-
P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat
Is democracy truly a universal human goal?
- Thread starter MyDoorsAreOpen
- Start date
neonads
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2005
- Messages
- 1,313
I read ages ago that there was a loosely defined geographic East-West divide based on the rights of the layman during the Dark Ages. On the Western side the peasants were free to leave their lord and hook up with another if they so choosed. This created the incentive to show some care for them by the landlords. On the Eastern side, the laymen were serfs, i.e. slaves, and were treated like property. The momentum towards this model was that if you did not drive your serfs like crazy to increase production then your revenues would suffer making you an easy target for attack.
I think that the origins of this divide trace back to ancient cultures such as the tribalism of the West and the fact that the East had practiced slavery since the dawn of civilisation. Tribal societies are very democratic and the recession of the Roman Empire left them the tools necessary to transform into the feudal model, just like they had been practicing in the East for millenia before only the strong tribal tradition remained. William the Conquerer's success would not have been possible without his recognition of the rights of the Saxons and his progressive policies.
I think that the origins of this divide trace back to ancient cultures such as the tribalism of the West and the fact that the East had practiced slavery since the dawn of civilisation. Tribal societies are very democratic and the recession of the Roman Empire left them the tools necessary to transform into the feudal model, just like they had been practicing in the East for millenia before only the strong tribal tradition remained. William the Conquerer's success would not have been possible without his recognition of the rights of the Saxons and his progressive policies.