How were monarchies able to last 1000s of years but dictatorships

File: I, Claudius.png (1MB, 1020x768px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1020x768px

Kingdoms: divine right of kings, hereditary, hierarchic societies.

Dictatorships: a layman is in charge, hard to connect with the country's past rulers, almost impossible to configure as a dynasty, society has already tasted democracy and liberalism.

>>2671451
>Dictatorships are relatively new, as non-monarchism only catched on after the french revolution

>Dictatorships have a tendency to self-destruct by declaring war on other nations (see hitler)

>Dictatorships run into crises when the dictator dies because there is no clear heir (see franco)

North Korea is the closest thing we have right now to a long-lasting dictatorship, and even that nation is slowly turning into a monarchy.

>>2671451
Maybe because they both existed in completely different times you fucking retard

>>2671451
Some points:
1. I can't recall a single dynasty that lasted 1000s of years?
2. Monarchies changed a lot from feudalism to absolutism to constitutionalism.
3. Secular dictatorships don't have divine right or a mandate of Heaven to back them.
4. They also don't have hundreds of years of tradition.
5. Loyalty to a family may have felt more natural than loyalty to the ideal of nation.
6. Monarchs weren't necessarily popular. The pope isn't popular with all Catholics but to be a Catholic you have to be loyal to the Holy See. It just so happens the pope sits on the throne, same as any king just happens to sit under the crown. If the pope or the king passes, the loyalty still stays, because it doesn't rest on the actual human being alone.
7. Secular dictatorships became big around the same time as democracies, where people generally enjoyed better living standards. Monarchies, back in the day, met merchant republics and the like, but no large democracies.

>>2671451
I don't see how monarchs killing and overthrowing other monarchs counts as monarchies lasting 1000s of years if the the same can't be applied to dictatorships

>>2671451
Pretty sure there's been exactly one royal family that lasted 1000+ years and mostly thanks to not having any power.

>>2671536
>I can't recall a single dynasty that lasted 1000s of years
Japan's.

>>2671649
They didn't rule for almost any of that time.