Feb 13, 2023·edited Feb 13, 2023Liked by ourospost
I disagree with the notion of distributism mainly because most people don't offer any description other than socialism without the name. I think I can offer some ideas as to what a proper organic society would look like since I come from a family that owned estates and even had slaves a few generations ago( my family is not European so we remained feudal till fairly recently). One of the reasons why I think there was a failure of feudalism was the lack of freedom for the serfs and slave class. When you have no recourse to stop a tyrant people are more susceptible to populist sentiments. You can read all about the degeneracy of European nobility. Another thing is the eternal or lifelong nature of property rights. A person who bought the land was entitled to keep it for as long as he could and pass it down forever. So if a yeoman was forced to sell his land in hard times his descendants would be landless and screwed for generations. I think a solution can be found in the Israelites. The Israelites divided the land up between tribes and then the men of the tribes were given land which was to be allotted to their sons. They could sell or give away their land to another person however by the time of Jubilee the land had to go back to the intended inheritor. This way there would be no permanent landlord like other ancient communities had( Pharaoh was the sole owner of all the land in Egypt for example). People can form fiefdoms with their inherited lands and elect a lord who would provide for protection in exchange for fees or a majority of profits or even all the income from the land till a Julibee. This allows for the use of land by those who can actually do things with( entrepreneurs, merchants, planters, etc) while keeping the ownership of land with a certain family or group of people. Globalization if you mean free trade is still a very important thing, and I really dislike the DR's leftwing attitude toward it. It doesn't make logical sense, God has created a diversity in lands, resources, and peoples all around the world so that people would be forced to cooperate in things they need or want. You need to trade but there can be balance made by prohibiting products that are contrary to a people's culture or from a hostile group. Another armchair idea is using corporations to organize quasi-feudal structures. The average normie wants the life of a serf but gay. They want free healthcare, food, recreation, housing, birth control, and whatever all provided by a government or corporation. So you could make a system in which people in exchange the fruits of their labor for employee benefit packages and other things( like living in a certain place for a certain time). Imagine " A Day in the Life of a Twitter Serf".
I disagree with the notion of distributism mainly because most people don't offer any description other than socialism without the name. I think I can offer some ideas as to what a proper organic society would look like since I come from a family that owned estates and even had slaves a few generations ago( my family is not European so we remained feudal till fairly recently). One of the reasons why I think there was a failure of feudalism was the lack of freedom for the serfs and slave class. When you have no recourse to stop a tyrant people are more susceptible to populist sentiments. You can read all about the degeneracy of European nobility. Another thing is the eternal or lifelong nature of property rights. A person who bought the land was entitled to keep it for as long as he could and pass it down forever. So if a yeoman was forced to sell his land in hard times his descendants would be landless and screwed for generations. I think a solution can be found in the Israelites. The Israelites divided the land up between tribes and then the men of the tribes were given land which was to be allotted to their sons. They could sell or give away their land to another person however by the time of Jubilee the land had to go back to the intended inheritor. This way there would be no permanent landlord like other ancient communities had( Pharaoh was the sole owner of all the land in Egypt for example). People can form fiefdoms with their inherited lands and elect a lord who would provide for protection in exchange for fees or a majority of profits or even all the income from the land till a Julibee. This allows for the use of land by those who can actually do things with( entrepreneurs, merchants, planters, etc) while keeping the ownership of land with a certain family or group of people. Globalization if you mean free trade is still a very important thing, and I really dislike the DR's leftwing attitude toward it. It doesn't make logical sense, God has created a diversity in lands, resources, and peoples all around the world so that people would be forced to cooperate in things they need or want. You need to trade but there can be balance made by prohibiting products that are contrary to a people's culture or from a hostile group. Another armchair idea is using corporations to organize quasi-feudal structures. The average normie wants the life of a serf but gay. They want free healthcare, food, recreation, housing, birth control, and whatever all provided by a government or corporation. So you could make a system in which people in exchange the fruits of their labor for employee benefit packages and other things( like living in a certain place for a certain time). Imagine " A Day in the Life of a Twitter Serf".