I'm not a fan of monarchy. It's a LARP.https://twitter.com/UrthExit/status/1372854378311340033 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @RokoMijic @RokoMijicUK
No it isn't, same with aristocracy (hereditary rule in general). It's a way to incentivize good government. Align ruler's and elite's genetic interest with their country's achievement. Just like with private ownership of firms, resources.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @RConclusionist @RokoMijicUK
What to do if the heir sucks? Seems so arbitrary. Regardless, stuff like human genetic editing will probably be the norm within two generations, so the motivation of lineage will only be increasingly moot.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Hard to imagine an heir so bad he'd produce the absolute abomination that USG / Harvard / NYT have created. A completely insane, sadistic monster wouldn't do what progressives did to Detroit and are doing to NY and SF.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
A monarch isn't a panacea to all corrupted incentives that led to these developments. Moral panics occurred in monarchies as well. In addition to monarchy you'd have to find an alternative to our current flavor of capitalism. Also, an insane ruler would destroy our geopolitics.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Actually a king is exactly a cure to those particular bad incentives. A king doesn't value a vote bank more than a productive beautiful city because a king doesn't need a vote bank at all. As far as our geopolitics goes...pic.twitter.com/IEBoQqzODB
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.