Monarchist Discussion Thread II: The Crown will Rise Again!

[The Parkus Empire]

They certainly didn't have freedom of movement. While they didn't have to pay a toll to leave, they had to pay a toll to wherever they went or passed through.

Which was still a substantial improvement on being legally denied this prospect almost in its entirety.

And having to provide a substantial portion of their crop and labour to their liege, as Geni already pointed out.

It's not really unless you actually have an income of money, which subsistence farmers didn't in most cases except in the most negligible amounts, even if they weren't serfs. If they didn't own their own land, they absolutely didn't.

[Genivaria]

Um yes non-serf farmers had the ability to uproot themselves and move somewhere else.
All the evidence we need for that is that the industrial revolution happened, people were moving to the cities where all the new jobs were.

Yes, of course, they could abandon their land and travel elsewhere, but not without paying a tax to the places they traveled to. Each region under noble charged travelers (particularly merchants), and the noble collected that cash.

The industrial revolution started after most serfdom ended.

Yes the peasants could leave in return for paying money, and their only way to make money was largely deprived of them.
They had to feed both their lords AND themselves and then somehow actually make some profit at the end of the year.

[Genivaria]

Which was still a substantial improvement on being legally denied this prospect almost in its entirety.

And having to provide a substantial portion of their crop and labour to their liege, as Geni already pointed out.

It's not really unless you actually have an income of money, which subsistence farmers didn't in most cases except in the most negligible amounts, even if they were serfs. If they didn't own their own land, they absolutely didn't.

You got a source for this? Because that's completely counter-intuitive.

[The Parkus Empire]

It's not really unless you actually have an income of money, which subsistence farmers didn't in most cases except in the most negligible amounts, even if they were serfs. If they didn't own their own land, they absolutely didn't.

You got a source for this? Because that's completely counter-intuitive.

You know the definition of the phrase "subsistence farmer"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsistence_agriculture

[Canadensia]

Which was still a substantial improvement on being legally denied this prospect almost in its entirety.

And having to provide a substantial portion of their crop and labour to their liege, as Geni already pointed out.

It's not really unless you actually have an income of money, which subsistence farmers didn't in most cases except in the most negligible amounts, even if they were serfs. If they didn't own their own land, they absolutely didn't.

This is the era in which the barter system and payment-in-kind was at its height, only having been surpassed in this regard during early periods of human development. It wouldn't have been uncommon at all for people to pay tolls in crops, woolens or other goods.

[Genivaria]

You got a source for this? Because that's completely counter-intuitive.

You know the definition of the phrase "subsistence farmer"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsistence_agriculture

Okay I misunderstood, I thought you were saying that free-tenet farmers had it worse than serfs.

[The Parkus Empire]

It's not really unless you actually have an income of money, which subsistence farmers didn't in most cases except in the most negligible amounts, even if they were serfs. If they didn't own their own land, they absolutely didn't.

This is the era in which the barter system and payment-in-kind was at its height, only having been surpassed in this regard during early periods of human development. It wouldn't have been uncommon at all for people to pay tolls in crops, woolens or other goods.

I mean, yes, in some cases that was acceptable. Generally speaking though, toll stations didn't have big granaries for storing tolls.

[Genivaria]

This is the era in which the barter system and payment-in-kind was at its height, only having been surpassed in this regard during early periods of human development. It wouldn't have been uncommon at all for people to pay tolls in crops, woolens or other goods.

I mean, yes, in some cases that was acceptable. Generally speaking though, toll stations didn't have big granaries for storing tolls.

'Toll stations' what are you talking about?

[Canadensia]

This is the era in which the barter system and payment-in-kind was at its height, only having been surpassed in this regard during early periods of human development. It wouldn't have been uncommon at all for people to pay tolls in crops, woolens or other goods.

I mean, yes, in some cases that was acceptable. Generally speaking though, toll stations didn't have big granaries for storing tolls.

Oh I agree.

Don't get me wrong, I fully recognize that subsistence farming didn't make for a much better life than serfdom, but it nonetheless was a substantial improvement, however small.

[The Parkus Empire]

I mean, yes, in some cases that was acceptable. Generally speaking though, toll stations didn't have big granaries for storing tolls.

'Toll stations' what are you talking about?

During the Middle Ages, taxes (I don't mean rent) were collected in the form of tolls for using roads and bridges and so forth, also often when you entered a town. These tolls were essentially a source of revenue for the lord of the area, but they also paid for protection of the road from bandits and such. Roads which were especially safe were known and preferred by merchants (and these naturally had higher tolls).

[The Parkus Empire]

I mean, yes, in some cases that was acceptable. Generally speaking though, toll stations didn't have big granaries for storing tolls.

Oh I agree.

Don't get me wrong, I fully recognize that subsistence farming didn't make for a much better life than serfdom, but it nonetheless was a substantial improvement, however small.

"Substantial" and "small"? Isn't that somewhat of a contradiction?

[Genivaria]

'Toll stations' what are you talking about?

During the Middle Ages, taxes (I don't mean rent) were collected in the form of tolls for using roads and bridges and so forth, also often when you entered a town. These tolls were essentially a source of revenue for the lord of the area, but they also paid for protection of the road from bandits and such. Roads which were especially safe were known and preferred by merchants (and these naturally had higher tolls).

Ah then we were thinking of different things.
I think that Japan did taxes better, they levied taxes directly in the form of rice.

[The Parkus Empire]

During the Middle Ages, taxes (I don't mean rent) were collected in the form of tolls for using roads and bridges and so forth, also often when you entered a town. These tolls were essentially a source of revenue for the lord of the area, but they also paid for protection of the road from bandits and such. Roads which were especially safe were known and preferred by merchants (and these naturally had higher tolls).

Ah then we were thinking of different things.
I think that Japan did taxes better, they levied taxes directly in the form of rice.

No, they definitely levied crops in the Middle Ages, but as a rent. I don't think freeholders had to pay it.

[Canadensia]

Oh I agree.

Don't get me wrong, I fully recognize that subsistence farming didn't make for a much better life than serfdom, but it nonetheless was a substantial improvement, however small.

"Substantial" and "small"? Isn't that somewhat of a contradiction?

Frankly, by this point you're arguing over polemics.

Small is perhaps the better choice, but regardless, subsistence farming was clearly a better alternative to serfdom.

[The Parkus Empire]

"Substantial" and "small"? Isn't that somewhat of a contradiction?

Frankly, by this point you're arguing over polemics.

Small is perhaps the better choice, but regardless, subsistence farming was clearly a better alternative to serfdom.

You mean semantics.

[Canadensia]

Frankly, by this point you're arguing over polemics.

Small is perhaps the better choice, but regardless, subsistence farming was clearly a better alternative to serfdom.

You mean semantics.

Mea culpa.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

....How are you thinking about it?

An Emperor is most definitely a monarch.

He was a monarch according to his title yes and how he set about giving his family titles but he didn't take his power from hereditary means which I think might be what's in dispute.

If monarchies have to be hereditary then there are no monarchies because there was a point in every dynasty where the crown wasn't inherited.

[Diopolis]

I wonder how many of y'all are imagining yourselves as the lord or king in this case instead of the serf or peasant that you'd most likely be under a monarchy without liberal democracy on the side, like disenfranchised workers under right-libertarianism or anarcho-capitalism supporting said systems and ideologies. Some people just can't keep their domination fantasies in the bedroom where they belong.

I imagine myself as solidly middle class, same as now.

[Frievolk]

I wonder how many of y'all are imagining yourselves as the lord or king in this case instead of the serf or peasant that you'd most likely be under a monarchy without liberal democracy on the side, like disenfranchised workers under right-libertarianism or anarcho-capitalism supporting said systems and ideologies. Some people just can't keep their domination fantasies in the bedroom where they belong.

I imagine myself neither as a lord nor a king when I support monarchism. I support monarchy because I believe that even in the sense of crowned republicanism, it's a better form of government than republicanism. Nothing about "I'd be a noble" or anything.

[The Parkus Empire]

I am 100% positive I wouldn't be a noble, they don't just hand that out to plebs. That's not really the point, though. I also don't support monarchy, but republicanism with limited suffrage (for my country). However I would much prefer monarchy to a republic with universal suffrage.

[Australian Seperatists]

I feel 'trapped' in a country that is wanting to become a federal republic (Australia).

I say this because we have been more wanting to dump the monarchy and I am fully supportive of the monarch. One of my big fears is that if we do leave the commonwealth, not only no more commonwealth games for Aus, but primarily that we will devolve into the state that is the US today. Til the day I die, I will support the monarch through and through, regardless of the king/queen at the throne.

Does anyone else have the same or similar thoughts?

[The Parkus Empire]

I feel 'trapped' in a country that is wanting to become a federal republic (Australia).

I say this because we have been more wanting to dump the monarchy and I am fully supportive of the monarch. One of my big fears is that if we do leave the commonwealth, not only no more commonwealth games for Aus, but primarily that we will devolve into the state that is the US today. Til the day I die, I will support the monarch through and through, regardless of the king/queen at the throne.

Does anyone else have the same or similar thoughts?

I say Elizabeth needs to start doing something more than she's doing if Australia is to see a monarch as anything but pointless

[Genivaria]

I am 100% positive I wouldn't be a noble, they don't just hand that out to plebs. That's not really the point, though. I also don't support monarchy, but republicanism with limited suffrage (for my country). However I would much prefer monarchy to a republic with universal suffrage.

Very well we'll have a republic where all adults but you can vote, better?

[The Parkus Empire]

I am 100% positive I wouldn't be a noble, they don't just hand that out to plebs. That's not really the point, though. I also don't support monarchy, but republicanism with limited suffrage (for my country). However I would much prefer monarchy to a republic with universal suffrage.

Very well we'll have a republic where all adults but you can vote, better?

Is this what passes for liberal wit these days? Voltaire the shitposter is rolling in his grave.

[Genivaria]

Very well we'll have a republic where all adults but you can vote, better?

Is this what passes for liberal wit these days? Voltaire the shitposter is rolling in his grave.

What's wrong you hate your ideology being applied to you?