Why have people always hated the bourgeoisie? Why not hate the

>>2854465
erm, they did hate the nobles, check for the french revolution, will ya?

>>2854465
The poor because bourgeois used to be poor and now they act uppity
The rich because they know the bourgeois aim to take their place

>>2854465
>Why have people always hated the bourgeoisie?
Because people being successful makes other people envious and bitter.
>Why not hate the nobility who didn't have to work for their wealth?
Why hate a state of thing older than living memory? It's easier to accept something that always was than a new change. It's not a coincidence that new nobility was generally held in contempt.

Mere banter like the bourgeois gentlemen was just the aristocracy poking fun at the nouveau riche with their unrefined tastes, the romans had a similar attitude to wealthy plebeians.

Frothing at the mouth hate is propaganda by a state that wants excuses to tax the bourgeois.

File: The banker and his wife.jpg (210KB, 900x663px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 900x663px

Because nobody likes his creditors.

>>2854465
The nobles gave their priviledges thanks to their martial prowesses or those of their ancestors while bourgoies are just merchants who gained their priviledges from money


Martial Prowess > Nobility of Blood > Power Gap > Money

>>2855131
finance was more fun back then, you would literally handle gold coins like mario or some shit and you'd do it at home with your qt wife for company

BOURGEOISIE DID NOTHING WRONG

They hate us, cause they ain't us.

Not even memeing

>>2854465
They weren't entrenched enough for the aristocracy to identify with them and weren't socially disenfranchised enough for the poor to identify with them.

>>2854465
because they are hateful

>>2854465
Nobility, for the longest time, were supposed to look out for their peasants, who were their God-given responsibility. If they didn't take decent care of them they believe God would go Sodom and Gomorrah all over their asses. With The Enlightenment and the rise of secularism, less nobles and peasants subscribed to this belief in Devine right and Responsibility, but the idea that Noblemen were essentially benevolent persisted anyway.

Bourgeoisie were never seen to have this kind of responsibility to take care of their underlings, and often didn't even pretend to give a fuck the way nobles pretended to. It's kind of a similar reason merchants were so hated in China and Japan.

File: Urban Spear Militia.jpg (149KB, 1024x473px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1024x473px

>>2854465
Bourgeoisie-hatred seems to be a European thing, deriving from Medieval-Period differences between Peasants and Urban Dwellers.

Take for example: in China, the Nongfu (Peasants) and the Shimin (City-dwellers) are basically the same people (commoners). Non had special laws over the other and its more than common for peasants (who tend to live in clan villages) to have many relatives in the city to serve as that villages' "embassy" there. Like a middleman between the village's products and the city markets.

In many places in Medieval Europe, there's a vast world between the Peasants who are tied to their land and possessing of a liegelord, and Citizens who live in pseudo-democratic societies and have shitloads of rights. Hence the German saying of the time: "City Air Makes one free." Furthermore, in many places, they are divided by law, with the citizen being favored more by the rights and privileges granted to him by the Urban Charter than the peasant, who could be tied to his land.

File: Boxer Codex-408.jpg (153KB, 450x632px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 450x632px

>>2856795
>It's kind of a similar reason merchants were so hated in China and Japan.
Wrong on China's account: only the Scholar-Bureaucrat Aristocracy ever did.

Traditionally Merchants were looked down upon in China because they didn't produce the shit that they sell. However it is only the Scholar-Bureaucrat (who is, by all means, yet another Bourgeoisie). The peasants meanwhile thought nothing of it. Considering that the average Chinese peasant lives in a clan village which sends a family member to the city to become a middleman, merchants and peasants often belonged to the same family and helped each other out.

For that matter: in a twist of irony, peasants, merchants, and scholar bureaucrats could all be found in one family. The peasant relatives harvested/created the shit that the merchant relatives sell in order to send a child/finance a relative to study in a academy in order to receive a government post & its lucrative salaries, who then helps his relatives out.

>>2854465
my last name literally is bourgeois. if a communist revolution ever happened my family would be slaughtered.

>>2855253
sounds comfy.

>>2856989
If fascists took over they'd also go after you. Your type flourishes best in a neoliberal world.

>>2854465
there wasn't that much hate. most lowborn people back then really did bow down to their highborn superiors as if they were blessed by god. Better to live in a stable slavery than any alternative heh heh. Essentially fuedalism was a pledge to your local lord to serve in his army when required in exchange for him protecting the area you lived in from other lords and bandits.

because they are rich people without taste, class or decency.
They are rich bydlos.

File: SAND_Maurice_Masques_et_bouffons_06.jpg (249KB, 579x1033px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 579x1033px

>>2854465
The bourgeois were disliked because they were commoners yet acted like they were something better than the poorer common folks. The aristocracy didn't really mingle with the common people to a great extent, so they had a lot less presence in peoples' daily lives. Also, aristocrats usually had the law on their side, so criticising and making fun of them could be more trouble than it's worth.

How many times have burghers tried to assemble and overthrow the structure? Think about that.