It's a common thing.

One day the greet you with flowers, the other-with stones.

Idk, you tell me what the people will do...
Will they do what you tell them to?
Im just exploring the fragility of your state

So if the fascist guy wants a stable control over the country he must either start killing more and more people, or secure the trust of the people, and the second one is pretty hard.

What I mean is that the moment the military guy takes over he would be forced with many situations he couldn't predict and he is not trained to.

if he just starts using random violence against everyone the people will start hating him and they would love the judiciary to put a case on him.

if he kills the judiciary, then, this is a legit reason for a coup against him.

https://twitter.com/BarakRavid/status/1174035448483778561 Looks like Israel won't be annexing any more territory

And this time around the corporate shrewd can use his resources to support another commander who will be more suitable for him.

I mean in a society build like that a stupid military brote will be nothing but a tool in the hands of the corporate elite.

remember something else-for a corporation it is CHEAPER to buy off the police, than to pay a full blown military.

A military consumes more resources than a police by the definition of it.

What is more expensive-guns and prisons or tanks, bases and boot camps?

If you are a corporate executive @Fuksias what would you choose?

I told you-there is NO WAY these three can come together to construct their "perfect' dictatorship, cause then, it would actually be good for the people if they achieve a state of balance among themselves.

It's a game where no one can win by themselves, but when they are in equilibrium it's best for everyone.

Can you get my idea?

Megalomainacs are over represented in the elite... Just because it wont work long term doesnt mean one wont try

Yes, he will.

And he will get killed by others like him.

That's the point of the system-always pit a megaloman against someone else like him. Works best for everyone.

The thing is that the system is so forth build that they can get but can not HOLD power for long, cause the moment they make a fatal mistake someone can take their heads off, too.

So they must either be suicidal, or, think twice before trying anything stupid.

Natural selection will do its thing over the generations in such kind of a system.

Instability is bad for the wealth of a nation

That's why democratic countries are superior on average, because they're more stable

The more people have to worry about survival, the less they are willing to invest

Disagree.

lol that's basic economics

It depends on the time span.

You can disagree all you want, every economist agrees on this

Too stable countries get into stagnation over a long enough period of time because they run out of fresh ideas.

May be the economists are wrong, then.

wtf are you talking about

Stagnation of what kind?

Tell me about a society that didn't get into a stagnation?

Stagnation for ideas, challenges, innovations, a stagnation that ultimately leaves societies under a stable but uninnovative rule.

Countries that apply democracy experience stagnation less often and for shorter periods because they have a more solid foundation for investment

Countries that experience stagnation eventually turn into a shit.

For example, it's hard to properly invest in business in the middle east because shit goes bad all the time

It's a law of Nature.