I've been thinking a lot about the problem of 'libido dominandi' (or 'the lust for power') in the political sphere, the ramifications of it, the incentive systems and structures that exacerbate it, and likewise the incentive systems and structures that help abate it. I think it is one of the central causes for concern in political systems. It corrupts the leader who is power-craven, making them emotionally enfeabled, and within short order incredibly corrupt or much worse arrogant with "good intentions." Because of this, I think it is the central cause for the eventual failure of Democracies and Republics. In fact, the leaders chosen in a Democracy or Republic have to choose to run for office, which means that right from the get go they lust for power. In other words, the problems of libido dominandi are baked into the very nature of a Democracy/Republic. What I find interesting about demarchy (or sortition) is that it is a system that at least has a chance to choose individuals who don't want power, or an even better arrangement, individuals who absolutely hate the job and want to do as little of it as possible. When I was trying to think through other institutional arrangements where this might possibly be the case, monarchism was another natural fit. True, there were monarchs who wanted power, like "l'etat c'est moi" Sun King, but there were also rulers like Pedro II, who very much seemed like he absolutely detested being King. What do you guys think about the "lust for power," demarchy, etc.?