| REVIEWER | RATING & REVIEW |
 | DrEntropy (40)
07/07/2008 | Feudalism has become something of a meaningless, all-purpose curse word (like Fascism). In its original sense, Feudalism was a huge step up from the brutal empires and tribes it grew out of, though some of its technology was less advanced. If our modern nation-state system continues to decay, our future may look neo-feudal-especially if land and natural resources replace industry as the primary source of wealth and power. Russia and Latin America are already half-way there, and the US isn't far behind. Niall Feruguson recently sketched out such a possible future recently, based on the 10th Century-powerless wannabe empires, caliphs and popes (UN, EU, etc...) presiding over a feudal world, with a few prosperous city-states here and there (Singapore, Dubai, Miami). Maybe an empire or two, and some tribal/pirate zones as well.
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | irishgit (151)
04/12/2007 | Judged in the context of the era during which it was prevalent in the west, fairly effective.
It evolved out of Roman imperial structures after the fall of that empire, and made a lot of sense for both the ruled and the ruler.
In most parts of Europe, settlements were outposts against a dangerous and frightening wilderness, and an elaborate tapestry of loyalty, obligation, and service made good sense.
Could it be abused, and was it?
Of course, just like every other system of governance ever created.
Is it suitable for an post-industrial society?
Not at all.
Did it work for its time?
Quite effectively in most instances.
Lets try and keep things in perspective.
(9 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | kierchehof (0)
09/02/2004 | In order to get where we are today, we had to go through it. It was a logical step in the economic and social development. Of course, it would be lethal if it were done in today's day and age, but for when it happened it was absolutely necessary and it worked out fine (Russia is excepted).
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Kateryna (0)
08/16/2004 | Was needed in certain period of world history. Should not be a point for today
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Emilia Fulci (0)
07/22/2004 | Feudal societies are the closest we've ever come to achieving the 'perfect society'. History will tell you all you need to know about Feudalism, if studied objectively. Remove yourself from individual circumstances (ie, saying I personally would not be happy under a Feudal system!) and study the facts before bashing an ideology as 'cruel' or 'outdated'.
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | DaRick (4)
04/25/2004 | Feudalism, at least as we know it, is long gone, thank goodness, since the idea of paying homage to your unappointed master would be extremely ridiculous in the modern world. Feudalism is the reason why horrific wars such as the Crusades erupted, since the Pope, as head of state, said it was OK to kill everyone non-Christian. Since the Pope was the unappointed master, everyone had to listen to him or face a very humiliating excommunication. Feudalism featured in the Dark Ages and feudalism has allowed little progress, since the unappointed 'rulers' are more important than progress. It's a ridiculous system and one that should remain buried in history.
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | dandl (0)
02/19/2004 | We hate it because we had to do a report on it.
(0 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
| Nerokis (0)
01/21/2004 | Feudalism is a cruel, inhuman and thoroughly undemocratic system of government, which is absolutely irrelevant in today's world. Most of the problems in Dark Age Europe were thanks to this foolish ideology. If we accept that the separation of church and state has been a positive thing for the world, then this system is the polar opposite of modern government, because at the height of its hierarchy were the self-obsessed, bureaucratic church leaders, who served an almost entirely negative purpose in Western history. It seems clear to me that Feudalism was designed simply to degrade human beings by breeding such weaknesses as fear, arrogance and hate at all levels of society. Why breed such things? Because certain types of theism (not spirituality just the heinous, manmade weapon that is organised religion) thrive in suffering areas of the world. Congratulations to whoever thought up this stupid, harmful concept.
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | JonTheMan (29)
11/10/2003 | "But me'lord thats my wife!"."Yeah humble peon, she was your wife, now I am taking her as thou unjustly gave me narry enough hogs heads last wednesday!". "Doh, Fuedalism sucks!". Of course nowadays we have a sort of advanced fuedalism where people are kept in servitude by finances and money rather then social status. This is a little better and allows for a bit more social mobility but tell that to someone living in a shack outside a sewer. Hopefully one day we can all be equal and we won't have to opress eachother. Lets work for ourselves as well as eachother rather than for our self-appointed masters.
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | twinmom101 (33)
07/25/2003 | The most recognized form of feudalism was utilized during the Dark Ages in Europe from about 500-900 AD. There was a reason why this was called the Dark Ages. Read Gregory of Tours "History of the Franks" to see just how depraved and backwards Europe was at this time. To say it worked is just stupid, as it was what Europe did to just get by. Following the vacuum that the fall of the Western Roman empire left and the continuous influx of barbarians from the steppes of Asia, feudalism was tthe only thing that could be quickly organized to protect what little Europe had to protect at the time. It worked, barely, and the people who lived under feudalism lived miserably. No progress was made. While the new Islamic Middle East was experiencing a renaissance of art and science and the Far East was quietly amassing the army of Ghengis Khan, Europe spun its tires in poverty, disease, fear and petty warfare. Great system, huh.
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | anmalone (5)
02/11/2003 | It worked until something better came along. Noblesse oblige does have a certain humility.
(5 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Davis21Wylie (1)
07/10/2002 | Yes, it definitely was not a coincidence that feudalism was king in an era of narrow-mindedness and no technological advances. Somehow it was understood that the king owned everything in a country: no personal property, no personal freedom. I didn't rate it "terrible" because it wasn't a particularly militant ideology in the nazism mold. It just simply doesn't work.
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | ellajedlicka21 (6)
01/05/2002 | The most ancient of all social structures and that outdated. It was the common thing in Europe during the Middle Ages, a milennium of virtually no scientific progress.
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Ruby (16)
05/23/2001 | Obviously a bad system for today... or really anytime in the past milennium or so... but I read something (that I only vaguely remember) that talked about feudalism as an important step in European history toward recognizing private property, and moving toward a system of dispersed capital that ushered in more commerce and advances in living standards and freedoms. So I'll spare giving it a "1" despite the obvious irrelevance to modern times.
(6 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
| 1-14 OF 14 | View All |
