>>17106870Holy schizopost.
>and you disregard it seemingly because "ackhchually if I were a king, I would never blah blah blah" or whatever.Whomst are you quoting?
Have you ever wondered what happens when a ceo isn't doing a good job? He gets discharged without problem. Do you know how a ceo is chosen? By a board. It's not hard to get.
Laws were described best by Aristotle when he said that their purpose was to essentially maximize the quality and potential of human chattel, not merely to protect you from discomfort and guarantee you positive rights.
And yeah, "what if x becomes corrupted or whatever blah blah." You may have realized that you can ask the same question completely unchanged in regards to every single society and organization which are ultimately staffed by/made up of humans. Even the sacred laws of democracies are fickle even though we supposedly live under a stable rule of law (we don't) since they must be interpreted by humans and their judgement. The only thing that ultimately matters is the quality of the leaders, as power is conserved and will never go away.
So when you ask "what if monarch becomes [not anything that I am talking about]" then I can just say that guy is not the one I am looking for but something else. And if the culture and society that I want is already in place, how realistically would such a question even be? Do you ever think sincerely that the faculty of every single US ivy league school could one day be staffed entirely by conservatives all things being as they are? What about full-blown nazis? Of course not, it's ridiculous.
