[On the Instability of Republics]

[SunTzu123]

Which is why FDR was quite successful. With the way he commanded government in his day, he was edging in on dictatorship. (Not that he actually got there, sadly.)

Im glad he did not become dictator the new deal was a failure.

[BrotherhoodUK]

Oh, god, what have I unleashed.....

Right, no flaming over FDR. He got America through a war it didn't want but was forced into. I think FDR did unbelievably well considering his leadership and position.

And Conrad, I must say that although there are good rulers, there are many more bad rulers. I'd prefer someone that we'd chosen.

[SunTzu123]

Hopefully, we would be blessed with a benevolent suzerain in the form of the emperors Nerva [96-98 CE], Trajan [98-117 CE], Hadrian [117-138 CE], Antoninus Pius [138-161 CE] and Marcus Aurelius [161-180 CE].

after the fall of the Julio-Claudian dynasty, the Principate was reformed and princeps was no longer a position extended on the basis of merit allowing future emperors to designate their own heir without those heirs having to earn the position through years of success and public favor.

[Bree Fletcher]

Oh, god, what have I unleashed.....

Right, no flaming over FDR. He got America through a war it didn't want but was forced into. I think FDR did unbelievably well considering his leadership and position.

Basically, here's what I think about the guy: America was about to die. The great depression nearly sent the country into a deathspin that could have ended nowhere good. (fascism, even?) The fact is, America didn't exactly prosper under him, no. But it didn't actually die either, when most people who could've tried to stop its death would've failed.

[SunTzu123]

it was the war that got America out of the great depression. It got bussiness's converted to making goods for the war effort got people back to work again

[Conrad_Jalowski]

Actually, the hegemons and sovereigns of the Nerva-Antonine Principate were chosen based on their abilities and service to the Roman state due to the lack of offspring of each successive ruler. For example, the benevolent yet vacillating Nerva chose the pugnacious or bellicose Trajan as his imperial successor based on his great popularity with the Roman field armies as opposed to Nerva himself who has scorned by the former soldiers of the Flavian dynast Domitian.

While you are correct in that beginning with the Flavian emperor Vespasian the vicegerent of the Princeps and the succession line were to be hereditary and no longer based on merit or the particular level of competency, the rulers of the Nerva-Antonine line designated as their successors popular and successful individuals who were deemed worthy of the emblems of imperial authority and the mantle of supreme hegemony.

[Holeypaladin]

What would be the closest option to an Achenaran-style Imperium?

[Wildor]

I guarantee all of you.

If you ever get a dictator, you will not want another.

[King Dylan]

You need an absolute leader, one that can make decisions quickly and that doesn't need to be worried to please (or lie) to the people, just so he/she can have another term in office. Naturally, I voted for despotism. But to be honest, my favoured option isn't listed.

[Ikeni]

An authoritarian government is a better choice to maximise efficiency of the state (as long as all of the rulers are capable that is), whereas democracy or republic allows for far more corruption, inefficiency and extended bureaucracy all to allow people the right to "have a say".