Ruling isn't for everyone. But few things are

Nobody disagrees with that

DEmocracy disagrees with it

People ree at me even when I suggest higher standards for voting

What you're contending is the way we sort people into castes

>shitmocracy

If you leave the caste assignment system open to interpretation, it will be interpreted more and more loosely as time goes on

Because people will want to lower the standards for caste promotion

A person's "nature" is way too loose

What about their nature? The number of bowling pins they can juggle?

Now everybody in the world is spending hours and hours juggling bowling pins so they can be higher status

All things considered, which the idea is that those in power will look at, and then choose their inheritors by. But they can easily choose people based on favours and nepotism

So high school kids are driving themselves insane, spending 14+ hours a day learning how to juggle

which is why I have given up on society, started focusing more on the genes and the memes, and embraced pugnism

I am unconvinced of all systems intended to choose good rulers

I don't think there's a perfect system

I agree that the success of a socio-political system depends largely on the population employing it

@Hagel Another thing: I think a system and a people are coupled in many ways

Like, a good system will improve the people, and a good people will employ a good system

Yeah

Since we don't have wars or plagues anymore, it's important to keep R vs K breeding from going out of control with a system

But no system will be a people's salvation. Systems only emerge from good and strong rulers who can enforce and create them

how do you propose we go looking for strong rulers

That's why a good ruler may keep a paradise while he rules, but after he has died, the only lasting mark that he can leave is upon the people's nature itself (genetics and memetics), improving the chance for another good ruler to emerge in the future

We don't

everyone tries to fight for what he wants, that's how it works and that's how it will work

Fighting can be done economically or physically violently

or purely memetically

let me rephrase

As an individual, you find and follow a good leader, or you become one yourself

that sounds like a form of democracy

just substitute "vote for" in place of "follow"

Democracy is a cease fire agreement

What I described is more similar to a form of anarchism

which is always what you have anyway, people just pretend like it isn't the case

It is like democracy I suppose, but the resource is might and intellect, not quantity of followers

Quality of followers starts mattering too, not only quantity

It is like democracy in that every system is an arena for conflict, including democracy

sounds like anarcho-capitalism

anarcho-capitalism, to me, seems like an express route to third-world status

Anarcho capitalism agrees on non physical conflict