I think it would be the best, but of course the alternativves you mention wouldn't be complete, unstoppable disaster like democracy is

Republics are an improvement upon "democracy" but still shit

I support starship troopers government tbh

Byzantine government would be gr8 if they had a clearly defined succession law

That's what I appreciate about the Russian government under the Romanovs, they had a fixed line of succession after Catherine the Great

I find politics boring to follow

My dudes

This is my watch

http://www.haveston.com/hav041a2.html

Do you think this strap would go well

What is this, /fa/?

Who cares? It's not a rolex, so obviously its made to show time, not look pretty.

My dad gave me the patek but I'm seriously afraid I'd knock it into a wall lol

So i wear this seiko diver as my daily

Democracy just sounds really stupid to support. It's just people saying "Yay, the people I hate could gain power and I love this system because muh freedumz".

limited suffrage democracy *might* work in a culturally and racially homogenous society

How about a legislative body composed of nobility and clergy with one strong leader who gains power by divine righ-wait that sounds like pre French Revolution monarchy

Mozalbete is right tbh, heredity does sound best

However, in a society as adamantly anti monarchist as the US, I would prefer a republic with a hereditary ruling class

The best system of monarchy is hereditary, but the monarch can choose someone from outside of the family to be his heir if he thinks they would be better.

Yeah or an elective monarchy that selects one the previous monarch's sons

i believe in for-life high power executive position

That's pretty much how most Germanic monarchies operated at first, anyways

You shouldn't give any power to anyone below the monarch or clergy because if you give the people even an inch, they will keep taking more.

You have a point there @de ton, nobles did have a tendency to weaken the kingdom

How about a fascism-level of contentrated power along with militarism combined with a monarchy and some nobility?

No, the Church can deal with local/provincial government.

East Asian societies did nobility well in the sense that in order to maintain noble status every generation of nobles had to be military officers or civil servants

If you ceased to be useful to the realm you became a commoner, pretty much

That still gives too much power to too many people.

So no nobility?

Church and Monarch

Have only monarch+royals, then clergy, then everyone else is a commoner?

Yes

What would be the status of landowners vs peasants, then?

What about royals who are not immediate family of the monarch?

Landowners are the bosses of the peasants who work their land.

Would landowners be given any special privilege or should they be content with at least having their wealth

Non-immediate family royals are still royals.

What about granting noble titles but only to royals who are too far down the line of succession? Such as duchies or counties?