How did we grow from Egalitarianism to Plutocracy?

[Kangirl]

It's plain you don't know what aristocratic values are

OK, tell me what they are, then, and tell me why you think the US etc. has them?

 

[Magic Poriferan]

It's funny how this thread didn't have to go anywhere, since within the first three posts it was basically summed up.

 

[Mole]

OK, tell me what they are, then, and tell me why you think the US etc. has them?

Well, it's interesting.

While Oz has aristocratic values, the US has royal values.

For while both Oz and the US came off the same British tree, we came off during different periods, and so we are two different branches of the same tree.

The US came off during the Royal Ascendancy and so have retained royal values. While Oz came off during the Aristocratic Ascendancy and so has aristocratic values.

The British aristocracy worked because it kept the King weak, and most important, jealously stopped any other aristocrat from usurping the role of the King.

And just as the British aristocrats were jealous of one another, so today in Oz, we are jealous of one another. And here today it is expressed as, "cutting the heads off tall poppies". And we make a sport of cutting the heads off tall poppies, with the exeption of sportmen and women.

We made the exemption for sportsmen and women because British aristocrats loved the outdoors and so do we, and so we love our sportmen and women. And of course our climate is perfect for the outdoor life of aristocrats.

British aristocrats were also brutal, and so are we.

And the US, for instance, elects a king every four years. While our Prime Minister is not even mentioned in our Constitution.

We do this because just as the British aristocrats kept their king weak, so we always keep our leader weak.

The US President is not only your political leader but also your Head of State and Commander-in-Chief. While it is unthinkable for our Prime Minister to be our Head of State, or indeed unthinkable that the PM be our Commander-in-Chief.

And we keep our Queen in another country on the other side the world. We pay nothing for her and she always follows our advice.

And because she is completely powerless, she is totally popular. Why, we had a referendum in 1999, to ask whether we should keep the Queen. And all of Oz voted for the Queen, except for one small territory.

However in the US, royal values have been democratised, and now every American is a little king or queen.

While in Oz aristocratic values have been democratised and we are now all little aristocrats.

So when we are talking to Americans, we know we are talking to royalty.

But when Americans talk to us, we always have to remind them they are talking to aristocrats.

 

[heart]

British aristocrats were also brutal, and so are we. While the Amercians find it hard to even say the word, "toilet", just as royalty never mentions the word and is reputed not to use it.

I can't agree with this part. So many people in my offline life are obsessed with toliet functions and toliet humor---well I can say this for North Central Texas, Northern California, Indiana and ChicagoLand.

Maybe the North Eastern seaboard where all the Federalists (Essex Junto), Hamiltonians were is different?

Thomas Jefferson was an artistocrat in spirit.

And Aaron Burr wouldn't have been afraid to say toliet or crapper and he was brute force brutal while being very literary and on eye on higher stars like women's rights and such. So I suppose if Hamilton hadn't been so keen on maligning him and they hadn't had their duel, more Americans would be prouder of their toliets and less of a bee in your bonnet? Not sure, but maybe.

 

[heart]

I am not addressing individuals, I am adressing whole cultures.

But living in a culture of extreme individualism, that hates losers and takes narcissism to ridiculous lengths, it is a natural mistake to make.

You don't understand, I am talking about the larger culture. But I can only speak for those regional areas that I listed. Maybe your assumption is correct about the North Eastern Seaboard. We'd have to hear from someone who has more experience with those areas.

The USA developed different areas at different times. Different regions have different cultures and values. I know this because I have lived, worked and breathed in these different areas for several years at a time each---known the people on the sidewalk level as they truly are, not as they want to project in five minute soundbytes.

Our TV and other media has to cater to these different geographic locations and cultures all at once and may give out a more sanitized version than is true at the street level.

 

[matmos]

C'mon Peguy, you are the perfect foil for me - if you didn't exist, I would have to invent you.

And if you didn't exist, I would have no need to invent you.

Hehe.

Maybe you can merge into one?

 

[Kangirl]

OK, thanks for the explanation, Victor. I don't agree but also don't wish to get into an argument about it, because I'm not sure we have any hope of convincing each other of anything.

The tall-poppy syndrome comments are interesting, though. I think the UK has a bit of that, too. Build someone up, then brutally chop them down once they've gotten 'high' enough/too big for their britches. I don't see that so much in North American culture.

And yes, the Australian obsession with sport is...intense. I watched a documentary on how the Aussies run their sports bodies - it was pretty impressive.