So you're defending ignorance? Ignorance that gets to make decisions at a national level?
Let's agree that power can lead to corruption in certain kind of people. Not all people in power are corrupt.Originally Posted by HoreTore
As I have pointed out before a man who holds a post for life is much less likely to be corrupt than a man who will only be in power for a limited time and must, therefore, steal as much as possible while he's near the money box.
On top of that, you are much more likely to have corrupt people in a multitudinary government than if one person holds power. That is a mathematical certainty.
Lastly, if you don't like your absolute leader you can try and kill him. Which becomes kind of futile if a new one gets elected from the same bench every 4 years.
Personally, I must point out there have never been such a thing as a corrupt king. There just hasn't because it doesn't make sense. Corruption for what? They are guaranteed life-long power! Why would they steal?
Even the Tsars of Russia in their day didn't collect as much money for their own needs as a percentage of total revenue as disappears in the pockets of crooked politicos every year.
And I'd like to point out that some of the most stable, sane and long lived states today are monarchies: Liechestein, Monaco, Netherlands or the Vatican. In fairness if we were to follow an example of government, the Vatican's would be the one to follow as it has survived for 2000 years. As far as governments go, that's a success story in my book.
Bookmarks