Does there exist any ideology/philosophy for people who wants too bring feodalism back?

Because you don't realize how lucky you are not having to live in a feudal society
>Catholic wants the Middle Ages back because he wants to be a noble, knight, or bishop
>doesn't realize he's 99.99999999999% likely to be another illiterate peasant, just like the vast majority

Oy vey goy why would you want to live n a close knit village with strong morals and traditions? Here, take some used up slut and an iPhone instead!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment

Christianity, kind of.

Jesus as King, ruling the world from Jerusalem, with all of the church (the real church, not the Mother Earth cultists) ruling and reigning with Him, having jurisdiction over cities and peoples and nations.

And the nations sending their tribute to us in the New Jerusalem, as every man has his own land to farm, eats from his own crops, drinks from his own vineyards, and enjoys a peaceful thousand years existence in an Eden type world.

As something of a political feudalist, I have to make a correction there bud.

Feudalism is not really the same thing as manorial serfdom. Serfdom existed before and after medieval feudalism.

Feudalism refers to the relationship between a vassal and his liege. It refers to a swearing of fealty to an overlord. It refers to the exchange of military service for land or other treats. Serfdom is not necessary for, or synonymous with, feudalism. Although serfdom was ubiquitous at the time.

Thanks for understanding.

Those LARPing idiots really just want to mix hypercapitalism and nerd shit with Reagan-era "conservative" values and/or early 20th century Progressive values.

Why aren't you satisfied with the current system of paying taxes and swearing loyalty in exchange for military protection and civic programs from your government?

If you're looking for a world based on principles of "do ut des" between human parties, that's always been the case. Even now.

>Reagan-era

Depending on who you ask they're more Richard I-era.

>there are people in this thread who advocate socially rigid clientelism as a viable form of government
>there are people in this thread who look at rich and powerful people and think "if only they had grandiose titles, an elevated legal status and a social system which obliged me to tug my forelock to them and subject myself to a set of petty injustices and laws like sumptuary laws which forbade me from wearing nice clothes lest I be mistaken for a noble"

What a time to be alive.

>not wanting to be ruled by Lord Trump of the duchy of Manhattan

If I wanted to live in a close-knit village with strong morals and traditions I'd go back to Romania and live with my grandparents along with the inbred local girl they found for me.
I thank my parents every day that they went through the trouble of moving to a Western country, I only regret that they beg me to go visit the family for marriages and funerals.

They really aren't. They think they are but they have no fucking clue.

Taxes should be limited to land rents, not extending to 50% of my labor. Nor am I interested in civic programs.

literally a self hating gypsie

>he wants to live in India with people shitting in the streets and litter strewn everywhere, with clouds of flies spreading particles of shit on to every surface and no public health department or street cleaners to regulate a rudimentary level of public hygiene.

So you want to regress to a level even the Minoans viewed as primitive?

Oh look, it's another libertarian pretending he's a reactionary or that he knows anything about premodern economic systems.

That's pretty rich considering gypsy culture is a lot closer to historical "feudal" societies than your idealized Little House on the Prairie fantasies.

Yes, that's right - if no one is capable of providing these services via free enterprise.

>Oh look, it's another libertarian pretending he's a reactionary or that he knows anything about premodern economic systems

I don't propose a "feudalist" economic system. It's a political system.

gypsies are nomads

Are you perhaps familiar with the term "political economy"? When you argue that the state should earn revenue by renting land instead of taxing labor you're not talking about politics. Nor are you advocating a "feudalist" political (or economic) system.
The Chinese imperial court had bigger disagreements between Legalists and Confucians than you have with mainstream parties.

Many aren't. It doesn't really change what I said either way.

This is the correct answer.

I think there does.
Gobalization, neoliberalism, etc.

wtf i hate feudalism now

Duh.

The state protects property owners, it's the primary and necessary function of the state. Nothing that does it can be considered as anything but a state, and nothing that doesn't do it can be considered a state.

So they should pay for it, since they are the primary benefactors of the state.

Wages or salaries or any form of employed income is between the employee and the employer, government doesn't need to have anything to do with it.

>the state serves the interests of the rich, they should pay for it!
>the state serves the interests of the poor, they should pay for it!
The left-right dichotomy in a nutshell.

The left-right dichotomy is

>rentiers should pay for the state
>workers should pay for the state

Enjoy posting with no electricity

I hate feudalism, too.

>you'll never live into a neo-feudal state
Feels sorta bad man.

Belarus is on another level though

They really are LARPers. I remember an article on ANUS where the author said a major change in the world he desired was wars being fought with hand to hand combat. It's a very bizzare mixture of fascism and libertarian ideology with a bit of green rhetoric thrown in.

>strong morals

Like commonplace prostitution and the high crime rates that flourished in the middle ages?

>have an iPhone and a slut instead

Woah, that's deep man. You totally blew the sheeple out of the water. Other people enjoy keeping in touch with their friends or having sex. You're above that: you know true pleasure can only come from advocating reactionary politics on the internet.

>wars being fought with hand to hand combat
I can't tell if he's imagining lightsaber duels or regretting that he'll never get to use his katana.

Absolutism is not Feudalism.

Yes, it's called Communism.

>>there are people in this thread who advocate socially rigid clientelism as a viable form of government
>how does Bourgeois government work
>>there are people in this thread who look at rich and powerful people and think "if only they had grandiose titles, an elevated legal status and a social system which obliged me to tug my forelock to them
> and subject myself to a set of petty injustices
>how does the current entertainment industry and legal system work

>Feudalism: society is based on the distribution of land
>Communism: land (as a mean of production) is communist property shared by everyone
I am okay with this.

ITT: people who play too much Crusador Kings

>a close knit village with strong morals

I cast detect unread

sorry for slightly OT, but could anyone post the screencap of the thread with all the medieval manuscript drawings and everyone concluding that it was equivalent to memes on a chan? thanks

>Does there exist any ideology/philosophy for people who wants too bring feodalism back?

Yes, the most radical monarchists essentially want the world to return to a pre-1789 state.

>implying that that doesn't mean absolutism

Not even a monarcuck, but that's pretty elementary

>there was feudalism before 1789

Feudalism slowly died during the era of the Capets, in the XIIIth Century.

>Here, take some used up slut and an iPhone instead!

Sounds good to me senpai a lam a ding dong!

Conservative hindus who think the caste system is a good thing

the most designated of designateds

FUCKING THIS.

I'm young, but I still want to go back to the times before the west was the weak, effeminate, degenerate fucking shit hole it is today.

I guarantee the majority of nu-males don't even fucking know what DEUS VAULT means for fucks sake.

1350 was the high point of civilisation tbqh.

No I'm fairly sure today is

>right after the black death

>peak of the black death
>highpoint

You mean right in the middle of

>/Thread

Btw, a little off topic: are Paradox games viewed as memes or are enjotyed on Veeky Forums?

>no spiritual unity
>no religion except invading Islam
>no Western identity or pride
>no art or architecture
>no code of honour or chivalry
>no monogamy
>nothing but whiny self-entitled children chasing hedonism and crying about micro-aggressions while the West is bending over to the barbarians

Amazing civilisation you got there.

Fine make it 1347 you autists, I was rounding up.

(You) made it too obvious when you added the chivalry shit, makes you're troll to obvious.

Nobody is that fedora.

>civilisation unprepared for disease outbreak
>highpoint

>praises Gothic Catholicism
>fedora

Is this your first day memeing?

No civilisation would have been "prepared".

Gothic Catholicism is the most fedora thing i've ever heard behind the word 'euphoric'

Contemporary Western civilisation is far more prepared for disease, if you disagree you're willfully ignorant

>Gothic Catholicism

You're really terrible at this.

More advanced medicine doesn't outweigh all the rest.

And medieval Western civilisation was far better prepared for Islamic invasion or third wave feminism.

>no spiritual unity
>no religion except invading Islam
Just the fact that there are people ranting about the lack of religion it's a fact that there are people still caring for religion/faith.
Btw religions and the people's approach to religions change during time. If not, we would still have latin mess or we might as well all be praying Bahl or Anubi.
>no Western identity or pride
Sjws being loud on the internet and the medias doesn't stop me being proud of muh heritage, if I did wouldn't like history that much
>no art or architecture
I might let you win on the art, but arts are, as many human fields, shifting concept
>no code of honour or chivalry
Because a man can't have moral without codes?
>no monogamy
Because "back in the day" nobody cucke/got cucked?
>nothing but whiny self-entitled children chasing hedonism and crying about micro-aggressions while the West is bending over to the barbarians
People always had their objectives, sometimes it's hedonism, today everyone is free and fool enough to choose whatever they want, time will tell who was right.

You sounded like one of the "deus vult" guys, I hope you aren't
Btw a discussion is a discussion and it gives you something back everytime

Pre 1789 world was feudal. Absolute monarchy is just the final stage of the feudal system.

No it wasn't. Feudalism is a system in which local landlords rule their law over a small plot of land, and in turn own an hommage to a higher landlord, which builds some sort of a pyramid all the way to the King.
When the King's demesne makes up for 4/5 of his realm, when all of his subjects and vavasours make an hommage to him, when his personnal Parliament can judge any local judgement in appeal, and when the edicts of his Council have to be respected everywhere in the Kingdom, this isn't feudalism no more. And guess what ? All of this was real in France far before Louis XIII and the notion of "absolute monarchy", which only made the King even more powerful and the authority even more centralized.

In answer to your question OP

High Toryism is the closest non-meme Ideology/Philosophy there is for people who want to bring feudalism back

The most famous High Tories were the Jacobites who to a lesser degree still exist but in the early 1700's were a political group with the focus on restoring the Stuart monarchy, but their political views were closely related to Feudalism (Preference for a hierarchical organisation of society over utopian equality, as well for holding the traditional gentry as a higher cultural benchmark than the bourgeoisie and those who have attained their position through commerce, as well as an appreciation for high church, high culture and an agrarian lifestyle, with individuals having strong ties to family, religion and the land)

>Just the fact that there are people ranting about the lack of religion it's a fact that there are people still caring for religion/faith.
No it's not. I'm an atheist but I still lament the death of Christianity and the sissification of the Catholic Church. The vast majority doesn't even do that though.

>muh heritage
Meanwhile most Europeans hate their country and their civilisation.

>arts are, as many human fields, shifting concept
Art died over the course of the 19th and early 20th century. It started when it fractured between Neo-Classicism and Romanticism, and then it continued to fracture into smaller and smaller movements until it dissolved completely.

>Because a man can't have moral without codes?
Your individualist thinking shows the decay of society. I'm talking about a code of conduct for all, what one man does alone doesn't change the rules.

>Because "back in the day" nobody cucke/got cucked?
It certainly wasn't considered normal to spend a lifetime switching between hundreds of partners and never founding a stable family.

Oh not these niggers. Do we need to throw your lifeless body into a ditch or something?

I guess I shouldn't be to scared of someone with over 30% bf, no guns, or willingness to do violence to steal property.

Communist are pests. The belong in the grave.

>No it's not. I'm an atheist but I still lament the death of Christianity and the sissification of the Catholic Church. The vast majority doesn't even do that though.
In which way christianity died? And also christianity isn't only catholicism.
I think I'll let slide the part where the atheist laments the death of christianity, it's just stupid

>Meanwhile most Europeans hate their country and their civilisation.
Some do, others don't.
But it is true that most governments don't encourage their citizens to know and be proud of their culture.

>Art died over the course of the 19th and early 20th century. It started when it fractured between Neo-Classicism and Romanticism, and then it continued to fracture into smaller and smaller movements until it dissolved completely.
Art has evolved from being just craftsmanship, art transmits a universal message from a singular object. Today art it's just different, for examples it can be expressed via new forms (films just to say one)

>Your individualist thinking shows the decay of society. I'm talking about a code of conduct for all, what one man does alone doesn't change the rules.
"Well manners" still exist today, whether to apply them or not it's a choice, as was for your beloved chivalry

>It certainly wasn't considered normal to spend a lifetime switching between hundreds of partners and never founding a stable family.
It wasn't and it's still not. Both sides of the extremes aren't considered "normal", just because normality is dictated by the majority. Today you just don't get stoned/burnt alive

>In which way christianity died?
Are you fucking serious? Churches are being demolished in France every few days because nobody goes to church anymore. The Pope is just some stupid SJW celeb.

>I think I'll let slide the part where the atheist laments the death of christianity, it's just stupid
You think you have to believe in God to see the positive effect Catholicism used to have?

>whether to apply them or not it's a choice, as was for your beloved chivalry
There was far more social pressure to do so.

>It wasn't and it's still not.
Of course it is, I barely know any exceptions to that rule.

Wew Lad.

The amount of bastards in the middle ages was astounding.

And and Chaucer had stories about cuckolds so it was a thing back then.

In fact I think he termed the phrase cuckold.

>Are you fucking serious? Churches are being demolished in France every few days because nobody goes to church anymore. The Pope is just some stupid SJW celeb.
Again with the french church story. That church was demolished because it would have fall to pieces by itself. And by the way churches were demolished even back in the good days
About the pope: all he does is embracing values of humility, servitude and the "love thyne neighbour" all christian values.
But he surely isn't a sjw, not in the internet way. He spoke against gender ideology and religious satire.

>You think you have to believe in God to see the positive effect Catholicism used to have?
No you don't. Christian values can be embraced by anyone. But an atheist lamenting the death of a religion is uncommon.
Positive effects like burning alive philosophers and their work? Also christianity isn't only catholicism

>There was far more social pressure to do so.
So imposing a belief is the highest point of civilization?

>Of course it is, I barely know any exceptions to that rule.
Where I live people still get married and look forward to a "regular", relaxed life

>spiritual unity
>middle ages

Read a fucking book

That was more as a result of high mortality rates and poor communications, for example, If I was an English soldier going to fight in France in the Hundred Years War, if I fought in France for say 7 years, my wife at home wouldn't be able to know whether I was alive or dead and so what would commonly happen was soldiers would go off to war, wives wouldn't know when/if their husbands were coming back, and would usually remarry because they didn't usually know if their husband was even alive.

There is nothing to suggest bastards were not frowned upon in the middle ages, in fact they were frowned upon a lot more by high society (read: the Nobility) than in modern times

>read a book
>doesn't specify which book one should read to educate themselves on the topic

Why do people do this?

kek

It would be hard to find a book on the middle ages that didn't mention the constant religious strife. Literally, go find a book, any book, and read it.

>any book
What the fuck is a wocket, who the hell puts one in their pocket, and what does this have to do with religious strife?

>wocket
>pocket

Lad... are you alright

Well meme'd

Keep reading and if it doesn't explain, I'll tell you tomorrow

>DEUS VAULT
>VAULT

Fallout 5 confirmed in the Holy Land

Deus Vult is a reference to the video game Deus Ex, right? (As in, I want Deus)

TOPPEST KEKS

More seriously, since I give other people shit for not backing theirs up

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catharism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldensians
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Council_of_the_Lateran
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antipope_Gregory_VIII
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Schism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joachim_of_Fiore#Condemnation
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amalrician
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Gnostic_sects

tl;dr
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heresy

I don't have my medieval books with me and I'm more of an early modern kind of guy anyways but you should be able to mine some good ones from the references.

Small nitpick, the AntiPopes weren't an issue of religious doctrine, they were an issue of not wanting to be subject to the specific Roman Pope, and his political power.

Doctrinal unity wasn't the question

Fair.