WHAT KIND OF ARISTOCRACY DO A PEOPLE NEED? —“…every people needs an aristocr

WHAT KIND OF ARISTOCRACY DO A PEOPLE NEED?

—“…every people needs an aristocracy. It’s an integral part of human nature and can’t be dispensed with. The question then is not ‘For or against aristocracy?’ but ‘What kind of aristocracy?”–

The short answer is: If you don’t produce a natural aristocracy by merit you will produce an unnatural parasitic clerisy, or a devouring criminal syndicate, by its absence.

Any aristocracy must be limited to a constitution of the natural law of sovereignty and reciprocity in demonstrated interests. This is the difference between european aristocracy and monarchy and the authoritarian alternatives that other civilizations have so regularly produced.

As such the power of the aristocracy is not so much to make law, but to have the power to act outside the law to restore the law. This is what the english discovered was the natural consequence of increasing agency in a population. It’s not that monarchies are unnecessary, it’s that you don’t REPLACE the hierarchy of houses of government you add to them as you add people who prevously had, or still do have less responsibility for commons, and as such less knowledge, skill and common interests in the commons rather than enrichment of themselves at others’ expense.

In doing so you produce the market for the production of commons between the classes and the classes represent responsibility, knowledge, and common interest in the production of commons.

This is the difference between majority democracy that races to the bottom and ‘Concurrent Democracy’ produced by the english and the founding fathers as an extension of the ‘concurrency of classes and regions’ in the assent of legislation using house and senate, and the ‘commonality of judgements in court across regions”, that continues to preserve and expand the capital (interests) of the commons from which all benefit indirectly instead of directly. In other words its empirical government.

Aristocracy needs to follow a first principle which is the long term interest in self preservation of their position and it’s advantages, even if that advantage is nothing more than the social and political status to influence or sway public opinion or political outcomes.

After that, aristocracy requires one demonstrates responsibility for normal human behavior across the classes at scale in military, industry, or geographic (political) affairs – even if that responsibility is limited to the reward for excellences demonstrated by members of the polity, investment in arts, legitimizing political actions, vetoing policy, and ‘throwing the bums out’, and negotiating with peers whose interests an influences are the same.

This is called ‘Natural Aristocracy’. It’s quite important since each generation must spend an inordinate amount of time training the next generation in the rather rigorous protocols, manners ethics and morals, that produce the standard of behavior against which others are judged, and to learn enough of the manners and understandings of community, business, industry, polity, military to provide that ‘ok this is enough’ veto when the natural consequence of human organizations leads to an outcome where the consequences whether short, medium, or long term are against the long term interests of the polity.

Affections
CD

Reply addressees: @sqpatrick77