Political Crossfire Forums

[Prole]

I accidentally stumbled across the word "ptochocracy" when trying to figure out the word for "rule by judges." A "ptochocracy" is a government ruled by the poor and/or lower class. It got me wondering, has there ever existed such a society?

Can anyone think of any?

[Mr X]

I dont think so. I dont think that it will ever happen, if the lower class did come into power, it would become the upper class.

-X

[Bobicito]

I think that basically tells it all. I can't think of anything or any society that ever existed like that.

[antonio62]

There could be village societies where people rule similar to that. But it is more likely they work together without anyone having any extra power even if they are richer or poorer.

[Thomas M]

It is impossible because if the lower class would rule it would use it's power to make the lower class become the upper class. This is the reason why communism fails, people automatically use their power to make their life and that of their friends better.

[BastionOfSanity]

Thomas M wrote: It is impossible because if the lower class would rule it would use it's power to make the lower class become the upper class. This is the reason why communism fails, people automatically use their power to make their life and that of their friends better.

Communism is classless, you argument is void.

[Thomas M]

BastionOfSanity wrote: Thomas M wrote: It is impossible because if the lower class would rule it would use it's power to make the lower class become the upper class. This is the reason why communism fails, people automatically use their power to make their life and that of their friends better.

Communism is classless, you argument is void.
Communism should be classless, but people always look for a group to belong to, and thus create new 'classes'.

[Bobicito]

The only thing close to this would be a direct democracy were everyone in a village participates in the goverment. Everyone is basically the same.

[demosthenes67]

it's nearly impossible for a "lower" class to rule.

Quote:
Quote:
Quote: It is impossible because if the lower class would rule it would use it's power to make the lower class become the upper class. This is the reason why communism fails, people automatically use their power to make their life and that of their friends better.


Communism is classless, you argument is void.

Communism should be classless, but people always look for a group to belong to, and thus create new 'classes'.

it's human nature to create classes when none exist clearly

[perdidochas]

BastionOfSanity wrote: Thomas M wrote: It is impossible because if the lower class would rule it would use it's power to make the lower class become the upper class. This is the reason why communism fails, people automatically use their power to make their life and that of their friends better.

Communism is classless, you argument is void.

Communism should be classless, but as is human nature, some people are always more equal than others.

[Mr X]

BastionOfSanity wrote: Thomas M wrote: It is impossible because if the lower class would rule it would use it's power to make the lower class become the upper class. This is the reason why communism fails, people automatically use their power to make their life and that of their friends better.

Communism is classless, you argument is void.
Nothing is ever classless.

[sherborne]

Prole wrote: I accidentally stumbled across the word "ptochocracy" when trying to figure out the word for "rule by judges." A "ptochocracy" is a government ruled by the poor and/or lower class. It got me wondering, has there ever existed such a society?

Can anyone think of any?

There may have been actually. But this kinda would have been null and void once they took over. Plus its also on a slightly smaller scale. Im referring to some of the slave rebellions in America. All the slaves rose up against their white oppressors and i suppose 'governed' for a time. That is untill the rebellion was put down. You could perhaps also say that the Mamalukes in Egypt were of this kind but that is a successful slave rebellion and lasted a lot longer so obviously they were no longer at the bottom of the pecking order. You could also perhaps again say that Israel and Jews is another example. Jews were at the bottom of the pecking order in Israel, then after the war they were thrust to the top and still are today.

Its all a little bit farcical though because once the subjected group has taken power they are no longer at the bottom. The word kind of loses its distinction and cannot incorporate any form of subjective interpretation.

[Subzero]

I think "lower class" is being used here in terms of wealth only, not power.

The answer then is yes, pretty much every time a mob of poor people has revolted to destroy an upper class they percieved to be oppressive.

[sherborne]

Subzero wrote: I think "lower class" is being used here in terms of wealth only, not power.

The answer then is yes, pretty much every time a mob of poor people has revolted to destroy an upper class they percieved to be oppressive.

So therefore slaves, as my previous post points out, would qualify no?

[Subzero]

sherborne wrote: Subzero wrote: I think "lower class" is being used here in terms of wealth only, not power.

The answer then is yes, pretty much every time a mob of poor people has revolted to destroy an upper class they percieved to be oppressive.

So therefore slaves, as my previous post points out, would qualify no?

Yes, as they would certainly qualify as in the lower classes.

[Thomas M]

Subzero wrote: I think "lower class" is being used here in terms of wealth only, not power.

The answer then is yes, pretty much every time a mob of poor people has revolted to destroy an upper class they percieved to be oppressive.
But if the lower class overthrows the upper class, the wealth would get redistrubuted and the lower class would become the upper class.
The class with the most power will use its power to become the most wealthy, so lower class is being used in terms of wealth as well as power.

[sherborne]

im still trying to figure out how to pronounce this word. :-D

[bob.appleyard]

sherborne wrote: im still trying to figure out how to pronounce this word. :-D

It's Greek, so silent p and hard ch.

So TOK-OK-RA-SEE

I think.

[bob.appleyard]

H.G. Wells' the Time Machine could be said to describe a ptochocracy, I think...

[Bobicito]

Lets just put it this way. Its immpossible for this goverment to have ever existed.