Ruling a kingdom/ an empire

What are the rules to ruling rightfully and correctly? What makes a King or an Emperor a good ruler?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Be a populist

To not do what Napoleon did, i.e. solving every dispute with war and alienating all of your allies and potential allies.

I agree with you diplomacy is important for every ruler. But what about internal policies and such?
Wouldn't you risk losing the support of the elite by doing so?

In terms of internal policies Napoleon was excellent, arguably the greatest lawmaker France ever had (with Napoleon III a close second). It’s just unfortunate he couldn’t translate these skills into foreign affairs as well.

>solving every dispute with war

So, how exactly do you solve the issue "countries are declaring war on me" without war, genius?
As far as I know, Napoleon, started only two wars (Spain in 1808 and Russia in 1812) and by that point he already had conquered most of Europe in defensive wars started against him (third and fourth coalitions)

If they're anything but a meritocracy then fuck the elite. It's the people who make things happen

But how can one govern without the support of the rich and powerful? Look how it ended for Emperor Domitian for pissed off the entirety of the Roman Senate

Do what the people want

It sounds simple, but it can be hard sometimes. The people will put you into power, they can remove you from power.

Saddam Hussein was the one that figured this out.

>Free education
>Improved literary rate
>Nationalized oil
>Helped the middle class
>Improved healthcare and infrastructure
>Empowered farmers and strengthened agriculture

Just keep the people happy

I’m not accusing him of being the aggressor all the time (statistically he wasn’t), but every time someone challenged his Continental System his first course of action was to declare war on them - Portugal, the Papal States, Russia. Spain was also an unbelievable clusterfuck of stupidity that far outweighs the decision to invade Russia. Napoleon knew foreign affairs only in terms of war or the threat of war. He never really cared for giving good diplomacy a chance like his enemies did, and that’s why literally everyone in Europe except Italy ganged up on him by the end, even when a few years earlier he dominated the entire continent. Even though officially most of the wars were waged against him, his hyper aggressive foreign policy was what provoked this most of the time.

It went well for Genghis

True enough, I guess charisma is one other thing a good leader needs.
There will always be people who will oppose you though. How does the King or Emperor have to deal with that?

>There will always be people who will oppose you though. How does the King or Emperor have to deal with that?

Follow Frederick the Great’s advice:
>My people and I have come to an agreement which satisfied us both. They are to say what they please, and I am to do what I please.

>>My people and I have come to an agreement which satisfied us both. They are to say what they please, and I am to do what I please.
That is a great advice

This,
Even if Napoleon wouldn't have been a 10/10 general, he would have been recognized as one of the greatest men of France just by his internal policies with numerous institutions always in work today (basis of french education system, basis of french administration system, bank of France, french territorial organisations, taxes system, FUCKING civil code, army organisations, court of audit, french canals, numerous bridges, religious toleration, ....)
All this in 10 years, the equivalent of two mandates today while being at war against all Europe. What current or past leader can brag about that?
For instance when he landed in Malta, although he only spent five days on the island, he opened up the ghettos, abolished feudalism, instituted equality before law and completely overhauled the island's administration.
Just imagine the incredible genius was Napoleon

Does rich and powerful really apply within the society of scattered Mongol tribes? It's not as if they were nobles in a pre-existing hierarchy that needed to be appeased by anything more than age-old looting but moreso.

They measured wealth in the amount of horses and livestock they owned. There were some families/tribes that owned thousands, and had for generations. These were the aristocracy of the steppe.

>Solving everything with war
It is not his fault when everyone else was joining coalitions and declaring it on him. You sound like a jaded Anglo.

A bad ruler is one who is hated by his people
A good ruler is one who is loved by his people
The best ruler is one who is not known by his people

youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs

>There will always be people who will oppose you though. How does the King or Emperor have to deal with that?
Keep the people on your side so Reigne change is hated
Just read the leviathan and the prince
That’ll solve all philosophical questions you could ever have

>joining coalitions
Maybe by sticking to 1880 French borders and marching home at the end of the war rather than continually occupying countries he could have peace

The people answer to the king.

The king answers to God.

>greatest law maker
>causes the rise of terrorism
Really makes you think

best post
the moarch should be there to ensure his subjects are free

t. Pol Pot

The French Revolution started the decline of Europe.

>Socialism
>Atheism
>Materialism/Naturalism
>Evolutionism
>Occultism/re-emergence of Paganism
>Pseudo-science or Scientism

All of these things can be traced back to the French Revolution.
It was basically a micro-cosm of Lucifer's rebellion against God.

>Just read the leviathan and the prince
>That’ll solve all philosophical questions you could ever have
Thanks for the recommendation. Will do

I remember Napoleon signing peace with Britain at one stage, any guess as to who broke that treaty?

I agree with you but I think you misposted this.

Any guess as to who made the first shadow move
Oh yeah Napoleon

>What makes someone a good ruler?
Strength above all. A ruler must be strong enough no to fall to selfishness under the corrupting power. A ruler must love the people he rules over, and must fight for the common good with his power against all that is evil

>arguably the greatest lawmaker
>Spreading phony liberalism and rampant nationalism is a good thing

Don't forget:
>Nationalism
>"democratic" institutions

Underrated post. Everyone in this thread neglects the importance a higher being plays in a monarchy. Whether explicitly expressed or not, without the people's belief that the Kings authority comes from a higher power he will be constantly undermined and not respected.