• Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s a hereditary system. Historically monarchy were hereditary and life long, but succession can be by the will of the previous monarch, appointed, or even democratically elected.

      Monarchy really only means that’s there’s one person at the top of a hierarchy. There can be few or many people below dealing with the actual work, and the responsibility of the system can be outlined by a constitution or absolute.

      Most monarchies can behave as a dictatorship if the monarch acts as a dictator. Monarchy and Dictatorship are two terms for describing autocracies, and there’s a lot of overlap between the two, but neither require or disallow hereditary succession, although monarchies usually end up with it.

        • Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Exactly as your other comment finds, monarchies can be dictatorships if the monarch really takes control. The typical method of control tends to be different though, with monarcies often using traditional power (such as heredity and religion) and dictatorships usually being the result of military force (coups and conquerings).

          I think the more useable difference is that a monarchy is a system ruled by a single person, while a dictatorship is a single person ruling. It depends on whether we’re talking about an existing system of hierarchy or a person at the top; a leader vs, well, a dictator.

          It’s not common, but I’d bet a dictatorship that lasts long enough will become a monarchy or institue some form of oligarchy, while a monarchy could become a dictatorship without changing much; maybe reverting with the dictators passing or simply collapsing.

        • Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well I was curious and did a little reading. It seems mostly in name. Though Monarchies tend to have a dive right component where Dictatorships seem to more often arise from a coup d’etat.

          • tias@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I live in a monarchy (Sweden) but the King does not control the country, and there’s no religious component to his position. I would not consider us a dictatorship.

            • Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Also as with most monarchs these days. They are no longer the seat of political power. I don’t think most people would consider Sweden to be ruled by a monarch.

        • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Depends on the rest of the systems surrounding the president. The US president, for example, has some power to do things unilaterally, but much of what a president does must be approved by other branches of the government to take effect. In that sense, the president isn’t the sole person at the top of the hierarchy, there’s a few bodies that that power is split between.