Trump's Economic Plan

[Speaker to Animals]

An aristocracy can be defeated by famine there for aristocrats are farmers.

A farmer can be kicked in the throat too. What is a farmer going to do against an army when the farmer is not himself a warrior?

We spent a solid 1500 years where the farmers were the property of the aristocracy. They didn't have fuck all to say about anything.

[Speaker to Animals]

Even in the context of the debate on the second amendment, the argument in favor of the widely owned firearms leading to an intractable insurgency implies a majority of the warrior caste is fighting that insurgency. The warrior caste is divided in that scenario.

But if they are not, or most of the warriors take a single side, then we have a new aristocracy of some kind. I doubt it will be a half-assed copy of one like the fascists tried to do in the 20th century. Probably more like what Heinlein predicted, but who knows. We will have to wait to find out.

[Martin Hash]

I'm done reading your soldier-fetishing: just expect me to skip any post with that drivel in it.

[Martin Hash]

An aristocracy can be defeated by famine there for aristocrats are farmers.

Aristocrats don't have to worry about food, or anything you can buy.

p.s. You look me up when the famine comes; I'll give you some food.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Not sure if StA is calling for a junta, a military coup, or just about to initiate a “cleansing” of his local Walmart...

I guess I’ll just have to stay tuned to this Economics thread, for more Economic analysis.

[The Conservative]

An aristocracy can be defeated by famine there for aristocrats are farmers.

Aristocrats don't have to worry about food, or anything you can buy.

p.s. You look me up when the famine comes; I'll give you some food.

Except the French may have something to say about that...

[Speaker to Animals]

Not sure if StA is calling for a junta, a military coup, or just about to initiate a “cleansing” of his local Walmart...

I guess I’ll just have to stay tuned to this Economics thread, for more Economic analysis.

It is good that this time you admit to being ignorant and puzzled by complex topics instead of pushing through with idiotic statements. Because you showed some small gesture of honesty and humility with respect to all the shit you do not understand, I will make this clear to you:

My argument has little to do with "should" and everything to do with "is". That is to say, I am interested in the cycles of civilizations, and their exists two polar extremes that western civilization oscillates between: aristocracy (rule by warriors) and democracy (rule by the mob).

At our heights we attempt to reconcile them, as the United States was conceived. We were supposed to be a democracy of warriors. Generally, though not exclusively, if you were a voter you were also a land owner (financial stake in the country) and a member of the militia (you would pay the blood cost of your own votes).

But over time any democracy expands franchise until most people get a vote, and a minority of people pay the financial and blood costs of those votes. A military caste arises. Eventually the military takes control from the mob before the whole civilization dissolves, and you get an aristocracy.

When the aristocracy emerges, it happens in a process that is the mirror image of how democracy emerged. At first there are compromises. The aristocracy of the Roman empire still maintained a Senate. Towns and villages still voted on local issues that had nothing to do with defense. But the aristocrats will grow in power until you get something like the feudal and manorial systems of the medieval period.

Like the beginnings of democracy, the beginnings of the aristocracy are a kind of golden age. Until shit gets unstable. Power accumulates to the very top and local decisions are no longer made by the people. The aristocracy controls the economy and social life rather than just security. People eventually revolt because it becomes unbearable for too many. The process repeats and society begins to move in the direction of democracy.


What I actually want, if you want to know my "should" is that sweet spot in either direction where you have a blend. On the democracy side, I would rather limit enfranchisement to those who fight and have financial stakes in the government. On the aristocratic side, I would rather have an aristocracy whose purview is defense and foreign policy, with democracy used for economic and social matters.

What I do not want is the extremes. I do not want mob rule as we have in America today. Neither do I want a tyrannical aristocracy that treats the rest of the people as slaves.

I argue we should avoid the extremes, and the democratic extremists label that as wanting to enslave everybody. Which is bullshit, but extremists always assume everybody thinks in their terms.

[nmoore63]

An aristocracy can be defeated by famine there for aristocrats are farmers.

A farmer can be kicked in the throat too. What is a farmer going to do against an army when the farmer is not himself a warrior?

We spent a solid 1500 years where the farmers were the property of the aristocracy. They didn't have fuck all to say about anything.

Ha.

Aristocrats come in many flavors. It’s your silly narrow definition.

If you control the afterlife or the rain or the granaries or the swords or the copper find or ... then you can be aristocrats.

[nmoore63]

An aristocracy can be defeated by famine there for aristocrats are farmers.

Aristocrats don't have to worry about food, or anything you can buy.

p.s. You look me up when the famine comes; I'll give you some food.

P.S. the west side of the mountains will be the wrong side in a famine. Look me up; I’ll give you some food.

[Speaker to Animals]

An aristocracy can be defeated by famine there for aristocrats are farmers.

A farmer can be kicked in the throat too. What is a farmer going to do against an army when the farmer is not himself a warrior?

We spent a solid 1500 years where the farmers were the property of the aristocracy. They didn't have fuck all to say about anything.

Ha.

Aristocrats come in many flavors. It’s your silly narrow definition.

If you control the afterlife or the rain or the granaries or the swords or the copper find or ... then you can be aristocrats.

No.

The basis of an aristocracy is that of the warrior. Aristocrats take power and defend it. If you controlled the rain, the warriors can just take control of you.