I think this is a narrow take, a bit like suggesting that women weren't historically discriminated against and putting forward Cleopatra as an example.
Surely, rich and noble eccentrics have existed in the past with several notable examples. But to point at exceptions and then suggests that this proves that no underlying trend is present seems like incorrect reasoning.
Surely, rich and noble eccentrics have existed in the past with several notable examples. But to point at exceptions and then suggests that this proves that no underlying trend is present seems like incorrect reasoning.