Pharoes - great governmental system?

[removeduser_4536284751384]

I'm sure you've all heard the expression that there's nothing better than a good king, and nothing worse than a bad one. I think we can all agree that absolute power could be great if used solely by someone trustworthy for good purposes.

But obviously that can never happen because there is hardly anyone who could be depended upon not to be a corrupt bastard of a king. I mean look at the Roman Emperors. How many of them were good? Maybe Marcus Aerelius, and Constatine the Great. That's all I can name out of all the Emperors for hundreds of years. How many medieval kings were good? I don't think I can name any save Richard the Lionheart. They were all absolute bastards. That's why we have democracies with seperation of powers.

However Egypt had a novel political system. They had a Pharoe who had absolute power. Sounds just like every other tyranny eh? Well no actually. Egyptians believed that when you died, your heart was weighed by the gods (Specifically Anubis and Thoth). If you had lived a good life, your heart would be light and you would be allowed into the afterlife. If you were bad, you were a murderer, or, more important to us here, a bad ruler, your heart would be heavy and it would be eaten by the devourer, Ammut. That would be the end of you, you just wouldn't exist any more.

So fear of a higher power kept the pharoes in line. They were afraid that unless they were good rulers they wouldn't get into their afterlife. There were bad ones of course, but they were few. What do you think of this?

[The Fishman]

I'm sure you've all heard the expression that there's nothing better than a good king, and nothing worse than a bad one. I think we can all agree that absolute power could be great if used solely by someone trustworthy for good purposes.

But obviously that can never happen because there is hardly anyone who could be depended upon not to be a corrupt bastard of a king. I mean look at the Roman Emperors. How many of them were good? Maybe Marcus Aerelius, and Constatine the Great. That's all I can name out of all the Emperors for hundreds of years. How many medieval kings were good? I don't think I can name any save Richard the Lionheart. They were all absolute bastards. That's why we have democracies with seperation of powers.

However Egypt had a novel political system. They had a Pharoe who had absolute power. Sounds just like every other tyranny eh? Well no actually. Egyptians believed that when you died, your heart was weighed by the gods (Specifically Anubis and Thoth). If you had lived a good life, your heart would be light and you would be allowed into the afterlife. If you were bad, you were a murderer, or, more important to us here, a bad ruler, your heart would be heavy and it would be eaten by the devourer, Ammut. That would be the end of you, you just wouldn't exist any more.

So fear of a higher power kept the pharoes in line. They were afraid that unless they were good rulers they wouldn't get into their afterlife. There were bad ones of course, but they were few. What do you think of this?

I bet few Pharaohs actually believed in all this mythology, evidenced by the fact that they twisted it themselves to give them more power. Often these ancient religions were just an excuse for a monarch to do whatever they wanted. Tell the peasants that you are responsible for keeping the life-giving floodwaters running and they won't dare to oppose you when you demand that they donate all their money towards building your pyramid.

[Boyar Son]

Well i wouldn't say no...

What's in it for me?

[43rdFoot]

Monarchies are monarchies are monarchies.



And they are all outdated.

[saxdude]

They believed them selves as gods so maybe not...

[Thorn777]

What about today's people in general not believing in this divine judgment all that much?

[Snowball]

Why would I trust a single person, that is for all intents and purposes a "God" on earth (in regards to his power over other people) to care for MY interests and what is good for ME?

(And this would be the same for all the other "I's and Me's in society"....)

[removeduser_4536284751384]

Why would I trust a single person, that is for all intents and purposes a "God" on earth (in regards to his power over other people) to care for MY interests and what is good for ME?

(And this would be the same for all the other "I's and Me's in society"....)

well obviously you wouldn't because people aren't dumb

but if he really believed this kind of stuff it would make him good

[Rapax]

Religion keeping Leaders in line, was that really your suggestion? It is merely a tool abused by the powerful to control the masses rather than something they were afraid of.

[Amorphos]

If you could find a modern day substitute for the wrath of the gods [if that ever worked], then a single ruler would be great, after all where you have many voices and opinions you need some manner of direction, preferably singular. With democracy you can have a majority of incorrect decisions or worst candidate elected, but there again a single individual is just as fallable.

What you need is a skeleton structure of principles that leaders of any kind have to go by, not just for law but for economics too. This would be inflexible and as new situations arise unusable. What you need is more discourse and input, more power sharing and decentralisation. So the opposite to the pharonic system?

[The Noble Lord]

Nah, it wouldn't work today. We don't need any more pyramids and slave labor would look bad on television, and can you imagine the insurance claims and lawsuits .