Seems pretty fair to me, why people were so bamboozled about it?

>>2866089
for the same reason why we hate police and bureaucrat's today, it sucks to have a dickhead in charge of your life

File: 1491786089099.jpg (170KB, 329x606px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 329x606px

>>2866097
You're just mad you're not the dickhead.

You'd act the same way

File: 20190.jpg (117KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 600x800px

>>2866105
oo you little arrogant fuck, ud be in the fields while a knight is fucking your wife and daughters

>>2866089
What do you mean by bamboozled?

>>2866089
Greedy bourgeois scum

Has anyone read the Wealth of Nations?

Living under a baron and getting free food at banquets seems awesome af.

Over time, hospitality decreased because of increasing profit opportunities and avenues for investment.

>>2866118
Peasant revolts, liberal revolutions, shit like that.

>>2866118
flumple busted

>>2866089
feudalism was rarely such a neat little pyramid in practice

Knights were nobles.

>>2866118
bazinga'd

>>2866105
>implying i don't have a comfy bureaucratic job

Power corrupts.

People are greedy scum.

It's impossible to put one person in power over another without them abusing that power.

In Polly Prissypants fantasy land all people in power are good, kind, altruistic and only interested in caring for their subjects.

IRL they just fuck all their inferiors over because fuck them they weren't born rich.

>>2866089
Peasants created food through labour. Kings did not create land through labour.

>>2866089
Because with inbreeding you get a king with a deformed jaw and an IQ of around 80 controlling every moment of your life. Also you shouldn't have to ask why people hate totalitarianism.

File: king john .jpg (157KB, 1264x536px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 1264x536px

>>2866097
>>2866112
>>2866118
>>2866133
>>2866138
>>2866143
>>2866203
>>2867415
>>2867422
>>2867427
Rebellion !!!!!

Guards Guards !! Arrest these peasants for high treason! !!!!!

>>2866089
Because the jews and masons were triggered by it, therefore they made the retarded commoners to hate it too.

>>2866089
So the king steals the land of the people and in return they become his slaves? How is this fair?

>>2866089
They aren't bamboozeled they just believe that some should not have social prilveiges

>>2868242
the land always belonged to king

>>2866089
Wow they gave them part of nature's land, how magnanimous of them, peasants should really work their entire life for them to be even.

>>2866089
Society had progressed to the point that basic physical safety wasn't enough to guarantee the compliance of the peasants with the increasingly authoritarian and centralized nobility.

>>2866105
What a qt

The "classes" weren't transient

>>2868242
The land was conquered by the king and then awarded to his faithful servants?

>>2868288
>natures land
Do you believe in borders

Feudalism is cool and all, but I rather have my vote count than my count vote.

>>2868351
Give the vote to the land owning middleclass at the most and restrict it going further
Late Victorian monarchy is where it's at

Where's the Jew chart?

>>2868353
Victorian monarchies have very little connection feudalism. OP was talking about how feudalism was good, not Victorian monarchies where knights and nobles were irrelevant or had no where near as much power as they did during the middle ages

File: ira.jpg (78KB, 350x468px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 350x468px

>>2866097
Well you already have this guy to answer to

File: what-did-he-mean-by-this.jpg (306KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 1920x1080px

>>2866089
>I will accept the fruit of your labour in exchange for not killing you for living where you were born.

1. that image is grossly misleading
2. you should get a job

>>2866089
For the rural serfs, the main issue were the rising demands of their feudal lords. Most of the peasant revolts demanded a return to the so-called "old rights". Feudal obligations came in different forms - the main obligations were in produce. Anyone who earned money (although for a long time, this was very limited) would pay the obligations in currency. On certain occasions, the commoners were obligated bigger offerings, usually in the form of one of their livestock (usually, this was at their feudal lord's marriage or during holidays). Then, there was also the one tenth they had to give to the Church. And because apart from the collective lands (such as the woods and pastures), the Church property and the land the commoners worked on, there was also land directly controlled by the feudal lord, the common folk were also obligated to work on the latter a certain period of time every year. Because they relied on what they produced, any higher demands could pose a risk (and in addition, a harsh cut into the tradition - oftentimes, revolts were seen as a defence of the old ways of their fathers and grandfathers) and they were therefore highly opposed to them.

>>2870692
Stupid me, I hit enter too soon.

The second part wasthe burgher aspect. In the cities/towns, people dealt much more with money. Throughout the ages, the burgher class became wealthier, but they still held no power vis-a-vis the nobility. This led to the burgeois revolutions that paved the way to the ideas of democracy - although it must not be forgotten that the burgeoisie were not very benelovent towards the lower classes.

>>2870692
>Then, there was also the one tenth they had to give to the Church.

would the church redistribute this to those in the parish, perhaps those for whom their harvest were insufficient? or is this a good example of how little middle age peasants subsisted upon?

>>2870710
It was used to finance the priests and to mantain the churches and other Church property. It was only paid by those living on Church land, though.

>>2866089
OH its very fair
except for the peasants that were treated like shit by everyone above them

>>2866089
>>2866089
it didn't exist

All by himself? Must have been a baller King, then.

>>2871709
>>2868324
Meant to quote

>>2871589
Well, not as stratified as the picture suggests

>>2866089
Because people fail to understand that feudalism was born out of a effort to get safety

>>2871762

So are mob protection rackets.

>>2866112
Is the knight good looking my lord?
I don't mind as Long as my daughter has a strong son I really need a hand with the land my lord

>>2871762
so is litterally every societal system

>>2866089
Come and debate us on the new /his/ server.

https://discord.gg/NYdGns

>>2866143
>implying this is what killed feudalism
The birth of centralized nation-states with absolutist kings killed feudalism.

>>2872087
capitalism killed feudalism

>>2866089
it is never this simple, and its not a staircase its a clusterfuck web.

>>2867422

Actually Kings do create land through labor service. They spend time punishing nobles and everyone with a good law system. They take those lands and redistribute them to allies. Only flaw in the system is that the land is not nessecarily going to the most capable, since the pool of nobility is smaller.

>>2866105
I'm mostly mad that the guy getting paid $12 an hour gets to be a dick to me. If I'm going to get fucked over by a civil servant I don't want it to be some poorfag on a power trip.

>>2872087
Huh, that's a very Marxian way of looking at it. The further development of feudalism, advanced by the avant garde of the feudal order (kings) sowed the seeds for its own abolition (liberal revolutions and takeover by the bourgeoisie).

>>2866112
Sounds pretty hot! I'm in need of extra hands around the field.

>>2866133
The bourgeois are the one who revolted against this. And by revolting i mean manipulating peasents to revolt for them.
The system was working just fine but the bourgeois wanted to replace the nobles ad the King in the pyramid of power.

>>2870657
More like preventing those guys 10 kilometers from here from killing you.

>>2866089
It worked fine enough but it was utterly stagnant so it's good it died.

>>2873627
>They spend time punishing nobles and everyone with a good law system

This is not the same thing as creating land.