Nothing says they'll be good at it, but someone who relies on the outputs of society is encouraged to govern sustainably. Rebellion costs money, and is usually easier to quell with honey than vinegar.
Login to reply
Replies (1)
And if they're not good at it someone who is is incentivized to fill in the gap, aided by the rebellion who would seek to depose the bad ruler.
I'm not sure an absolute monarch is best, and there is probably cultural variance -- you never step in the same river twice. But the generational incentives make way more sense than election cycles...