Down With the Hereditary Aristocracy
July 4, 2026
by William P. Meyers

Site Search

Popular pages:

No Title of Nobility

At the time of the American Revolution, in 1776, Great Britain had a hereditary aristocracy. True, there was some porosity to it. The industrial revolution was in its early stages (some call it, before 1800, the Industrious Revolution). Rich men (and women) could marry into the aristocracy, or its impoverished families, and thereby gain titles, at least for their children. Because of the varied lines of kings in England's past (Anglo Saxon, Tudor, Stuart, Windsor, among others) there were many variations in the aristocracy's lineages.

Both the Declaration of Independence and the later U.S. Constitution were anti-aristocratic, though the colonies and nation certainly already had a class of people with aristocratic pretensions. For the most part this was not explicitly stated. Rather, it was made clear by such statements as "that all Men are created equal" in the Declaration and "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government" in the Constitution.

There is one explicit anti-aristocratic sentence in the Constitution: "No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States." [Article I, Section 9]

I believe we have failed to properly interpret and enforce this Constitutional mandate.

Its typical interpretation is that no one will be called king, duke, lord, (queen, duchess), etc., at least not officially. Nor can such titles be passed to one's descendants. [Though it is okay to call a woman "the Queen of Rock and Roll" if you like.] Title, in this interpretation, means what we are required, legally, to call someone.

Title has another meaning. As in title to a parcel of real estate. Title, used this way, is roughly equivalent to property. So no Title of Nobility can be interpreted as not allowing for a hereditary aristocracy of wealth.

Some would say we do not have a hereditary aristocracy in the United States. I say we do. And if we want to "secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our prosperity" we have to terminate that aristocracy. It may primarily be an aristocracy of wealth, but that wealth is largely inherited, and so it has become a hereditary aristocracy.

I am not advocating chopping off the heads of billionaires, as the French revolutionaries chopped off the heads of the French nobility in 1789.

I am not advocating making it impossible for a persons, or a group of persons, to make a great deal of money by creating a business centered on a new invention or idea or mode of organization.

I am for abolishing the current system where a few people inherit most of the wealth of America, while a substantial minority of people inherit nothing or close to nothing, often dooming them to a life of hardship, no matter what their natural talents are.

So it is time to revisit the tax system, with the abolition of our hereditary multi-millionaire class in mind.

We need far higher taxes on inheritances and transfers of wealth to family members. We must decide democratically where to set these rates, but I would start with a 50% tax on estates of over $10 million (which still leaves survivors with aristocratic wealth) graduated up to a 95% tax on estates of over $1 billion. Note that the remaining 5% of $1 billion amounts to some $50 million, not a bad haul for the heirs.

To prevent the accumulation of such vast wealth during a lifetime we need higher income tax rates at the top end. We also need to treat capital gains as ordinary income (although I think capital gains should be adjusted for inflation). A rate of 80% on annual incomes over $10 million would leave an entrepreneur with $2 million to spend that year, enough to scrape by on.

Admittedly it will be a hard fight, as the current aristocracy has the capability to buy politicians, media, and public opinion.

At some point it would also be nice to have a competent and patriotic Supreme Court rule that my interpretation of Article I, Section 9, is correct. Therefore the over-accumulated wealth of past generations can be seized and redistributed to men (including women) whose economics at birth should be roughly equal.