@adfjs
I literally quoted
your comment, using the definition of the word
you used. In the context you used it, 'responsibility' = 'blame for a result'. They take responsibility for the king's decision, by suffering the effects of it? Sorry to resort to ad hominem, but seeing as you started it, you really
are fucking stupid.
Edit: I realised I probably should clarify, for your sake. There are two definitions of responsibility. If you
have responsibility, you have a duty to do something. Like your example, the peasants have a
duty to follow through with the king's decision. If you
take responsibility, i.e. literally what
you wrote: "they take responsibility", you are to
blame for something. Those are two separate things. Cultural context doesn't factor into it
at all, since we are living in the present using modern definitions of words. Repeat, we are discussing right
now, not in your precious history. If the word changed meaning, you adapt to modern meanings.
Also, seeing as I actually conceded when I was wrong, but you didn't despite being
proven blatantly wrong, I wonder who is stuck in a "little Dunning-Kruger bubble"?