Answer: Primitive societies have one hierarchical form, either Tribalism or Monarchy, or some type of theocracy where God/King are the same guy. (Hmm, sounds familiar!) There are strengths and weaknesses to each of these, but I suppose you’d want to live in a monarchy, given the choice, assuming you were fortunate enough to live under a relatively just and stable monarch. It can be an efficient setup, although it has the obvious drawback of doing a poor job of representing ‘the people.’ And if someone in the leadership is corrupt it is up to the leadership culture to deal with it, which is obviously not good.
Modern societies employ competing systems, such as a Prime Minister, Parliament and Court, similar to the way the United States is set up, which was of course based upon theories devised during the Greek Classical period, among philosophers like Socrates, Democratus and Plato.
These philosophers realized there are advantages to a King, as for example in defending the nation. A King can call troops quickly and assemble generals to decide upon strategy, without lengthy deliberation by a parliament.
But of course a King can become too powerful, so the advantages of democracy are employed at the Parliamentary level, with representatives from various regions debating various matters before a final vote is tallied. This body can ultimately unseat the ruler, whatever you call him, or Executive. At least that’s the idea!
Finally, the court system is fashioned after a religious order, with a hierarchy of judges somewhat removed from the day to day matters of society by policies like lifelong appointments, which frees them to consider the loftier philosophical matters like “who shall be considered a person?” Because maybe you don’t want Toyota being considered a person!
