I wonder if we will ever have the leisure, the money, and the time to breed and develop better quality fashions, homes, luxurious lifestyle, and leadership than the English aristocrats

I obviously believe in change in the evolutionary philosophy of theological materialism, but I don't think changes should be made unless the change is actually better than the past.   

 

I think the Anglophile's are basically right in revering the age of aristocracy in England regarding clothing, fashions, homes, luxurious lifestyle, and leadership in general; it was one of the greatest aristocracies in history, even if it was eventually prone to etiolation and effeteness.   

 

In my view, changes in fashions, homes, luxurious lifestyle, etc. would only be improvements around the edges of the age of aristocracy in England. The English aristocrats had the leisure, the money, and the time (1688-1830) to develop the very best quality in fashion, homes, and luxurious lifestyle. The fashions and homes of today are greatly inferior to the age of aristocracy in England by any sane assessment, give or take a few damp manor houses, stiff collars, and bustles. 

 

Breeding between aristocrats of the British Empire was present for a long time not only relating to homes, fashions, etc, but in the greatly successful leadership of the state, armed forces, government, clergy, the big landowners, etc. Even so, in the long run I believe more in the separation of powers and states as seen in the original U. S. Constitution, even to the extent of developing ethnostates for distinctively different ethnic groups. I also believe in meritocracies which prevent the etiolation and effeteness that aristocracies are prone to. And I believe in the constant genetic improvement of human beings all the way to Godhood.

 

Even so, I wonder if we will ever have the leisure, the money, and the time to breed and develop better quality fashions, homes, luxurious lifestyle, and leadership than the English aristocrats of 1688-1830.