I wonder what they were truly like
He’s right, and won’t say it explicitly, that the bitter pleb perspective on them is hegemonic, and not only in Russia.
Wouldn’t be surprised if he’s right about this
The best, indeed only, examination of the nobility between 1800 and 1861 was, for instance, written well over a century ago
He’s right on with this
many German historians and social scientists share with some of their European and more of their North American peers the conviction that in the modern world aristocracy is an irrelevant and politically suspect area of study, to which only scholars tainted by social snobbery and attracted by a love for superficial glitter will dedicate themselves. Aristocrats and their progeny are dumb, wicked or, more likely, both.
I think here of the way Sloterdijk described Christianity as an anthropotechnology of running-ahead to perfection using a model (Jesus)
If the aristocracies of old are all interpreted by bitter plebs then we don’t have an ideal to run toward. Like I said, people tend to use the bitter pleb as the model.
Wouldn’t it be nice to witness, even if only in text, what an actual aristocratic ruling-caste is like?
“Oh I see what you’re doing! You have to bring THEM into this?”
Not intentionally, I just admire certain aristocrats and think they’re an extinct species. Don’t you like to live in this time?
This book claims that in the 19th century the aristocracies of Europe were already on the defensive. Did they deserve the hate? Think about it historiographically- we mostly have the mobs’ eye-view on the matter. If people are similar to the way they are today then they hated the aristocrats because they were better than them. How arrogant.
Remember, we’re living in a time of deliberately engineered reverse-meritocracy
Niggers, both white and black, work together to convince themselves it wouldn’t be better for the country if they didn’t live here. I got news for you… (You’re less than worthless, objectively speaking.)
Even Land is a bitter pleb, so I don’t expect anyone else to be much better.
What we have now is a cross between bourgeois and prole
It was not illogical for Marx to believe that the new bourgeoisie would supplant the aristocracy as Europe’s ruling class.
I find the Hindu castes more accurate to describe the US, personally. Vaishya-chandalas who adapted to the shudras they rule over by appropriating shudra characteristics. Kind of like the way the Alawites pretend to be Muslims. Except with our upper-caste they actually did seem to convert to Islam. The kagal is a different story.
“I don’t need to emulate aristocrats, mannn, I’m fine the way I am.” Haha
Who are seen as aristos these days? The grifters of social media? The dullards they let you see on the screens? The ideal of perfection is being ran toward!
Makes sense I’m studying this subject now, after all the diatribes about our pseudo-aristocracy- the question naturally arises does it not- Who can we learn from then?
I’ve already told you and you probably don’t have the attention span to carry it out, that German and Greek thinkers are the aristos of the aristos. Besides them how about the ones that were actually in government rather than theorized about government.
Do you have a sense of how hostile the modern world is to people talking like this? PLEBS exist, shit-elites exist, the DEMOS exists. And they’re all something that deserve the profoundest hatred. If you don’t hate them then you’re going to be like them, that’s just a fact.
Oh right I forgot this is who I’m probably talking to