What are the pros and cons of these political parties:monarchy, aristocracy, oligarchy, dictatorship?

Question

what are the pros and cons of these political parties:
1. monarchy
2. aristocracy
3. oligarchy
4. dictatorship

Answer 1

1 - Cons: Self serving and absolute power (leading to absolute corruption). Pros: Centralized power may make for faster decisions and actions.

2 - Cons: Same as #1. Pros: Since it is a group, decisions/actions might be more measured.

3 - Same as #2

4 - Same as #1, although perhaps even more self serving because they don't have the 'legitimacy' of birth and so they tend to be more paranoid.

Answer 2

Pros Of Aristocracy

Answer 3

Heres the rest of my answer which got cut off still on WWE cons Same Old Sh*t: Nothing ever seems new or different in the WWE its just the same guys facing off against each other mostly because WWE half@*** pushes guys towards the main event. But it really is getting tiring of seeing Orton, trips, cena, batista, edge, and taker facing off against the same guys over and over and over. The HHH vs Orton and Orton vs Cena Feuds are prime examples it was too much last year and got extremely boring. Those fueds were a big part of why I only occasionally watch WWE anymore because I am tired of seeing the same crap every PPV. Tag Division: Hart Dynasty is the only real tag team in it, and shomiz and truth and morrison wont be together 3 months down the line nuff said. PPVs: They Cost 50 bucks a piece and they are decent at best. Take mania for example my sister ordered it and she invited me over to watch it I was like why not at least Im not the one wasting money. So I go to watch it honestly it seemed like just another WWE PPV and I wasn't really impressed by any match on the card. If WWE is supposed to be the best promotion out there and they are putting on shows like that as their self entitled grandest stage of them all. It is sad. And to all the people who actually think that 26 was a great mania let alone a great PPV go back to the years 2001 - 2005 for WWE and look at some old PPVs back then they extremely better. WWE can do much better than they are but choose not to because they know people no matter what will spend money to buy them its sad really. if TNA wasn't what got me into wrestling in 2003 I probably wouldn't watch it right now. And if danielson wasn't on NXT(the only WWE show I watch consistently) and swagger didn't just become champ I wouldn't watch WWE either. So to all the people who are all about WWE vs TNA really it doesn't matter since both promotions aren't that great right now. I suggest you try watching ROH and DGUSA better wrestling and their PPVs dont cost more than 20 bucks. But if thats a little "too much" wrestling for you and you need more "entertainment", even though the sport is called Pro Wrestling and you can never have enough, then watch PWG and Chikara its wrestling but with comedy and is highly entertaining.

Answer 4

These aren't political parties, they are systems of government.
As for a comparison of them, there isn't enough room here, and that's coming from someone who's probably set a record for long-winded answers.

Answer 5

you need a lot more space to sum that up. Try the dictionary and you will see that all are bad