Where did we get the idea we need kings and queens?
You can see the mess you get when you leave it to the people to decide matters. You need a leader, hereditary monarchy is one way of going about it, dynastic elected leaders is another.
Emothic Von Hellsing
I have more food, and resources then you. If you want some of it, then you must follow me. Human nature. Before kings and queens there were tribal leaders.
around the neolithic revolution, and it's an outgrowth of tribal leaders and family patriarchs and matriarchs.
The first king was the most powerful of chiefs who had accumulated the most followers, money, and might. It gradually became a position that was passed down from father to son. The concept of monarchy has changed over the many years -- there are very few absolute monarchs whom have all of the power. Most of today's monarchies are constitutional, where powers are shared by an hereditary branch of government and an elected one, in order to assure that not one government entity has all power.
Society s have always had a leader and that was usually the strongest Male, this also applies in the animal kingdom
Originally villages in different parts of the country had chiefs, who were later called kings, and the king of one part of Britain would attack another part of the country to gain control. Eventually there were fewer kings with more land each until one king controlled the whole country. Then the different countries in Britain and Europe fought each other. Then we developed modern government but the king or queen remained as a symbolic head of the country.
"We" as the human race in general?
Sir Prince Kenny
Simple, the local successful strong man, passed everything on to his son.
Power has been accumulated by individuals since pre-history. But at some point, the rules of hereditary monarchy became preferable to mortal combat in choosing a leader. Kings, queens, princes, dukes, earls, freedman slave form a ranked hierarchical arrangement for a society. More interesting is where we got the idea that we don't need a hierarchical arrangement of society and should move to a more level, democratic model.
Strange country, because if we walk past Westminster Hall next to Parliament, there we will see the statue of Oliver Cromwell MP. If only he could have created a 'Republic' we would not now be ruled over by Hun-Krauts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Statue_of_Oliver_Cromwell_outside_the_Palace_of_Westminster.jpg Instead Cromwell made the mistake of creating a dynasty with his son taking over after him. The worst is the vile wife of Chas One a Catholic, had the body of Cromwell dug up and hanged in chains when her son Chas Two was made kingperson - the restoration of blind monarchy. Thus we have no burial place or shrine to perhaps the greatest parliamentarian of them all. Oliver Cromwell MP. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDsAn_u70tw&t=12s
pit bulls bite
no country should put up with it
It morphed out of local strong guys. Humans always plague other humans, so for each band of humans living, hunting and farming together there was always one defender who was ended up being the guy who saved the day during the latest raid. That guy quite often would also end up being called upon to settle disputes. If the group wanted to carry out their own raid against some other band, he would be chosen to lead. You see where this is going, right? When several groups get together, of course there has to be some decision made about which of the group-leaders is going to be the head leader. So as the grouping of groups gets bigger and bigger you finally reach a point where the fella chosen as the best of the best of the best comes to be considered king. The next issue is, what happens when this "king" gets old and feeble. Do you start the whole process of fighting and killing all over again to determine the new guy? Yeah, that did occur - but after a few bouts of that, somebody reasonable probably said "Let's not go through all that chaos over again...let's just have the old king tell us who the new king should be." And so it was. And then eventually some king said "The next king shall be...my son!" And, as you know, sometimes that worked and sometimes it didn't. So, I guess the answer to "Where did we get the idea?" is that it arose from necessity way back when groups of people had to deal with raids from their neighbors, and it just kinda grew into "kings and queens" by itself through an inevitable process of agglomeration.
In any society there is a need for an ultimate arbiter of disputes and setting the direction. This would originally have been set by popular acclaim. The idea of a hereditary ruler would have been based on the assumption that the original leader was so remarkable that some of his talent would continue through his sons. Unpopular leaders were overthrown by new leaders who had enough backing from their armies. It is quite recent that this has all been fossilised into an unshakeable right to rule in which kings and queens can ignore popular opinion and simply feather their own nests. But pride can come before a fall, as the French and Russians (and plenty of others) discovered.
Liberals still crave authoritarian rule. Of course, liberals are idiots.
We didn't get the idea, Kings and Queens imposed themselves on us and grew rich, enabling them to hire people to keep them in power.
Tulipata wapi wazo kwamba tunahitaji wafalme na malkia? Unaweza kuona fujo unayopata unapowaachia watu kuamua mambo. "Kama kuna kiongozi, utawala wa kifalme wa urithi ni njia moja ya kufanya hivyo, na viongozi wa kifalme waliochaguliwa ni njia nyingine.""" Emothic Von Hellsing Nina chakula zaidi, na rasilimali kuliko wewe. Ikiwa unataka sehemu yake, basi lazima unifuate. Asili ya kibinadamu. Kabla ya wafalme na malkia kulikuwa na viongozi wa makabila. Katika kipindi cha Neolithic, watu walianza kuunda familia za kifalme na za kifalme. Mfalme wa kwanza alikuwa mkuu mwenye nguvu zaidi ambaye alikuwa amekusanya wafuasi wengi zaidi, pesa, na nguvu. Hatua kwa hatua ikawa cheo kilichopitishwa kutoka baba hadi mwana. "Mafikiri ya kifalme yamebadilika sana katika miaka ya hivi karibuni, na kuna ""mfalme wa kifalme"" ambaye ana mamlaka ya kifalme." Katika nchi nyingi za kifalme, mamlaka ya serikali inashirikiwa na matawi ya urithi na moja iliyochaguliwa, ili kuhakikisha kwamba hakuna serikali moja yenye mamlaka yote. "Mashirika ya watu yamekuwa na kiongozi na kwa kawaida huyo ndiye aliyekuwa na nguvu zaidi, na hivyo ndivyo ilivyo katika wanyama pia.Kwanza vijiji vilikuwa na wakuu ambao baadaye waliitwa ""wafalme"" na mfalme wa sehemu moja ya Uingereza aliwashambulia wengine ili kupata mamlaka." Mwishowe kulikuwa na wafalme wachache zaidi na kila mmoja alikuwa na ardhi zaidi hadi mfalme mmoja alipodhibiti nchi nzima. Kisha nchi tofauti-tofauti za Uingereza na Ulaya zikapigana. "Hata hivyo, serikali ya kisasa ilibaki na mfalme au malkia kama ""kichwa cha nchi.""" "Sisi" kama jamii ya kibinadamu kwa ujumla? Sir Prince Kenny Simple, mtu mwenye mafanikio na mwenye nguvu wa eneo hilo, alimpa mwanawe kila kitu. Nguvu zimekusanywa na watu mmoja-mmoja tangu nyakati za kabla ya historia. Lakini wakati fulani, sheria za utawala wa kifalme wa urithi zikawa bora kuliko mapigano ya kibinadamu katika kuchagua kiongozi. Wafalme, malkia, wakuu, duques, earls, freedman mtumwa fomu ya cheo utaratibu wa cheo kwa ajili ya jamii. "Kitu cha kushangaza zaidi ni kwamba, ""Hatuna haja ya utaratibu wa jamii na tunapaswa kuhamia kwa kiwango cha juu zaidi, mfano wa kidemokrasia.""" "Hii ni nchi ya ajabu, kwa sababu ikiwa tutatembea karibu na Westminster Hall karibu na Bunge, tutaona sanamu ya Oliver Cromwell MP.""" Kama tu angeweza kuunda 'Jamhuri' hatungekuwa sasa tunatawaliwa na Hun-Krauts https: en.wikipedia.org wiki_file: Statue_of_Oliver_Cromwell_outside_the_Palace_of_Westminster.jpg Badala yake Cromwell alifanya kosa la kuunda nasaba na mwanawe kuchukua baada yake. "Mke wa Chas I, ambaye alikuwa Mkatoliki, alimwua Cromwell na kumfunga kwa minyororo wakati mwanawe Chas II alipofanywa kuwa mfalme, na hivyo kurudisha utawala wa kifalme wa kipofu.""" Hivyo hatuna mahali pa kuzikia au mahali patakatifu pa labda mbunge mkuu zaidi kati yao wote. Oliver Cromwell Mbunge. "Hii ni kwa sababu ""Pitbulls"" (pets) wa miaka 12 na ""Pitbulls"" wa miaka 12 na ""Pitbulls"" wa miaka 12 na ""Pitbulls"" wa miaka 12 na ""Pitbulls"" wa miaka 12 na ""Pitbulls"" wa miaka 12 na ""Pitbulls"" wa miaka 12 na ""Pitbulls"" wa miaka 12 na ""Pitbulls"" wa miaka 12 na ""Pitbulls"" wa miaka 12." Watu daima kuambukiza watu wengine, hivyo kwa kila kundi la watu kuishi, kuwinda na kilimo pamoja, kulikuwa na mlinzi mmoja ambaye alikuwa mwisho kuwa mtu ambaye kuokolewa siku wakati wa shambulio la hivi karibuni. Mara nyingi mtu huyo aliitwa pia kusuluhisha mabishano. Ikiwa kikundi hicho kingetaka kufanya uvamizi wao wenyewe dhidi ya kikundi kingine, angechaguliwa kuongoza. Unaona ambapo hii ni kwenda, haki? Kwa hivyo, ikiwa kuna makundi kadhaa, lazima iwe na uamuzi wa nani kati ya viongozi wa kikundi atakuwa kiongozi mkuu. Kwa hivyo, kwa kuwa makundi yanakuwa makubwa na makubwa, mwishowe unafikia hatua ambapo mtu aliyechaguliwa kama bora zaidi ya bora zaidi huanza kuchukuliwa kuwa mfalme. Suala linalofuata ni, ni nini hutokea wakati "mfalme" huyo anapokuwa mzee na dhaifu. Je, unaanza mchakato mzima wa kupigana na kuua tena ili kuamua mtu mpya? "Hiyo ni kweli, lakini baada ya mapigano machache ya ""Hebu tusifanye fujo hiyo tena, hebu tufanye mfalme wa zamani atuambie ni nani mfalme mpya.""" Na ndivyo ilivyokuwa. Na hatimaye mfalme fulani akasema "Mfalme wa pili atakuwa... mwana wangu!" Na, kama unavyojua, nyakati nyingine hilo lilifanya kazi na nyakati nyingine halikufanya hivyo. "Kwa hiyo, jibu la swali ""Kwa nini sisi kupata wazo hili?""" "Kama ilivyoelezwa hapo juu, ""mfano wa watu waliopaswa kukabiliana na uvamizi kutoka kwa majirani zao, na kwa namna fulani ilikua kuwa wafalme na malkia kwa yenyewe kupitia mchakato usioepukika wa mkusanyiko.""" Katika jamii yoyote kuna uhitaji wa mpatanishi wa mwisho wa mabishano na kuweka mwelekeo. Hii awali ingekuwa imewekwa na sifa ya watu wengi. Wazo la kuwapo kwa mtawala wa urithi lilitegemea dhana ya kwamba kiongozi wa awali alikuwa wa ajabu sana hivi kwamba baadhi ya vipawa vyake vingeendelea kupitia wanawe. Viongozi wasiojulikana waliangushwa na viongozi wapya waliokuwa na utegemezo wa kutosha kutoka kwa majeshi yao. Ni hivi karibuni kabisa kwamba yote haya yamekuwa fossilized katika haki ya kutatanisha ya kutawala ambapo wafalme na malkia wanaweza kupuuza maoni ya watu na tu manyoya viota vyao wenyewe. Lakini kiburi kinaweza kuja kabla ya kuanguka, kama vile Wafaransa na Warusi (na wengine wengi) walivyogundua. Wafuasi wa uhuru bado wanatamani utawala wenye mamlaka. Bila shaka, wanaharakati ni wapumbavu. """Wafalme na malkia walijilazimisha juu yetu na wakawa matajiri, wakiruhusu kuajiri watu ili kuwaweka madarakani."