focus on seems to be a problem for everyone...fakers...



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by s12345
Should we be at war with the aristocracy? If the aristocracy were killed and it was believed to be in the common good and afterwards was proven to be so, would it be OK? The fact that hereditary titles exist means that some countries have something very wrong with them.
It would increase social mobility.
Reduce class discrimination.
Free wealth.
Close the gap between rich and poor.
edit on 12/3/12 by masqua because: all caps in title


why would you have to "kill" them in order to form social equality????

That's just barbaric.

and who's to say "ALL ARISTOCRACY" are all of ONE specific psychological demographic???

ie: "they're all BAD GUYS and the other people are all GOOD GUYS"
this demonization of the wealthy of the world is ultra-ignorant.

I DO believe that eventually in this planet's history.. a combination of the best aspects of Socialism and Capitalism should be formed into one perfect system while applying a monetary version of THERMOECONOMICS (using the CALORIE) as a quantifiable unit of timeenergy value.
a ceiling on how much money you can make and a FLOOR as to how much you're allowed (one that bestows a high standard of living to ALL) .. combined with MANDATORY cooperative workdays (2 per month) of work for the community...
say any of your interests continue to make tons of money after you reach your CEILING.. then all that surpolus income goes to a fund for which the community votes on where those funds are spent...
and you get the recognition for the accomplishments that those funds are responsible for providing...
but the ceiling would be the "ridiculous level" .. meaning it's absurd to have more than the ceiling quote.
ie: NOBODY has any NEED for anything more than a certain number of millions of dollars... MAYBE even hundreds of thousands.. DEPENDENT upon value rates .. inflation etc..
but even those concepts would be ironed out and obsolete if you had a monetary value system that was so solid that it could never change.. because it would be global and based EXACTLY upon the amount of time and energy used to perform a task or create a product... not this "guestimation" we have now where it's a paper note "kinda" summarizing an ideal "worth"

having capital funding at your fingertips aside from your GLOBALLY distributed welfare would induce a revolution in economic invigoration.

no need for genocide, dude.

edit on 3/12/2012 by prevenge because: (no reason given)
edit on 3/12/2012 by prevenge because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by s12345
 


That would not work.

This is an unpopular opinion, but there IS a natural hierarchy that exists within humanity. Different levels of able, smart etc..

That natural "pyramid" will always exist and the best of the best will be on top. That's not the case today as the pyramid has been artificially inflated by people who clamored to power on the backs of others, by lying, cheating, etc.

However even if you removed them from the top, the people below them would simply assume the vacant positions. If you want to solve the problem of the rich vs the poor, then eliminate the profit motive.

Elimite the rich's ability to influence politics via money and lobyists among other things.

Killing vast numbers of people will never solve a damn thing.

~Tenth



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Thanks....lol. That's the point I was trying to make last night...you just phrased it better than I did!



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by s12345
 

That natural "pyramid" will always exist and the best of the best will be on top. That's not the case today as the pyramid has been artificially inflated by people who clamored to power on the backs of others, by lying, cheating, etc.


er - many of the people on top are NOT the best at what they're supposedly there to do...
many are frivolous and abusive and wasteful with what they're allowed to do and control.

you're talking a technocracy or meritocracy where the ones who CAN do the best.. are placed at the top..

such is NOT the case in todays' world.

you'd like to think it is.. but it's not nearly there because of inheritance.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by s12345
 


For thousands of years the aristocracy has been culled for want of a better word
and the reason for this has always been "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely".

Psychopaths/Sociopaths naturally seek positions of power but often keep themselves out of the limelight. These people become so indoctrinated from birth through private and specific schooling that they are Easily bought up with hardline views outside of the mainstream.

An interesting question has been asked recently, do psychopaths help or hinder the advancement of mankind?

Personally I believe revolution is inevitable in many European countries. If this happens you are going to see armed forces from different countries being put in place to quell the public. This may lead to civil war.

While we are all at war the powers that be will sit in bunkers and offshore in yaughts/submarines.

Many scholars state a little revolution once in a while is a good thing.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by s12345
 


No one needs to kill anyone else, but there is a certain point and time when the inequity between those who have (The One Percent/Aristocracy/Bourgeois/The Elite) and those who 'have not' (Everyone Else/The 99%/The Proletariat) becomes so great that the masses must, and will, stand up and say "enough is enough."

Unfortunately, those at the top of the pyramid rarely agree.

We are, perhaps, approaching one of those points in time.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by prevenge
 


That's exactly what I was saying in the portion of my post you quoted. That the hierarchy has been "sullied" by folks who got there by ill means.

But killing them certainly won't solve the problem and put the proper people in their place. A shift needs to occur in how we look at human beings and business. We need to look at it from a " what helps us all" standpoint, instead of what helps our bottom line.

But really the crux of the issue is the profit motive and the ability to use humans as an asset. As well as corporate influence in public politics and although I think that successfull business and industry pioneers should have a voice in influencing policy, but not the way it's done now.

~Tenth



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by prevenge
 


That's exactly what I was saying in the portion of my post you quoted. That the hierarchy has been "sullied" by folks who got there by ill means.

But killing them certainly won't solve the problem and put the proper people in their place. A shift needs to occur in how we look at human beings and business. We need to look at it from a " what helps us all" standpoint, instead of what helps our bottom line.

But really the crux of the issue is the profit motive and the ability to use humans as an asset. As well as corporate influence in public politics and although I think that successfull business and industry pioneers should have a voice in influencing policy, but not the way it's done now.

~Tenth



i honestly believe that the only method as to how that sort of 'hierarchy purify9ng' can be obtained is for secrets to be extinct. meaning that nobody could ever be fooled again.. by the development of telepathy.
if a bunch of people(say.. after dec 21st 2012 for good measure
) become "pop!" telepathic... then the scum of the earth would have no place to hide... the telepaths could see right through into their minds and report to the rest...

also.. throw in indestructible bodies.. and telekinesis and well.. i don't think there'd be anything really in the way from a changeover of power happening eventually.. from people that have the MERIT to be in those positions... the super-humans make all the arrangements for putting the people in charge. normal humans... in replacing the bad humans ...

but i digress...


for many minds to see into one another all of a sudden... would INDEED be a "Judgement day"...



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by prevenge
 


That's exactly what I was saying in the portion of my post you quoted. That the hierarchy has been "sullied" by folks who got there by ill means.

But killing them certainly won't solve the problem and put the proper people in their place. A shift needs to occur in how we look at human beings and business. We need to look at it from a " what helps us all" standpoint, instead of what helps our bottom line.

But really the crux of the issue is the profit motive and the ability to use humans as an asset. As well as corporate influence in public politics and although I think that successfull business and industry pioneers should have a voice in influencing policy, but not the way it's done now.

~Tenth


re-read your post.. sorry didn't read it thoroughly the first time.. so yeah.. i agree with you.. but we have to be diligent in not painting with a broad brush.. and quantifying EVERY distinct statistical element... and not guesstimate because of emotional urge.



posted on Mar, 13 2012 @ 03:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by s12345
Should we be at war with the aristocracy? If the aristocracy were killed and it was believed to be in the common good and afterwards was proven to be so, would it be OK? The fact that hereditary titles exist means that some countries have something very wrong with them.
It would increase social mobility.
Reduce class discrimination.
Free wealth.
Close the gap between rich and poor.
edit on 12/3/12 by masqua because: all caps in title


1. Believed to be for the common good by whom? The majority? That is the falacy of true democracy. Socialists and communists have tried it in the past, and it turned out an utter failure for the common man. I'll stick with capitalism and the constitution.
2. Increase social mobility......WTF is that? Jealousy is truely a vice.
3. Reduce class discrimination....nope....there will always be the haves and have-nots.
4. Free wealth.....no such thing. Believe it or not, most of us have to EARN our way through life.
5. Close the gap.....nope. See 1, 2, 3, and 4 above.

edit on 13-3-2012 by Hugues de Payens because: Spelling



posted on Mar, 13 2012 @ 12:48 PM
link   
To critique your points:

1. Believed to be for the common good by whom? The majority? That is the falacy of true democracy. Socialists and communists have tried it in the past, and it turned out an utter failure for the common man. I'll stick with capitalism and the constitution
ANSWER
Not having hereditary titles has nothing to do with comunism. America has no hereditary titles, do they live in the communist system? Are they a communist state?

.
2. Increase social mobility......WTF is that? Jealousy is truely a vice.
ANSWER
Social mobility has nothing to do with Jealousy.Without social mobility a country would cease to be competitive with other countries.

3. Reduce class discrimination....nope....there will always be the haves and have-nots.
ANSWER
In most countries it is possible to have an awful lot and still not be upper class, or be poor and still be upper class. Although due to class discrimination the upper class always have an advantage on making money back due to classism and connections the poor and even the rich formerly poor do not.

4. Free wealth.....no such thing. Believe it or not, most of us have to EARN our way through life.
ANSWER
Like it or not lots of people inherit wealth. Some considerable wealth. Tehe old money families as I said made their money through slavery and war.

5. Close the gap.....nope. See 1, 2, 3, and 4 above.
ANSWER
I think I have already answered this question; see 1,2,3,4.





new topics
top topics
 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join