Nostr Web Client

This is why monarchies don’t degrade as fast as democracies. It’s the only system where the incentives of the leaders extend out beyond a 4 year term. And they are ever aware of the possibility of being deposed if they get too extractive of people’s time and energy.

Janis 5mo ago 💬 1

And then eventually the heir happens to be some dipshit. Not that the dipshit rules. Invisible power structures (IYKYK) emerge, and the King’s “master of stool” is suddenly the most prestigious job in the Kingdom. Eventually the actual rulers want to be recognised as such, and violence ensues.

Look, there are no “good” systems. It’s a space of trade-offs where you pick your poison. Or, well, it’s only a democracy that lets you “pick” the poison.

Arguably, the only real benefit a democracy provides is non-violent transfer of power. There are “democracies” where even this is not a given, and then yeah, a monarchy would be better, as the cycle of violence is longer.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

1776 5mo ago

Yep, with human nature and the ultimate competitions for resources that emerge, all systems eventually go to shit. The only question is how fast and how bloody. Our exceptionalism through history, our flourishing and our declines will always be cyclical. Never dreamed I’d be living through a fourth turning, but I’m here for it.