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.