Does a more technologically advanced civilization (compared to

File: IMG_0701.jpg (39KB, 600x337px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 600x337px

>>55179343
Pic related and will stay that way until we have real life examples.

>>55179343
The moment an ASI pops up, society as we know it will cease to exist, either having been destroyed, or changed so drastically as to be beyond comprehension.

>>55179343
It's mostly path dependent anon. Arguably a monarchy has better reaction time and long term planning, but many nations will be democracies because governments are heavily based on the military tech of their founding era.

Think priest vs warrior. In high-skill/high-cost eras, knightly norms predominate; in low-skill/mid-cost eras whoever manipulates the proles best (commies, fascists, Americans...) gets the best army.

I suppose if you're super advanced, you could do wacky stuff like crypto-locked strategic weapons owned by an corporate board through blockchains, who elect a CEO-king for life or until fired.

>>55179343

What setting? Political arrangements are driven by history, culture, and technology. Comparative position doesn't play a role that I'm aware of, except when you have a puppet regime of a larger power.

The biggest consideration is technology. Which obviously is driven by your setting.

Your OP seems encumbered by some assumptions that you aren't stating. Are you a Marxist of some kind? (Mainly the focus on comparative performance and the scare quotes around democracy hint at that.) If so, then just use marxs model, maybe updated with world system theory.

Otherwise, consider some other integrative views of history. The best for what you're talking about is Toddler. His book The Third Wave is a variant on technological determinism that incorporates culture, economics, politics, etc. He predicts government types being driven by information availability and density, the pace and cultural ideal of work, and education requirements of a national economy. Spengler, Toynbee, Diamond, and Aristotle all have a less technocentric view and don't do much to predict governmental forms but obviously are classics.

>>55179343
No matter what the level of technological development, you're probably going to see a form of government where either the most economically important or the most militarily important class are the ones who wield the most power. There's an almost infinite variety of ways you could spin this.

I think your mom should rule

>>55179343
Democracy rotting towards oligarchy and lower.

Advancement is driven by competition. This is why wars produce so much technological advancement: You let somebody sit, they sit. You threaten to one-up them in some way, they get off their asses and start scrounging up every possible method to one-up you back. Space Race is the most obvious example: We land a few people on the moon in the 60-70s just to show the Soviets how big our dick was. Half a century later, we... have launched a few more shitty probes and everyone has their own satellite. That's about it. Without somebody to wave your dick at, there's no space travel.

So to really get advanced, you need someone to dickwave at. This is easier when you've got more people at the table for two reasons. One, it gives a chance to dickwave against yourselves. Two, that applies to whoever's in charge; you can't maintain your position (as easily) by just existing, you've got to fend off all these vultures who will claim your throne if you hold still.

The problem is that all of this is a hill. Once you get to the top, you stop having anyone to dickwave against, and the ossification sets in. The will to do better dries up, so everyone just kind of lounges about doing their own thing, which inevitably involves consolidating power away from all that obnoxious competition. The once-mighty empire slowly decays and eventually falls, usually like a dozen different times in different ways, until it's forced to compete with things again.

At which point there's some kind of purge (violent or otherwise) of much of the old cancer and the cycle can begin anew.

>>55179343
A truly advanced society would have a Cryptarchy. The governing agencies would be so sophisticated that they would be effectively invisible. AI's would manage society from behind the scenes, while humans pursue their own agendas unaware that their lives are as carefully tended as any beloved pet's.

File: People.jpg (78KB, 625x440px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 625x440px

>>55179343
Well, advanced technology requires a high general knowledge base within the population, some form of educational system, and significant urbanization, things which in general lead people away from dictatorships.

The other two I think feed off each other. Democracy is the natural goal of people trying to get away from dictatorship, but there are so many economic and social and cultural forces that support oligarchies, its very difficult to get free of them. Every democracy has been based on one so far, and it's unlikely we'd ever really get free of that. Honestly, if we did, it probably wouldn't be for the best anyway.

>>55179343
They can be anything, it's fiction.

>>55179343
Technocratic state is typically what would happen.

Once society gets smart enough to realize that voting for popular people is a stupid idea.

Otherwise god-ai show up