Read on Twitter
Pembebel's argument for monarchy goes that a person who already has money and power is incorruptible because they can't be bribed. But whether the ruling monarch is good or not depends on luck. In a democracy, the people at least have a say
A monarchy is essentially a dictatorship, where a single person has unquestionable power. Even in cases where the monarch is nominally restricted by native custom, they remain above the law. If you don't like North Korea's way of govt, you probably won't like absolute monarchy
You might enjoy making jokes like "Mahafiraun" and "Madey Kutty" as much as I like joking about Najis and the hippo. But you think you could do that in an absolute monarchy? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-29628191
Too much money and power tends to get to a person's head. Even if a modern monarch won't be as bad as in the old days, stealing your wife for his harem or executing you for looking at him the wrong way, they're still given to hedonism https://www.insider.com/sultan-of-brunei-hassanal-bolkiah-everything-we-know-2019-4
But maybe I'm stretching it. Imagining a monarchy in the worst case scenario. Bad stuff happens in democracies too right? The difference is democracy gives you the option of booting out a bad ruler. Monarchy offers little room for dissent except rebellion
One might argue that kings are groomed for rule from childhood, making them "better" at their job than a politician who's only in power for limited time. And yet history is full of incompetent kings https://www.historyextra.com/period/medieval/9-of-the-worst-monarchs-in-history/
Even being a "good" or "strong" king doesn't necessarily mean being kind, nor would their reign be something you'd want to live under. Some of the most effective rulers are remembered for their cruelty https://www.ancient-origins.net/history-famous-people/ruthless-chinese-emperor-qin-shi-huang-how-he-unified-and-tyrannized-his-020762
I'm no evangelist for democracy. I used to romanticise monarchy when I was a teenager. There has been decent criticism against democracy, like how each person getting an equal right to vote means even the uninformed penyokong Bumno are allowed to participate
Democracy also means the majority rules, even in cases where the rulers disagree. On the other hand, a monarch doesn't have to worry about pleasing everyone. Theoretically, a king can do more good because there's no red tape stopping him from being bold.
*cough* child marriage
*cough* child marriage
Yet I don't feel that in itself is enough of a case for monarchy over democracy. Absolute power in one person's hands is too easily abused, and prone to nepotism and cronyism. Even a failed democracy usually gives people more power than an absolute monarchy
