More Reasons to Distrust Contemporary Feudal Fantasies
Romantic visions of feudal life bear little resemblance to the historical reality.
“Feudalism is so much better than what we have now. Because at least in feudalism, the leader is vested in the prosperity of the people he rules,” declared Tucker Carlson recently on The Tucker Carlson Show. His guest, writer Auron MacIntyre, agreed enthusiastically. Carlson added, “If all your serfs die, you starve.” McIntyre replied, “Yeah. There’s a true incentive to care for those people.”
The conversation sparked ridicule online, but it also reflected a broader, bipartisan trend. As Amanda Mull observed in The Atlantic, social media has grown “strangely nostalgic for life in the Middle Ages.” Samuel Matlack of The New Atlantis noted the puzzling frequency of the argument that the preindustrial past may have been superior to modernity.
Carlson’s reasoning implies that feudal lords, out of self-interest, nurtured the well being of their serfs. Yet the system he imagines has more in common with modern markets than with medieval Europe. Adam Smith explained the principle long ago: “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.” If customers are displeased, businesses collapse. Markets channel self-interest into mutual gain in ways that feudalism never could.
History makes that clear. Start with life expectancy. Even kings in the feudal era rarely lived into old age. Between the 11th and early 15th centuries, most European monarchs died young. Alfonso VI of Castile and León, who reached 79, was the outlier. Only a few others across England, Aragon, Germany, and France managed to live into their 60s. For most rulers, living to 70 was unattainable, and commoners fared far worse.
The average European life expectancy in the 11th century hovered around 25 years, driven down by staggering child mortality. Historian Richard Hoffmann notes that of 1,000 children who survived infancy, as many as 250 died by age seven. Only between 40 and 70 percent ever reached adolescence. In contrast, life expectancy in Europe today exceeds 80 years.
Nor were feudal peasant lives leisurely. A persistent myth claims medieval peasants worked less than modern people. This misconception stems from an early estimate by historian Gregory Clark, who suggested peasants worked only 150 days annually, an estimate he later revised upward to about 300. That number is higher than today’s 260 working days, even before accounting for paid holidays and vacation. Serfs’ labor was grueling and often damaging to their health. They were legally bound to the land, compelled to work their lord’s fields in addition to their own, and held few rights against mistreatment.
Another common misconception is that feudal societies provided security in exchange for labor. In reality, medieval Europe was marked by frequent famine, war, and violence. Crop failures were devastating, and local lords often demanded their share of harvests regardless of whether peasants had enough left to survive. Raids and small-scale wars were constant features of life, and the people at the bottom had little protection when armies swept through their fields. Unlike citizens in modern states who benefit from the rule of law and relatively impartial modern justice system, peasants depended on their lords for protection but had no meaningful recourse when those same lords were the source of oppression. For most peasants, daily life combined backbreaking labor with exposure to hunger, violence, and disease, far from the idyllic stability sometimes imagined today. (I explore these harsh realities in my forthcoming book, The Grim Old Days: An Introduction to the Preindustrial Past).
In Russia, where serfdom endured until 1861, abuse could be extreme. Serfs were frequently beaten or killed without legal consequence. The notorious case of Darya Saltykova, who tortured more than 100 of her serfs to death, was unusual only in that she faced punishment.
Material conditions were equally bleak. In 1300, the United Kingdom’s average income was about $1,657 in today’s dollars. That represented one of the wealthiest regions in Europe at the time. Even kings lived in poverty by modern standards, while ordinary peasants experienced deprivation that is difficult to imagine today.
When Friedrich Hayek titled his classic The Road to Serfdom, he did not mean it as praise. He used “serfdom” to warn against a return to systems that crushed freedom and prosperity. Carlson’s romantic vision of feudal life bears little resemblance to the historical reality.
Modern economic systems, for all their flaws, have delivered longer lives, safer working conditions, and unprecedented prosperity. The record of feudalism offers no reason to wish for its return.
This article was originally published at LA Progressive on 9/22/2025.




I think this people are imagining that they will be king or at least a knight. I have never heard anyone say that they wish they were a Medieval peasant.
Chelsea ........popularisation of the past and fondly remembering it is called nostalgia !
And we all indulge in it when it suits us to do so !
This doesn't mean we aren't aware that we are being extremely selective !
NOBODY actually 'pines for the miserable past' ............. only for our lost youth and vitality !
In every other context ".......algia" DENOTES PAIN........ as in neuralgia !
Feudalism was , without doubt , a better system than what came before it !
Organisation and order ............... as opposed to pure bloody chaos !
The ability to develop communities and industry and agriculture .....and to have an army to protect you and yours from pillaging , murderous raiders ! Yes....it required you to be subservient and to contribute substantially to the upkeep of the "Lord" [ Thane or whatever ! ] and he lived a much better life than you did..........but at least , you got to live .......and live longer and better lives !
The system has evolved through many different systems over the years as people and their ideas and their locations and their opportunities changed.
Socialism has been tried......it developed into communism where it has PROVEN to be disastrous and yet it still has some allure in 'academia' and other areas where envy overrules responsibility !
The Western Capitalist Free Enterprise System [ having been shaped by the Judeo-Christian morals , ethics and mores and the protestant work-ethic ] has been the most successful SOCIAL and ECONOMIC SYSTEM EVER DEVISED !
It appalls me when I read statements like "......Modern economic systems, for all their flaws,...." !!!!
There is NO PLURAL ! There is only ONE SYSTEM that has created wealth FOR EVERONE , almost eliminated global poverty and lifted living standards in every aspect...and that is CAPITALISM and FREE-ENTERPRISE with individual rights and property ownership !
Without wealth-creation there can be no wealth-expenditure and without that there is no progress ! It's amazing how " so called intellectuals" can be so stupid as to imagine otherwise !
AND YET THEY DO ! The childrens nursery stories , such as 'the goose that laid the golden egg ' , 'the magic pudding ' [ a magic steak and kidney pudding which, no matter how much one eats it, continually reforms into a whole pudding again.] seems to be so ingrained in their minds that they are oblivious to the 'real world' ! Ideologically idiotic !!!
And NO Chelsea , I am NOT advocating for Feudalism !
But to condemn it 'out of hand' is to fail to grasp historical reality and how 'progression' has produced todays successful transition from Feudalism !
SOME SIMILAR ASPECTS are still in evidence : Most people are still 'subservient' to a 'superior'
whether that is an employer or a government ! Some people benefit more than others , wealth is not equally divided , some people live longer and better lives than others ........etc etc.
HOWEVER , talent , intelligence , opportunity , inheritance , physique and physical appearance ,
genes , propensity to apply one's self , marriage partners etc........ARE ALSO NOT EQUALLY DISTRIBUTED......so why do 'socialists' expect wealth to be equally distributed when NOTHING ELSE IS or EVER WAS ? Perhaps , because they have an overdeveloped sense of importance and imagine themselves to be 'Don Quixote' galloping-off to right-perceived-wrongs...despite reality !
TAXATION should be the only "income leveller" in "our" society........as WELFARE destroys people , their initiative , their self respect and ultimately , their entire life and destiny !
TEACH THEM TO FISH........NOT TO BEG ! And stop running down the economic system which has given you a place , a purpose and a platform you would never have achieved otherwise !
Regards , Trevor.