Back to Ted

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wealth inequality trends to increase over time. Without some system that actively redistributes wealth, eventually a few people own everything of value, and ordinary people are obligated to do whatever the lords want in order to gain access to the material resources they need to survive. That’s feudalism.

      • Zengen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Can you name me one single time in human history that this wasn’t just the condition of the human race? Every time humans try to institute a wealth redistribution mechanism it becomes corrupted in less than 70 years and it just becomes feudalism again where the people are impoverished and starving and the only people living well are state officials lol

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Every pre-agricultural society? I’m not saying they didn’t have their own problems, but feudalism wasn’t one of them.

        • TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Small scale hunting and gathering societies are universally egalitarian because it’s impossible for any one person to accumulate significant wealth or to control resources. The way members of such societies gain influence therefore is through virtue and personal merit. This is the social system that we evolved to live in over hundreds of thousands of years, and it’s why we still haven’t figured out an equally amenable replacement in the mere ten thousand years since we adopted agriculture.

          That said, for better or worse, agriculture is a trap, and once we adopted it, there was never any going back, so we have no choice but to keep trying with what we have.