all 13 comments

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Western Europe has traditionally been an aristocracy.

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

i.e oligarchy

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sure, but oligarchy is a broad term.

[–]asterias 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Ancient Greeks tried all kinds of political systems and once they discovered democracy it was what led them to failure.

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Only Athens had democracy. Sparta was an Oligarchy as were most of the Greek states.

[–]disidentHRNational Socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Athenian democracy isn't even remotely close to modern "democracy" (i.e. jewish oligarchy)

[–]asterias 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Of course it wasn't, but it was still led to degeneration, which was pointed out even back then.

[–]Wrangel 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Scandinavians: local strongman gathers independent farmers, citizen soldiers, small time business owners to a thing. The local strong man runs the meeting and sets the agenda but people speak fairly freely and he has to be able to convince the majority of men to agree with him. If he can't get that support he is disgraced and has to leave. If he can get the people behind him he can pretty much do what he wants until the next thing.

We have a tradition of endless things that drag on for days. We have had them since our first recorded history and we still have very similar meetings today in everything from companies to soccer clubs to housing associations.

There are fewer class based rules on who can participate but generally the people who show up are the ones who have the agency and interest in doing so.

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes. Norse culture has a knack towards democracy.

[–]Parthings 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I’ll suggest that Indian oligarchy also needs a pass from an “intellectual” aristocracy. As long as current “intellectual” aristocracy approves, oligarchy can get away with anything.

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Perhaps but the pattern of dynastic rule remains. All Indian parties are more or less family franchises.

[–]Parthings 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Absolutely. But knowing the culture more, you see that a shady “intellectual” claiming to know better is the source of legitimacy for the government.

Before Gandhi, neither the congress nor the British were popularly legitimate. Mughals sponsored an entire set of intellectuals to translate ancient Hindu works to Persian and other languages. Even today, the anti Hindu caste warriors rely on a Dr Ambedkar to be the source of their intellectual credibility.

Part of the reason why the BJP has failed to maneuver better is because it is still seen as a party without an “intellectual” backing

[–]disidentHRNational Socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Genes and environment also change, so drawing some trends out of it is nonsensical (you mentioned China which was dynastic but now it has no traces of dynasticism in terms of the rule), and even besides that you drew these trends just by going several centuries back (in some cases just decades) and generalizing very broadly.