How Aristocracies Rule
Вставка
- Опубліковано 31 лип 2024
- The American fairytale is far from enchanted. Power and wealth are concentrated in an anxious aristocracy, comprised of 10% of the population, that reigns by dividing the lower classes and pitting them against each other so that the poor turn against the poor. It’s how most aristocracies throughout history have worked. It’s also how the American elite convinced 25 million non-slaveholding citizens to aid and abet them in slavery.
Can America ever live up to its promise of a government by and for the people?
Read Matthew Stewart's cover story on The Atlantic: www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/06/the-birth-of-a-new-american-aristocracy/559130/
Subscribe to The Atlantic on UA-cam: bit.ly/subAtlanticYT - Фільми й анімація
oh its just an american politics video. i thought it was going to actually explain how an aristocracy works
xXxSkyViperxXx I agree
Yeah I see
true
Ikr
I like the overall message of the video, but I was hoping that this would actually go into detail on the inner workings and mechanisms of an aristocracy.
Asmo Nymous orrrrrr...
They could have just made a longer cartoon and usef their funds and social cloat to provide more for more education more people.
I mean I support everyone cracking open a book too but this was rather lacking.
@Asmo Nymous I didn't immediately look at the length of the video.
I don't think you know what mock means.
HistoryBuff97 I think we could all benefit from being a little more "present" ....
Wealth disparity is not sufficient to make a society an aristocracy. Aristocracies have inherited titles. At the very least, aristocracies have a closed membership that isn't wholly dependent on wealth. Some merchants could be wealthier than vast majority of the aristocracy and still would be excluded from the aristocracy.
Slaveholders in the South never were "Barron of this or that village" or "Duke of some county." Membership into the Southern elite was based on current wealth. The South may have had a wealth disparity, but it wasn't an aristocracy.
The biggest problem with aristocracy is that leaders are selected by birthright and not by merit or even by popularity.
The biggest benefit of aristocracy is that leaders planned for the long term. Too many decisions--especially with regards to bailouts and debts--are made today based solely on short term considerations because politicians have the attitude: "If everything blows up in five years, I'll already be gone. It won't be my problem anymore."
I was expecting an explanation of how aristocracy operates.
This is not how an aristocracy works. This is something else.
This three minute video about the global history of aristocratic systems is VERY simplified.
Sorry mate, but when people say "aristocracy", they don't think about the US.
Agreed, I actually thought they were going to talk about the old aristocracy.
US is more an oligarchy.
I can't trace a clear message or question being answered in this.
OK cool it wasn't just me
What about the Brazilian monarchy? They wanted to end slavery and that's what lead to the downfall of the monarchy.
Aristocracy is not the same as " the elites"
Way more simplistic than I would expect from the Atlantic
The very America-centered explanation and the usage of frankly confusing figures kind of made its purpose lost
“A talented agent is sitting in his office...”
I feel this was the perfect opportunity for the Atlantic to use the example of the Italian kingdoms. The video could have explained the role of the nobles, the rise of the merchants and middle class, the decades of radical reforms during the risorgimento of the mid-19th century (Garibldi and others), and eventual loss of power by the aristocrats to the new wealthy merchants in the 20th century. Using the American model describes how agricultural merchants eventually lost power to industrial merchants in the 1870s, and how the industrial merchant descendants proceeded to reel-in every new market available. The Athenian democracy was also a questionable choice for successful examples in the video, since the idealistic, democratic city state managed to keep Pericles' system alive for less than a century (480-404 BCE), before becoming another oligarchy ruled by backwards tyrants (like the rest of the Aegean). A better example would have been the imperial Li family's cosmopolitan reforms during the Tang Dynasty (618-907 CE).
Love the clever, subtle use of Vivaldi’s seasons on this video for dramatic effect. Excellent sound design.
After all, "The Four Seasons" really could also mean fairweather political caprice.
This is just one way in which aristocracies rule. This video isn't meant to describe in depth every way in which aristocracies rule and operate. Might as well make a documentary at that point.
Aristocracies are lit. So is wealth. Didn't know there was so much salt in the Atlantic.
A bit hard to follow, but i would have liked to know what game you think the 10% is playing on the population to divide them, and if revolution is the only possible outcome to a decaying aristocracy. More of a directional approach on what to focus on rather than jump ahead to the 9% reaction after the revolution
I’m proud of my heritage. I wouldn’t be born so again I’m pleased. My Aristocratic ancestors and my African ancestors looked out for each other. They were never slaves or servants... they were treated with respect ... of course not everyone was nice like us.
Vivaldi
Seems more like an attempted call to action than an informative video.
I thought the video would tell about how aristocracies rule (literally)...
Fight! Fight! Fight!
And bring popcorn 🍿 for me please::
what is the first musical piece?
By the way, what 9.9% refers to??
The ending was a little confusing for me. Is the narrator assuming himself and the audience to be part of the 9.9%?
aristocracy is an enclosed entity, focused purely on itself. Understanding the modern world using such categories and comparing modern elites to aristocracies of France or Russia (Russia never had one) makes any arguments very weak. Aristocratic ideas are about granting some group a legit right to hold some position in a society. No modern elite, even the most corrupted one, has such a law. The modern world is very complex, extremely open and constantly changes itself. It not only gives every human being an opportunity, it grants a right to have an opportunity. And that`s a shame so many people still prefer oversimplifying things in order to blame a certain individual or a group they despise for everything they don't like. Social mechanics aren`t, and never will be perfect, and they have to be constantly updated, but it doesn`t mean that if you have some problems with a roof at your house you have to burn it to the ground.
I agree with this but aren’t the Czars aristocrats though?
I'm sure the new england/NYC/DC aristocracy is VERY beneficial and above reproach.
Was expecting explanation of aristocracy in general with some example other than America.
Nice video..but you need more details
There's a url to a full article in the description, but it's not clickable, and i can't seem to copy/paste on mobile.
The video essentially summarizes the conclusion of the article The Birth of a New American Aristocracy. It’s a pretty long but very informative read. Just the first couple parts discussing how wealth inequality and social mobility are connected and have gotten worse are worth it
The Atlantic is calling for a revolution
I love this video. Less is more, we can think for ourselves or investigate more.
The true society starts from barons.
Prince K. von Metternich
he died how relevant is he
@@walnutship6740 He´s one of the reasons why Germany exists in the first place. His legacy will continue has long as one of the most important countries in world history continues to exist.
Fight against whom? There is no such thing as a centralised aristocracy. There is no "castle" to raid.
"Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws" - Rothschild
Overthrow the means of production
I love how this slightly hints that we should start an all out french revolution 2.0
The red background at the end makes it seem like they are subtly suggesting we have a Communist revolution
More so communist, but French Revolution can work.
This is a very inaccurate video. The country was founded by its natural aristocracy and ruled by them in the manner of philosopher kings through Madison. It’s no secret as to why the entire country participated in slavery. The federal government derived 80% of its tax revenue from tariffs paid for by the southern states. The north enjoyed economic protection subsidized by southern slaves and people in northern cities lived better because of the wealth transfer.
The privilege of social class whose members possess disproportionately large percentage of society's wealth, prestige and political influence.
Quite positive here,they do not fkg care,they usually like telling all to piss off
Yet again, The Atlantic, you miss the point.
Well that was sloppy
Puerile. Was this for a sixth grade audience?
The best Liars Rule
According to Abraham Lincoln Government is for the people, by the people shall not be perish from the earth?
Will, base on the recent situation , we can't say that because of few privilege people wields political power that leds our country stagnation
I thought this was going to be an actual video on how Aristocracy works, not a video to mock Trump
How is it mocking Trump?
That is how aristocracy works. Capitalism has created a new aristocracy. Socialism will win because it's for the many, and not the few.
His name isn't mentioned anywhere, which means you recognize that the current situation is equal to what is described in this video.
Luke
That's your interpretation of a drawing which isn't confirmed in any way.
If you watched this, and immediately thought of Trump and what's going on, then you also see the massive issue in America. And Trump, being as rich as he is, and how devisive, is the face of it.
Semi-literate neo-Bolshevik dribble. I wanted to learn about aristocracies, not listen to a call for revolution.
Those Laurion silver mines were the worst place to work though. All slave labor.
Great Unrest is coming......
Tha f is tis???
I want to see nobilities not oligarchs!!
Narrow American mindset. The French and Russian examples didn't have racial groups to pit against each other.
Mason M exactly. That's why they worked.
Mason M
France fell into a civil unrest comparible to Syria during the French Revolution, and Russia had one of the most biblical revolts of the era...
Both, had extremist that ranged from far right nationalists, to actual communists...
*Actually, they did...*
but it was *not a coherent factor* , because *people in France and Russia never divided by race, but by city and by region* because the *cultures of both countries* adhere to a *statist identity rather an ethnic national one, which is what kept those countries together.*
Russia had serfs which were slaves
You don't need racial groups it's just more convenient that way, but any type of ethnic minority will do as an "other"
Is everything on the internet about slavery?
the video has no substance and mostly fluff for a progressive demographic. The message is basically activist. Atlantic seems to be lowering the standard.
What is this nonsense? An aristocrat in America is like a vegetarian eating at McDonalds.
dat done soun's like drty commie propagandr to me self, sR, by GAWD I ask you to git!
Nah, but really, all shit aside, I was hoping to learn something from this video. Not just some pro-democracy propaganda.
Not that I disagree, but I would say the title is misleading. Just change it to "The case against Aristocracy, for Democracy" Or something along those lines.
What the hell is this?
We're still alive and well in britain.
9.9%er here. The notion of me and my family being part of the ruling aristocracy, living in fear of the 'commoner' revolt is a real hoot.
Consider this: The 90th income percentile in the USA is ~$110k/year. The 99th is ~$300k. Now, don't get me wrong, that's a lot of money. In a global sense it's a fortune. But to make it into the 90th percentile you need two average income earners in one household. Those are some pretty regular folks. Those in the 99th percentile are your doctor or dentist. Now, you tell me, are these people the members of the aristocracy working to keep wages down? Striving to keep you subjugated? Are these the people living in fear of the coming insurrection to steal their power?
Bullshit. I'm 100% convinced that the clown who is writing these '9.9% aristocracy' videos is demonizing the wrong people. I fully believe that reaching the top 9.9% is something that many Americans can achieve. I believe it because I did it. I moved from lower-middle class (my dad worked in manufacturing) to upper middle class with zero outside help. Things that made this upward mobility possible: hard work, good luck, decent zip code, the right skin color, married someone with similar goals, consistency and planning over years-long spans of time. By the time I'm dead I will have spent DECADES of my life in front of a computer screen, but during that time I was continually pushing myself forward. How much do the people around you at work know? Well, learn more. What do your friends and family waste their money on? Waste less. It's not rocket science.
Now excuse me while I saunter over to my lavish 12 year old Honda and and drive to my palatial 100 year old fixer upper and dine on a decadent supper of reheated pizza. Give me a fucking break.
This notion of the 9.9% ruling American aristocracy is ludicrous. It's an invented enemy.
First
Go 9.9 %!
& look @ Scandinavia.
Shoulders of Giants ok
Shoulders of Giants that's never been a unified political entity could you be more specific
Yes! Think what we could all be.
I was expecting a video explaining how aristocracy works. Not leftist propaganda.
I HATE IT
I’m sorry but Not all people in the Aristocracy were bad people. My family was on the side of right. And we separated ourselves from others who were inhumane.
Biased much?
That was so stupid and a total waste of time
Oh look, an unbiased look at American politics. Nothing to see here, don't ask questions.
The science of racial differences is still very robust, and only getting ever more so.
Differences do not confer relative merit. As in the Declaration of Independence, 'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men were created equal...' The word 'equal' is not synonymous with 'identical'.
Though The People of the United States of America have failed to live up to the high ideals expressed in the founding documents, those concepts remain sound. No one has the right to exploit anyone else, ever, no matter the excuse. Not on the basis of 'race', or ethnic background, socio-economic background, age, or gender. Everyone who could read when the Declaration of Independence was written knew that the words 'Men' and 'Man' when capitalized meant all humans. Those words came from the Latin 'manus' for hand, not another appendage.
Outside the confines of a particular endeavor, differences can be meaningless.
Science, if even our direct observation is clouded, has shown us that differences between people within a given 'race' or ethnic group can be as substantial as differences between groups, and that many of these differences can result from differences in the environment in which an individual person developed.
The idea of genes, or DNA if you pefer, as destiny is obsolete. After all, corn plants have more 'genes' than humans. Significantly more. The relative complexity, at least from our perspective, of human beings is possible because our genes are modified, or 're-written on the fly' by epigenetic factors which are influenced by the environment, sometimes with effects stretching out over generations. And by more immediate or direct environmental effects.
To be human is to be far more alike than different. Science has shown that, as Carl Sagen phrased it, 'We are all cousins.'
We need to elect Bernie Sanders
Isn't the Atlantic a very right-wing feed?