Excellent Reads

1864 readers

155 users here now

Are you tired of clickbait and the current state of journalism? This community is meant to remind you that excellent journalism still happens. While not sticking to a specific topic, the focus will be on high-quality articles and discussion around their topics.

Politics is allowed, but should not be the main focus of the community.

Submissions should be articles of medium length or longer. As in, it should take you 5 minutes or more to read it. Article series’ would also qualify.

Rules:

Common Sense. Civility, etc.
Server rules.
Please either submit an archive link, or include it in your summary.

Other comms that might be of interest:

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Iliveonsaturdays@sh.itjust.works

awesome_lowlander@lemmy.dbzer0.com

AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works

223

The Rich Are Hoarding Wealth — Because They Know What’s Coming (archive.ph)

submitted 1 day ago by nicerdicer@feddit.org to c/longreads@sh.itjust.works

40 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The Takeaway — Collapse Isn’t a Flaw, It’s the Plan

The rich are not scrambling to prevent collapse. They welcome it — because they know they’ll be the only ones left standing. While the rest of us are told to “sacrifice” and “tighten our belts,” billionaires are building bunkers, buying private islands, and hoarding resources for the dystopia they see coming.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Inertia. Why did kings exist for so long?

[–] Libb@jlai.lu 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Inertia. Why did kings exist for so long?

They did not 'exist' spontaneously to begin with.

Grossly put, In early days France kings were elected. That's how Hugues Capet became king of France around 980 AD (Hugh is considered the founder of the Capetian family that lead to Louis XIV and to Louis XVI). He was elected by the other members of the aristocracy, and he was far from being the most powerful/rich/vast land owner (his 'kingdom' was in reality quite small compared to the lands of other aristocrats). Then, it's a lot of diplomacy and a lot more patience (over centuries), alliances and marriages (plus a few treason, and feuds) that made the difference and lead to his descents to become the incarnation of absolute power they once were peaking in the advent of Louis XIV and then it went to shit rather quickly (the dude died around 1715... barely 70-some years before the French revolution and the Republic), with only two more kings after him the second one, Louis XVI, ending beheaded. Meanwhile that Capet family was not 'undisputed' as the legit kings. Valois and then Plantagenet contested quite harshly their title and for quite some time they took it from them. It was only in somewhere in the XIII century that the Capet took back their power... up until 1789.

So, beside religion (bad karma, plus real risk of lessening one's power) politics and pragmatism explain the non constant killing of new kings. The real risk of having to face a coalition of all the other aristocrats (hostile to power grab) and also the certainty that if anyone could kill a king to become king, well, anyone else could do the same to the new one. It was much better (and safer) to agree to keep one king alive for a while and then, while publicly submitting to his authority (up to a certain point, as there were almost constant... disagreements) to split practical power between them (aka, back then split land ownership). It's also a lot cheaper than to have to fight constant internal wars to keep whatever you can put your hands on by a coup. Plus, publicly recognizing the dude as your king did not prevent you from secretly (or not so secretly) to weaken him or help to make his life hell. Ancient history of France is filled with that. It's great read ;)