The aristocracy is encouraged to avoid the affairs of the commoners which bred apathy

Do they really though? Every ruling class whether they "hate" the working class or not knows that its their job to keep their extractive regime going. In this respect, I would say the Anglos are pretty bad at it. Pretty much every Anglo ruling class has had to make major concessions to their working classes while Indian Brahmins and African Billionaires get away with things that are completely thinkable in the West.

Now none of this is down to altruism on the part of the ruling class. Its down to economic development and the resolve of the working classes. But as bad as Trump or Starmer are, you could be a chocolate farmer who never gets to taste chocolate while your president is a literal billionaire.

>>18514292
Most of that ruling class 'hate' (not just in Britain) doesn't go much further than:
>Could the poors just be a little less annoying?
>We're trying to make money and do politics here.
>Yes, I know they don't like it when we make money off of them, or do politics to them, but it's not like there's anywhere else they can go.
>Just shut up and stop asking for things to get better.
>I'm already rich and powerful, how much better can things get?

>>18514292
Overpopulation creates a 'fuck you, got mine' mindset. England being the world capital of trade meant expanding their population far beyond its natural limits. The elite consequently view the majority of their population as expendable, because they are

File: 632308.jpg (290.3 KB)

>>18514292
I don't get that from upper-class Brits, they're not really openly cruel like that. More hypocritical. They're very polite and think they're decent people who are helping you, but that betrays their sense of superiority. They're more like "he's a good chap, but rather... common." That's outrageous but it's a different thing.

I think Russia is far worse. I've never heard more openly anti-prole attitudes than from Russians who think they're above the common herd, who might as well be cattle to them. No false modesty at all. If you have money, act like it, and don't pretend you're not above the piglets. If you have money you should flaunt it with as much gaucherie and lip injections as you're capable of. If it takes a million piglets getting groundf up up in the meat-packing plant to make the injections for your beautiful body, it's worth it because a million lives can be sacrificed to make a single great one:
https://youtu.be/u5aDD-jfVFg

>>18514292
Upper classes are fine and actually have far more in common with the lower classes than seperates them. It's the cosmopolitan middle classes who are the problem in this country and have been for a long time.

File: 1762981867869323.jpg (725.4 KB)

>>18514292
That really isn't exceptional.
The Poles and Lithuanians went way farther with their Sarmatian theory. Where they believed they were racially different from the peasants.

The Spartans also had a similar thing.
Where they believed that their ancestors invaded from the seas and conquered Sparta and subjugated the Helots, and that is why they were ethnically distinct from their slave caste.

Anglo gentry did have a substantial resentment towards the lower classes, but it honestly never went as far as it did in other places.
As far as it goes for England, the philosophy of Utilitarianism ironically was a driving force. While many today stereotype utilitarianism as hippie stuff where the whole thing is about taking care of everyone, in the 18th and 19th century the basis of the philosophy, that people will pursue pleasure as an end goal, was used as a justification for cutting welfare spending or aid to the poor. Out of a belief that people would just rely on the welfare provided for simple pleasure. That it was helping the foolish poor to take away support for them and to instead support the productive gentry and capitalist classes, because they'd be encouraged to seek higher pleasures in labor. That it was a form of tough paternalism that the masses had to work and struggle to better themselves because they started from a degenerate position of lacking any knowledge of higher pleasures and were characterized by a tendency towards indolence.

>>18514292
This is far, far more a feature of the middle class than the upper class. The middle class genuinely despises the working class, largely caused by their own insecurity. The upper classes don't feel this insecurity. Over the last 40 years the middle class has supplanted the upper class as the source of our rulers and administrators, hence intense hatred of the white working class that we see from the state.

Commie projection

File: IndolentFool.jpg (643.2 KB)

>>18514966
>That it was a form of tough paternalism that the masses had to work and struggle to better themselves because they started from a degenerate position of lacking any knowledge of higher pleasures and were characterized by a tendency towards indolence.
Ironic considering the sauce.

File: Logo_of_The_Jeremy_Kyle_Show_(U.K.).png (101.5 KB)

>>18514966
>. Out of a belief that people would just rely on the welfare provided for simple pleasure
Yeah...'belief'....

>>18514292
The modern runtclass in England are disproportionately of Irish descent

File: IMG_20240515_125459_797.jpg (155.0 KB)

>>18514292
Nothing extreme about it, it's just the most visible case because you're English speaking and probably consumed disproportionately more English culture as a result.
Arthur de Gobineau is a good example of French Aristocracy having contempt and borderline treason hatred for their own French proletariat class. He literally thought he was a "Germanic Frank" and that the French common man was an "inferior Gaul".
The Russian Empire was basically being run by a bunch of Baltic Germans from the 1800s onwards, German Empress Catherine the Great also made serfdom even worse for the Russian peasantry.
Hungarian nobility were also really haughty fucks.
These attitudes declined after the post WWI collapse of most of the continent's traditional ruling classes and then the double whammy hit by the Communist takeover across Eastern Europe, leaving the UK's traditional class division as a "sole survivor" in that respect.

>>18516206
this is treated as forbidden knowledge in the modern UK. It also grinds my gears when libs try and scoff at your (understandable and justified) racism by saying 'you do realise that 200 years ago people said the same thing about the Irish?'
YES I DO REALISE THAT, SEBASTIAN, THEY TOO WERE CORRECT

>>18514292
Probably were the cause that the normans have been feuding among their members since arriving upon the english isle that were britain or something like that

File: thepeopleriseandfallofworkingclassselinatodd-2395616472.jpg (52.3 KB)

>>18514670
They acutally thought of being poor as a different race and upon the discovery of evolution the source of evolutionary change in a Lamarkian way. They also had the belief that elite culture was categorically different than mass or common culture. We are used to the idea of mass media and a common culture but they were not the same thing. This is also btw how the English justified trusting certain immigrants or elite colonized peoples too. The idea that they were more like them than the poor.

>>18514292
>How did the Anglo ruling class develop such an extreme (to the point of genocidal) hatred of their working classes?
by living near them

File: William-Shakespeare-usury-quote.jpg (129.7 KB)

>>18514292
The Reformation, Calvinist "only the rich go to Heaven" theology, the individualism promoted by liberalism (caring for the poor is "socialist")... you name it.

The problems of wealth disparity and a malevolent financial elite are far worse now than any prior era. Anglos were the first to industrialize, they created the processes. They of course would experience the downsides in the most asymmetric and disastrous ways because literally no one had done it before, except the Finns during the Hyperwar.