I concur, it will help curb corruption if we have a codified elite class. Monarchies usually encourage Aristocracy which ofc is much better than have a class of elites who operate outside of the law.
Nice cherrypicking. But Monarchism has been a successful form of governance for thousands of years. I could cherrypick the Spanish civil war and say ''oh look at how peaceful republics were during that period'' but I won't because I'm not out to make myself look retarded. Also there will always be an elite class you retard we're talking about codification. Because the illegal underhanded elite classes that exist within republics today are so much better, they're just fantastic. I especially love the bribery and back room deals.
@MGSB HRE was a) an empire and b) not really ruled by a single ruler. When it was unified by a single ruler, it ruled most of Europe. But carry on, I'm sure anarchism would've done better.
and what if this monarch is completely incompotent?
Ever looked at England? They had several terrible kings, but still worked. You have ministers and you have a few limits on depravity and you have the occasional rebellion.
God you're so dumb. Also why would a monarch be genocidal? Why would he kill his own subjects there never been 1 king who has killed his own subjects en masse in western history whereas there have been numerous democratically elected leaders who have genocided their own subjects.
There was hundreds of German Monarchs in the HRE. They waged nearly constant war against each other for hundreds of years, resulting in millions of deaths.
