An oligarchy where leaders frequently change based mostly on merit, with a social ladder accessible to anyone, is as close as you get to social harmony. As long as everyone has a shot, society is generally happy. (Note that a functioning economy is also needed for this.)
Democracy is mostly a safeguard to kick out the Napoleons before it’s too late.
Also, if you have strong local politics (like in the US, UK, or Australia), you might see more impact from your vote, as opposed to countries where you vote for a party and they pretty much do what they want for their term.
How are you defining oligarchs? I feel like in practice this term is only used to describe Russian businessmen, so I’m not sure if everyone has the same understanding.
I think the definition of “oligarch” is being stretched a little in the article, so I’m using it for my argument. Is Elon Musk an oligarch? Is Zuckerberg an oligarch?
My point is that as long as those at the top rotate and everyone has a shot, whether they’re called oligarchs or not doesn’t make much difference to the common person.
An oligarchy where leaders frequently change based mostly on merit, with a social ladder accessible to anyone, is as close as you get to social harmony. As long as everyone has a shot, society is generally happy. (Note that a functioning economy is also needed for this.)
Democracy is mostly a safeguard to kick out the Napoleons before it’s too late.
Also, if you have strong local politics (like in the US, UK, or Australia), you might see more impact from your vote, as opposed to countries where you vote for a party and they pretty much do what they want for their term.