Feudalism

How Eurocentric is that term

Did 6 million Jews really die

That stability is better than anarchy and content is a happy life

Feudalism is actually a really good thing, however it has never been properly tried before. Medieval European feudalism wasn't REAL feudalism.

I know this is a joke--but how could feudalism be reincarnated in the modern world? Does it require agriculture?

the complete collapse of all advanced technology and somehow convincing modern citizens that they have no rights and they should accept really high infant mortality

This. Change is bad and I don't like it

The eradiciaton of all forms of liberalism, an utter denial of the simple fact that the countries with the highest standards of living have some level of citizen involvement in the running of the state, a terrible technology base, and creating a complete shutdown on any cultural cross polination, considering the massive ammounts of people alive today, then most are going to starve.
Congratulations, welcome to the democratic peoples republic of north korea.

Feudalism was never a thing.

Not in the modern understanding. There's no unified 'IT WORKED LIKE THIS GUYS!' for everywhere.

Each area had it varied and different

Replace Nobility with corporations.

Wageslavery is to America as slavery was to Rome; the future of feudalism is in people being bound to meaningless and replaceable """"jobs"""" that they are tied to, being rules over by a stockholding elite class/caste that has both the liberty and freedom (due to bloodline and money) to engage in capitalism, something the impoverished wageslaves cannot sue (by law, lack of liberty and freedom, and lack of capital and funding).

I once read a book (The Unincorporated Man; bad execution of a good premise) in which every person was divided into shares at birth: 5% for the government, 20% for each parent, and 55% for himself.

In the book, it was typical for a person to sell some of his own shares to pay for college. Maybe a similar structure would work for a kind of "corporate feudalism" in which it was typical for people to be owned by companies. Maybe people could make a habit out of selling their children to companies?

EVEN IGNORING whether or not that's an accurate picture of either Colombian society or feudalism, that image is such self-serving bullshit.

Dude outright admits that he comes from a rich ("noble") family. So OF COURSE he thinks the whole system is great. It was literally set up to serve him. Plantation owners painted a pretty rosy picture of slavery too.

A serf is just a slave tied to land rather than an individual

Just as true in western europe as eastern

Oh hey, I remember that post. Really interesting to read. What was that again, the M&T thread?

>I'll just comment on the fact that he's the 1% rather than address his actual arguments because that would be too much work for my libtard brain

>really high infantry mortality was the lords fault
Really really makes me think user

I mean, it's not very hard to imagine how hard it is OP, you must have a lack of imagination.

Just imagine doing farming 12 hours a day without any real technology.

...

Russian serfdom was actually less restrictive early on than in the West because of the sheer amount of land that was open for cultivation; it only became more repressive just as serfdom was being abandoned in the West.

Well? How would this work? Each person would be divvied up into a bunch of shares. Your investors can force you to do stuff if they have a majority stake in you--and, obviously, that includes any corporation that buys your stock.

Has anyone here actually read the book in question? Any thoughts?

It didn't exist. :^)