Neofeudalism controversy in United States politics

There is controversy over the correct application of Neofeudalism as a term, and its political usage is often highly charged with partisan prejudice. Neofeudalism is often used by critics to describe political policies of opponents, and in extreme cases there may be asserted to be a deliberate drive towards a re-imagination of feudal systems of governance for implementation within the context of an information age society.
The term seems to have been originated as a criticism of the paternalistic left; an early example being the essay Neo-Feudalism published in 1961. The term is still used by some on the right in that sense in the twenty-first century:

Although he would later become a naturalized American citizen, Soros remains
in social outlook very much a European and believer in the paternalistic
neo-feudalism euphemistically called "democratic socialism" or "social
democracy."

Applications
One of its applications to current politicians is that it explains the support of some for both high levels of nearly uncontrolled immigration and of reduced taxation on the rich. Politicians thus targeted by the term are also frequently opposed to minimum wage laws, claiming they would reduce job opportunities for the poor and the young, even though their support for open borders is based on the claim that the economy is already producing too many jobs. These policies, traditionalists say, would continue to devalue the labor of the working class while creating a wealthy elite that is permanently entrenched in the style of a feudal state. Other applications might include pointing to an individual politician's family history of holding high elected office as possible evidence supporting accusations of an emerging hereditary aristocracy (another common characteristic of feudal societies).

Main Menu

See Also

Main Menu