Feudalism Comparisons

In reality though, feudalism was just one notch above pastoral slavery. You had no rights, most people were trapped into poverty and bound to a plot of land to work on the rest of their lives. The vast majority were not nobility so were given breadcrumbs. Wars were brutal and constant, bows were as deadly as firearms for a couple centuries, as evidenced by the Commanche even into the 1800s (they took more skill to train though). Only after capitalism and factories did anyone get empowered to imp

You mean feudalism where the lord owns everything and everyone else is a serf

Feudalism but without people actually having to work doesn't sound as bad.

Just don't accuse me of being racist or fascist, and you can call me what you like. But note my point about having more social mobility than feudalism 1.0.(Even back in the Middle Ages, though, serfs had property rights; they were sharecroppers, legally bound to their land but entitled to keep a proportion of their harvests. In the late Middle Ages, the obligation to give their lords a portion of their harvests was turned into the obligation to pay a certain amount of money -- which was

English. As mandated by the church. The rest of the feudal domains, while varied and some were much more brutal, also had the same setup in which the serfs were entitled to their share of the crop. So the point was and still is valid: Never in history a minority controlled this much of the world's wealth like the billionaires do today, including kings and emperors.

Abuse by feudal lords who essentially owned their lives as well.Where does this romantic idea of poor but free but noble peasants come from? That's not how it worked.Capitalism has it's problems, no argument, but the potential freedom it provided was much better for the average peasant then what was going on before.

This is just completely untrue.It is unclear to me if control of currency had anything to do with it, but looking at the power that feudal governments had over serfs[1] (as an example) it difficult to see how your argument stacks up.Far from being free, a serf's entire life was dictated by the demands of the government. The size of the family unit was dictated by the amount of labor a serf household owed the lord, and that could be as high as six days of labor per week (hence the size

You won't own anything, and you will be happy (not).This is truly insane, its WORSE than feudalism. https://www.businessinsider.com/american-worker-less-vacatio...

This is a kind of feudalism, where the peasants need to rely on the strength of lords and their knights (lawyers) to enjoy basic freedoms.

Have you looked into the history of industrialization? It was a huge fight on the part of workers to get a share of the profit. Companies hired private detectives who in some cases literally shot striking workers.If we look further back in history we can see feudalism in the Medieval period. It wasn't created overnight, it was introduced over time as there was a long-term surplus of labor and concentration of wealth and power in a few elites. It was only broken in Europe by the Black Dea