Why haven't you taken the feudalism pill yet, Jow Forums?
The system could easily be adapted to fit modern roles, and all could benefit.
Brainlets and the ambitionless could exist as serfs. They get put to work doing menial labor (fast food, stocking shelves, whatever) and in return receive whatever stipend they need to live on from their lords.
The merchant/farmer class is a bit better off. Makes their own living, some can perhaps attain wealth comparable with nobility. But they still need to kick something up to the nobles. Doctors, lawyers, businessmen, engineers, whatever.
Then you have lesser nobility and knights. For a modern equivalent, think military officers and local authorities like mayors. Landed gentlemen with power to vote in parliament/congress. "House of representatives" would fit here. Obviously, no roasties. Giving women the vote was top 3 biggest mistakes humanity ever made.
Greater nobility would be on par with governors. These are Senate tier people.
King should be beholden to a loose constitution but otherwise wield broad executive powers. May be removed with a 4/5ths no confidence vote to avoid bloody revolutions and so forth. Royalty remains hereditary unless removed by parliament.
Above the royals, in its rightful place, is the church. Specifically the church of latter day saints. If you think about it, the mormons have kept it together in the face of degeneracy better than any other religious group. It is the mormon faith that is the correct moral compass to keep family units functional.
This is a pretty good system. I like how it's not strictly a caste system and that the lower classes can gain some wealth. How exactly would the Senate work if there is a king?
Alexander Murphy
Constitutional monarchy. Think what the UK has only dont castrate the monarch so much. The role of parliament would include loose checks and balances on the monarch but would primarily be dealing with issues that dont require full attention of the king.
King should have unilateral power to make war, conduct diplomacy, grant clemency, determine trade policy, appoint advisors and magistrates, levy taxes. Unless overridden by an 80% parliament majority in both chambers.
Asher Sanchez
FYI we are living in a feudal society, fix'd it for you
I haven't yet. Will start giving it a read next week. I'm having hernia surgery and will have a few days of down time so I was looking for something to read anyway.
Bentley Smith
Sounds great. How would taxes work anyways (amongst all of the classes, especially)?
Aiden Moore
>Why haven't you taken the feudalism pill yet, Jow Forums? It doesn't work with privatized land. That's why we have capitalism. Once some Dutch faggots figured out how to survey and map plots and register deeds to them so that land could be capitalized. Now you could buy and sell and trade and borrow against land sight unseen for the first time. Soon owning things you didn't possess became normal. Then we got joint stock companies and stock exchanges. At this point, feudalism was fucked. England followed suit. That's what the enclosure movement was. Nobles fenced off and capitalized the commons as real estate. That's where peasants lived and subsistence farmed. When they couldn't do that any more, they fled to town and city centers. Some got work doing dumb dumb repetitive shit, and modern wage cucking was born. Since now there was a bunch of capital from land sales and a bunch of extra urban labor, the seeds of the industrial revolution were planted. But other former peasants were just layabouts. So in 1500 you get the Elizabethan Poor Laws, the first taxpayer-funded welfare in the Anglo world. Right on the heels of the enclosure of the commons and the beginning of capitalism.
But the big point is that you didn't need welfare when anyone could wander onto some land nobody else was using and put up a shitty shack and grow enough food to hopefully not starve to death. Sure, the local strongman Lord would take a share of what they grew. But they didn't need to pay land rents or have capital or take out mortgages to build a homestead and farm and shit. As soon as you make upfront cash necessary to do that, the peasantry and serfdom die.
Wyatt Cooper
Imagine if IOTBW this. Print hundred is of pamphlets and leave them around campuses. Force the media to recognize it and as such spread it either through discussing its contents (prolly won't) or the Streisand effect.
Jacob Hall
We have a similar system today, its called corporate capitalism.
Easton Mitchell
Thanks for the history lesson
Henry Foster
The social power structure today is very similar to the feudal social, the source of wealth has just shifted from land to corporate bodies. You had a class of people bouncing around, failing upward with titles for estates, now you have the same thing with corporate boards.
Kevin Williams
It sounds crude, but on a basic level similar to how the mob works. Everybody kicks up some portion of what they earn up the ladder. Merchant class to lesser nobles, lesser nobles to upper nobles, upper nobles to royals, and the royals tithe 10% to the church.
Church could maintain itself and administer charity with tithe revenue and other donations. Serfs dont have an income per se, so wouldn't worry about taxes. Since revenues get larger as you move up the chain, tax rates can be less. Let's say merchants pay 25%, lower nobles pay 20%, upper nobles 15%, monarch tithes 10%.
Beyond that certain goods or privileges could be taxed. In a proper society public transport should be well run and funded by basic taxes. Owning a private automobile could be taxed and kicked up with the rest of the funds.
As far as a budget, let's say that parliamentary finance committee (appointed by king) submits a budget for approval to the king. The king and his advisors review it and either approve it or make changes to it as needed. Setting budgets should be mundane and not involve clown world battles over earmarks or not passing any budget because of squabbles with one particular area of the budget.
Jayden Price
>Since revenues get larger as you move up the chain, tax rates can be less. You don't really need income tax at all in a feudal system, so long as the land is administered properly and rents are fair.
Jaxson Miller
Every layer had their own privileges. Peasants weren't slaves and needed to be protected and appeased by their rulers, like they had to give their rulers their service and taxes.
Carter Kelly
The "extra" classes are part of the problem. The US prospered and became the most powerful nation in history by getting rid of them. You only really need 3 classes: >leaders >skilled workers >laborers Fluid mobility between them, no heredity. Anyone who doesn't work gets deported. This includes kings, nobles, etc, plus the lazy poor. Yes that's not possible IRL but we're talking about a fantasy anyway.
Christian Brown
>Why haven't you taken the feudalism pill yet, Jow Forums? I am aware of the general risk to romanticize those times, so I hesitate to embrace those old systems too much. I genuinely believe in the superiority of monarchy that much I can say. I've never been a democrat never will be. But living in a caste system is all fine and dandy until you yourself want to rise and then you will find yourself not so accepting of the system anymore. I say that just because these systems are predicated on people's acceptance of their place. You accept that you are born a peasant or a slave and will die one you can not really become a merchant or better (unless you somehow get your hands on some serious money). Which can be a good thing, accepting ones place, but I'd be lying if I said I could easily do it if I was one of the unprivileged.
Generally speaking though the social order of the middle ages was a bit more convincing and worked better than ours. Particularly in politics. People need a central authority. Debates in parliaments are garbage.
Daniel Price
This is institutionalized brazilification and kikery, fucking Cletus.
Caleb Robinson
I have a better idea let the english nobility take control over the us, and let you all be serfs
Only an American alive in 2019 could LARP this hard. Fuck off with your Renaissance Fayre shit.
Jason Reyes
Eh, there could easily be room for some degree of mobility between classes. First, consider that most peasants would probably be content to be peasants provided that their lords offered them a relatively comfortable existence. 40 hour work week in exchange for food, shelter, clothing, basic medical care, a 2 week annual vacation, transport, tv/internet. Probably 80% of people would be just fine with that.
As far as mobility though, let's consider three example cases:
> serf to merchant class
A serf is decides that he is capable of more. He started a construction laborer, and over a few years reached a supervisory role. He works closely with engineers (professional/merchant class) and thinks he might like to become one. His aptitude testing indicates that he is capable of succeeding in that role and there is a shortage of civil engineers, so he petitions his lord to allow him to attend school to train to be an engineer. The lord agrees to release him from serfdom in exchange for free labor or some debt once his training is complete.
> non nobility to lesser nobility
A physician decides that he wants bigger and better things for his son than a comfy feudal yuppie lifestyle. He wants his son to be a man with power and influence. The most direct way to that end is to enroll his son in to a military academy and have him become a commissioned officer. His son completes military training, gets his commission, and completes his obligated term to his nobleman as an officer. The noble, pleased with his competency as an officer, offers him a parcel of land in exchange for accepting a commission as a captain in his army and serving another term.
> lesser noble to greater noble
This sort of transition is odd in that it's in some ways easier but is probably a combination of political savvy and opportunity rather than earned exclusively by merit. Think along the lines of doing a favor to the king.
Chase Flores
No. During European feudalism what is now Brazil was still using a hunter gatherer system of spearing monkeys and so forth. Similar to what Venezuela is doing now.
Also, the structure of feudalism was pretty efficient at keeping the kikes out. Kikes tend to infest the professions/merchant roles, which lack political power in feudalism. Practically the only way to wedge your way in to nobility was via military service, which conflicts with the nature of the jew. There's always marrying up, but back then marriage and honor mattered and no self respecting noble or royal would allow their daughter to marry a kike.
Camden Powell
You really think social mobility works like this in a feudal society? jesus christ.
