Why People Still Want Kings
The most uncomfortable truth in any discussion of power is this:
Oppression survives because it is wanted.
Not universally. Not consciously. But deeply enough to matter.
People like to believe they are ruled against their will. That tyranny is imposed from above, that domination is something done to them. This belief preserves innocence. It allows outrage without self-examination.
But history tells a harsher story.
Kings did not rule by force alone. They ruled because enough people found relief in being ruled.
Freedom is not the natural human state. It is a learned discipline. And discipline is frightening.
A king removes responsibility.
A ruler absorbs uncertainty.
A hierarchy tells you where you belong.
When fear outweighs agency, submission becomes attractive.
This is the part no revolution likes to admit.
When systems collapse, people do not immediately seek autonomy. They seek order. They look for someone to decide. Someone to command. Someone to promise safety in exchange for obedience.
This instinct never disappeared. It just learned new disguises.
Today, people do not kneel to thrones—they kneel to authority narratives. Experts. Leaders. Institutions. Anyone who speaks with certainty during chaos.
Certainty is intoxicating.
It quiets anxiety.
It resolves ambiguity.
It tells the mind it can rest.
And so people outsource judgment.
They stop asking hard questions because questioning requires courage, and courage demands responsibility. It is easier to defer. Easier to follow. Easier to believe that someone else has already thought it through.
This is not stupidity.
It is fear management.
Kings once promised divine order. Modern rulers promise stability, security, normalcy. Different language. Same transaction.
Give us control. We’ll handle the chaos.
And many people accept—gratefully.
There is also another truth, rarely spoken aloud:
Hierarchy flatters those near its top.
Even oppressive systems create beneficiaries. Advisors. Enforcers. Gatekeepers. Middle managers of power. People who gain identity, status, or survival by aligning with authority.
Not everyone is oppressed equally. Some are rewarded for compliance.
This creates defenders.
People will rationalize almost anything if it grants them safety or significance. They will call obedience realism. They will call submission maturity. They will call resistance naïve.
And when someone challenges the structure, the response is rarely curiosity.
It is hostility.
Because challenges threaten more than power—they threaten psychological shelter.
If the king is unnecessary, then obedience was a choice.
If the system is unjust, then participation was complicity.
If freedom is possible, then fear was the real ruler.
That realization is unbearable for many.
So they reject it.
They mock dissent. They shame resistance. They cling harder to the hierarchy that absolves them of responsibility.
This is why kings always return.
Not because tyrants are brilliant—but because human beings are afraid of standing alone.
The Divine Right of Kings did not survive through force. It survived through psychology. Through the unspoken agreement between ruler and ruled:
You decide. I will obey. And neither of us will have to face the weight of freedom.
This is the deal still being made today.
Until people are willing to confront their own desire for certainty, authority will always find a willing host.
The crown does not persist because it is imposed.
It persists because enough people are still looking for someone to wear it.
The Crown You Forgot to Question — a deeper examination of how divine authority evolved into modern systems of control. Click the link below to read.
https://www.scribd.com/document/981232959/The-Crown-You-Forgot-to-Question
Crowns Without Consent: The Divine Right That Never Died — an unfiltered audio exploration of power, consent, and the structures that replaced the crown. Click the link below to listen.
https://danderton2019.podbean.com/e/crowns-without-consent-the-divine-right-that-never-died/

Comments
Post a Comment