Did you mean to say “autocracy?” Like another user said, aristocracy involves a class of nobles with inherited rights.
Now, the system China had before the CPC came to power, that could reasonably be described as an aristocracy. But literally one of the first things that happened after the communists came to power was that that class was forcibly eliminated and their land was redistributed to the people who worked it.
Words change, aristocracy in ancient greece meant ‘rule by the best’ and they regarded inheritence as corruption. And while I’m sure president Xi is influential, I doubt he has the ‘absolute’ power for the word autocracy to fit.
Olligarchy would’ve been more unambigous.
I’m trying to play chess with a bunch of pidgeons who think they’re winning, smh
Leadership isn’t appointed in an aristocracy, it’s inherited, so you might have chosen the absolute worst descriptor. You could have used it as an adjective, maybe, but as the description of the structure itself it’s completely moronic. Yeah China isn’t an aristocracy because the positions aren’t inhereted, there we go your mind is changed.
No aristocracy can coincide with nobility but the term itself just means a small privileged ruling class hold all the power. Yes you’re right, in the middle ages this was mostly inherited, but that’s not a requirement. Of course the king/emperor could appoint nobles aswell. All these inbred mfers had to start somewhere after all.
but the term itself just means a small privileged ruling class hold all the power.
Jesus Christ you keep doing this. Do you not see how rude it is to talk like you do on something you clearly dont understand?
If that were the definition, then every representative type of government would be an aristrocracy. It would make the definition completely redundant, because it would just describe “representative government” which we already have a descriptor for. Fuck you people. Thicker than bricks and the ego of a 40’s physicist.
No wonder it’s a shitty description.
You’ve got a better word for a top-down system for appointing leadership?
Love how proud Americans are of their illiteracy
Did you mean to say “autocracy?” Like another user said, aristocracy involves a class of nobles with inherited rights.
Now, the system China had before the CPC came to power, that could reasonably be described as an aristocracy. But literally one of the first things that happened after the communists came to power was that that class was forcibly eliminated and their land was redistributed to the people who worked it.
Words change, aristocracy in ancient greece meant ‘rule by the best’ and they regarded inheritence as corruption. And while I’m sure president Xi is influential, I doubt he has the ‘absolute’ power for the word autocracy to fit.
Olligarchy would’ve been more unambigous.
I’m trying to play chess with a bunch of pidgeons who think they’re winning, smh
Leadership isn’t appointed in an aristocracy, it’s inherited, so you might have chosen the absolute worst descriptor. You could have used it as an adjective, maybe, but as the description of the structure itself it’s completely moronic. Yeah China isn’t an aristocracy because the positions aren’t inhereted, there we go your mind is changed.
No aristocracy can coincide with nobility but the term itself just means a small privileged ruling class hold all the power. Yes you’re right, in the middle ages this was mostly inherited, but that’s not a requirement. Of course the king/emperor could appoint nobles aswell. All these inbred mfers had to start somewhere after all.
Jesus Christ you keep doing this. Do you not see how rude it is to talk like you do on something you clearly dont understand?
If that were the definition, then every representative type of government would be an aristrocracy. It would make the definition completely redundant, because it would just describe “representative government” which we already have a descriptor for. Fuck you people. Thicker than bricks and the ego of a 40’s physicist.