For all it's flaws the ancient world had one thing right, only the upper decile or so have any hope of properly understanding what makes a society functional. But the remainder of the population will be absolutely furious if that is ever pointed out to them. So they made up something about divine rights to dole out lands to those upper performers and charged them with turning all the local idiots into something useful.
Any successful society must learn to subtly harness the power of idiots and midwits, they're just too numerous to waste. And one of the more successful strategies through history has been crafting a mythology to guide them and allow them.to be lead without hurting their pride.
In present day the left has effectively reversed the enlightenment which turned all the clergy into scholars, and have instead turned all their scholars into clergy, and it's been very effective. Whilst the right have abandoned most of their old myths of national greatness and patriotism and seem instead to have settled on pure wealth and pedigree as the magic power that makes people worthy of leading. But where capital inheritance is almost guaranteed, competence inheritance is more of a probability spread. So a good few of their mythological leaders are idiots themselves handed reins they have no idea what to do with and their performance shows it. Plus the right's mythological leaders don't have to make a show of true beliverism like the left's clergy do, so they are way more free to engage in greedy backstabbing and selling out their own whilst still somehow holding on to their legitimacy.
the problem with elites holding the reins is that it inevitably leads to collapse. as generations go by, and elites are born into elite life, their position is taken more and more for granted. eventually their distant children have a more skewed view of the world than the lowly peasants do, and the unrest begins to fester (you are here). barring a voluntary and peaceful change in the ruling class, elites eventually get overrun and destroyed without mercy. This destruction comes either from the peasants, or neighboring societies looking to capitalize on the weakness.
It happened with Nero, it happened with Mary Antoinette, it happened with Tsar Nicholas, and it will happen here eventually. The time from inception to destruction varies greatly, but it goes without fail.
Yeah making it even mostly hereditary is a bad idea because nature doesn't hand out guarantees like that, and exceptional natural talent in particular is too fragile a balance of factors, it falls into mediocrity very easily.
The longer periods of stability seemed to come when the aristocracy had some churn, families fell from grace and titles were stripped, expansion and growth left room for new people to be promoted up, and frequent conflict tested the mettle of many and let new blood distinguish themselves and be chosen by achievement.
The greatest source of disorder I think is from the natural desire for the best for your children, so those in power do what they can to make sure their children get to be in power too, even when they're not fit for it. We could do with a mythology that idealises being a noble leader based on early life achievements, but also a society that doesn't allow those leaders to live a more luxurious lifestyle than the rest. So that when a parent recognizes their child isn't fit to follow in their footsteps there's not a conflict of interest in not having their children also lead.
Half baked idea formulated on the spot ahead:
For all it's flaws the ancient world had one thing right, only the upper decile or so have any hope of properly understanding what makes a society functional. But the remainder of the population will be absolutely furious if that is ever pointed out to them. So they made up something about divine rights to dole out lands to those upper performers and charged them with turning all the local idiots into something useful.
Any successful society must learn to subtly harness the power of idiots and midwits, they're just too numerous to waste. And one of the more successful strategies through history has been crafting a mythology to guide them and allow them.to be lead without hurting their pride.
In present day the left has effectively reversed the enlightenment which turned all the clergy into scholars, and have instead turned all their scholars into clergy, and it's been very effective. Whilst the right have abandoned most of their old myths of national greatness and patriotism and seem instead to have settled on pure wealth and pedigree as the magic power that makes people worthy of leading. But where capital inheritance is almost guaranteed, competence inheritance is more of a probability spread. So a good few of their mythological leaders are idiots themselves handed reins they have no idea what to do with and their performance shows it. Plus the right's mythological leaders don't have to make a show of true beliverism like the left's clergy do, so they are way more free to engage in greedy backstabbing and selling out their own whilst still somehow holding on to their legitimacy.
the problem with elites holding the reins is that it inevitably leads to collapse. as generations go by, and elites are born into elite life, their position is taken more and more for granted. eventually their distant children have a more skewed view of the world than the lowly peasants do, and the unrest begins to fester (you are here). barring a voluntary and peaceful change in the ruling class, elites eventually get overrun and destroyed without mercy. This destruction comes either from the peasants, or neighboring societies looking to capitalize on the weakness.
It happened with Nero, it happened with Mary Antoinette, it happened with Tsar Nicholas, and it will happen here eventually. The time from inception to destruction varies greatly, but it goes without fail.
Yeah making it even mostly hereditary is a bad idea because nature doesn't hand out guarantees like that, and exceptional natural talent in particular is too fragile a balance of factors, it falls into mediocrity very easily.
The longer periods of stability seemed to come when the aristocracy had some churn, families fell from grace and titles were stripped, expansion and growth left room for new people to be promoted up, and frequent conflict tested the mettle of many and let new blood distinguish themselves and be chosen by achievement.
The greatest source of disorder I think is from the natural desire for the best for your children, so those in power do what they can to make sure their children get to be in power too, even when they're not fit for it. We could do with a mythology that idealises being a noble leader based on early life achievements, but also a society that doesn't allow those leaders to live a more luxurious lifestyle than the rest. So that when a parent recognizes their child isn't fit to follow in their footsteps there's not a conflict of interest in not having their children also lead.
still lead by an opposing faction of the elites either way
fair, but it still comes. a dissatisfied populace or weak leadership would make a country ripe for conquering.