Aristocracy has two sub-units: technical and spiritual. Technical Aristocracy are those that have all the markers of being aristocrats for a given Society1. These markers could be big houses, a taste for fine cheeses, or an expectation of legal reprieve in a large majority of circumstances. They could also be preferential treatment by the prison camp guards, fewer beatings by corner migrants, or an extra ration ticket. It is the possession of these markers in the context of the inhabited environment that dictate who is a technical aristocrat. Thus, you can find technical aristocrats in any society, FEMA camp, or ghetto. Spiritual Aristocracy are those who have and use technical aristocracy effortlessly. This is a subtle attribute that is mostly invisible to lower classes that don't have direct contact with aristocrats for long duration, and it is completely invisible to the middle classes2.
Spiritual aristocracy becomes apparent when you see how people operate within the confines of luxury free from the perception of outside observation. A healthy society is almost perfectly 1:1 spiritual to technical, the shortfall being low IQ second sons, bastards, undisciplined daughters, and widows, generally speaking. Unhealthy societies have a ratio that tilts towards the technical. You can see it in what gets defined as luxury; a majority technical aristocracy are happy with McMansions and pricey dinners, expensive trinkets and short vacations to nice places. Spiritual aristocrats just assume access to manors, high quality food, well made possessions, and summer estates. The unnatural propagation of technical aristocracy is the clumsy effort of up-jumped plebes3 with delusions of patrician aesthetics within a stable bubble of excess capital. They look down on the royals and nobility out of fear, intimidation, and envy. Indeed, it is envy that results from the fear and intimidation that emerges from their subconscious, knowing that they don't deserve to have what the patrician assumes he will get.
The Restoration of Monarchy is the restoration of natural trichotomy4, and trichotomy has no place for technical aristocracy out of proportion to spiritual aristocracy. Classical monarchy also has no place for a middle class. This is illustrated by the way Moderns5 cannot comfortably or realistically project themselves into the past via entertainment. They watch movies, or very occasionally read stories, about the Victorian Era or Classical Culture, and can't see themselves as either nobility or peasantry. They tend to assume they would be nobles, but their guts know they are little more than enbaubled serfs with horseless carriages.
It may be that a modern monarchy will only succeed when it figures out what to do with the Middle Class. This could just be my own self preservation instinct6, but I would hope that the Elites of the future, after seizing the reigns of society and instituting a strict and logical hierarchy, dispense with having a lower/serf/pauper class and establish the middle classes as a talent bunker, in the nautical sense; a reserve of noble aspirants. Imagine the societal stability generated by having a rigid social hierarchy where every level has things worth having. Perhaps this is just eatable cake, but it doesn’t seem too far fetched, given how easily amused we lower class folk are, and what is possible with well managed technology.
This may be an uncommon sentiment, but I actually prefer a life of service. I enjoy good leadership, well thought out marching orders, and well articulated rules of conduct. I enjoy it when the guilty are punished and the just rewarded7. I crave the opportunity to hand off a trade and lifestyle to my children, helping them to decipher who is worthy of their submission as well as what deserves their intolerance. Sometimes, I feel like the greatest trick the managerial elite ever played was convincing us commoners that it is better to dream of being king than realizing we could be happy being well served subjects. Indeed, I can almost hear the derisive mirth the preceding sentence probably caused. We are so convinced of the absolute fallacy that dreams of grandeur are preferable to concrete though humble holdings. We are encouraged, even forced, to forsake service in the vain hope of a temporary crown. Sadly, we wuzzn’t, and indeed willn’t ever be, kangz.
Society being defined as a group of people with definable boundaries and characteristics over time.
This is a function of societal evolution; middle class is a subspecies of lower class that began speciation relatively recently in Occidental Culture, and may die out just as quickly as it appeared.
The managerial elite, defined.
Royals - Nobles - Commons
Sub-Moderns might be a better term…
I am one of the obtuse, up-jumped paupers to which I refer.
I am fairly confident that I would enjoy experiencing that, and I earnestly look forward that I do.
.
Thanks for this post O.M.
<<Sometimes, I feel like the greatest trick the managerial elite ever played was convincing us commoners that it is better to dream of being king than realizing we could be happy being well served subjects.>>
I agree. Unrealistic expectations and the distorted appetites they fuel are a sure-fire path to suffering.
"Well served..." is critical, of course. Wise and compassionate leadership and clear boundaries provide genuine safety and an example that fosters a stable society (or company, institution, even a State).
None of this need disqualify us from having aspirations for ourselves, or our successors.
It may not be a popular view, but on balance I would say that Vladimir Putin personifies the qualities I've alluded to. The Professional Managerial Class (I too have been part of it) much less so.
Far too many of the PMC have simply become adept at saying things that they know their Overlings prefer to hear. It keeps those salary cheques coming in.
Very soon - look all around us - all moorings are lost. The centre cannot hold as Yeats so presciently warned.