Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
I think a big difference between modern and ancient society is that modern society really doesn't need the skills and knowledge of the economic elites.  Minus a few examples who tend to become celebrities thanks to their incredible accomplishments, Pretty much across the board, they are dumber and less competent than the striving middle class beneath them.

In the past, a massacre of the elites would result in the more or less complete collapse of a culture and a civilization.  They were the ones who could read, who had studied stuff, and who had the social skills to (in theory) keep things going.  Without the tiny group at the top, you'd have a mass of marginally educated townspeople, and illiterate and more or less neolithic peasants.  Sure, the people would survive, but it wouldn't be anything recognizable as civilization.  Post-Roman Europe comes to mind.

Nowadays, it would merely be the lifting of a parasitic rentier class.

by Zwackus on Fri Aug 23rd, 2013 at 08:02:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In the USA we are likely talking about fewer than 20,000.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Fri Aug 23rd, 2013 at 10:43:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I certainly agree with your last point and your characterization of modern economic elites. It is however difficult for me to distinguish it from the past, partly because some ancient societies, which lasted longer than our present day constitutional republics, such as the Roman Republic and the Athenian democracy, enjoyed mass participation in politics that managed to keep the various elites in check much of the time. Beyond Pol Pot and Cortez, Carthage and Taranto, I can't think off hand of any wholesale massacre of the local elites. And all massacres were perpetrated by invading armies or rival elites. As for the gradual collapse or transition of the Western Roman Empire, there was no elimination of the elites. They were perhaps just as dumb and parasitic as their modern heirs and got along on expedience, corruption and private armies.
  Elites, through greed, stupidity and banking on immediate short-term gratification, always owe their acquired intelligence and skills to a social contract with the commons. Without an institutionalized conflict between classes there is only brute tyranny, indiscriminate oppression by the one class that can afford the costs of violence management.
by de Gondi (publiobestia aaaatttthotmaildaughtusual) on Sat Aug 24th, 2013 at 07:04:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I can't think off hand of any wholesale massacre of the local elites.

The French and Russian Revolutions leap to mind.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sat Aug 24th, 2013 at 11:11:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
rival elites.
by de Gondi (publiobestia aaaatttthotmaildaughtusual) on Sun Aug 25th, 2013 at 03:17:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The groups establishing themselves as elite after the revolutions were as far as I know not part of the elite, rather they belonged to an educated middle-class. Naturally in perfect accordance with Goldstein's The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Sun Aug 25th, 2013 at 04:26:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Pareto!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circulation_of_elite

Now did Orwell read Pareto?

by IM on Sun Aug 25th, 2013 at 05:45:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Orwell was at least familiar with Pareto.

Here is Orwell writing a review of Burnham in 1946.

George Orwell - James Burnham and the Managerial Revolution - Essay

Burnham lays much stress on Pareto's theory of the "circulation of the elites". If it is to stay in power a ruling class must constantly admit suitable recruits from below, so that the ablest men may always be at the top and a new class of power-hungry malcontents cannot come into being. This is likeliest to happen, Burnham considers, in a society which retains democratic habits--that is, where opposition is permitted and certain bodies such as the press and the trade unions can keep their autonomy.


Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Sun Aug 25th, 2013 at 06:54:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Should have remembered that review.

A sound thrashing, that.

by IM on Sun Aug 25th, 2013 at 07:01:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'll have to check whether Machiavelli read Pareto (along with Livy)- or vice versa...
by de Gondi (publiobestia aaaatttthotmaildaughtusual) on Sun Aug 25th, 2013 at 05:55:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Surely it is Pareto that read Machiavelli, unless time travel was involved.

Vilfredo Pareto - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Vilfredo Federico Damaso Pareto (born Wilfried Fritz Pareto; Italian: [vilˈfreːdo paˈreːto]; 15 July 1848 - 19 August 1923) was an Italian engineer, sociologist, economist, political scientist and philosopher. He made several important contributions to economics, particularly in the study of income distribution and in the analysis of individuals' choices. He was also responsible for popularising the use of the term "elite" in social analysis.

He introduced the concept of Pareto efficiency and helped develop the field of microeconomics. He was also the first to discover that income follows a Pareto distribution, which is a power law probability distribution. The Pareto principle was named after him and built on observations of his such as that 80% of the land in Italy was owned by 20% of the population. He also contributed to the fields of sociology and mathematics.



Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Mon Aug 26th, 2013 at 03:43:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"The Pareto principle was named after him and built on observations of his such as that 80% of the land in Italy was owned by 20% of the population."

Which is pretty much communist by today's standards...

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Tue Aug 27th, 2013 at 07:37:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display: