u/VeraciousOrange

I understand that the rebellion that occured was a result of a curse from the Prophet Nathan to King David for his murder of Bethsheba's husband. However, umder the circumstances of Absalom's decison to rebel against his father, I can't say I truly disagree and I have struggled with that. His brother Amnon, David's firstborn, raped their sister, and because he was David's firstborn, David did nothing. Absalom rebeled to avenge this injustice, and personally I cannot say I would not also cut my father out of my life for not condemning my brother's crime. It feels almost unjust for Absalom to be villanized as he is, although I know the lord is the personification of Justice. How do I reconcile this?

I am a budding monarchist in the sense that I recognize it is one of the most stable forms of government woth the greatest capacity for foresight in policy. However, the potential for abuse of power, while certainly not unique to monarchies, is still and issue. I believe the Brazilian Empire potenially had the greatest system for counteracting the tendency, having based their monarchy on a similar "Presidential" system to the USA with three branches of government and the Monarch ruling the Executive. If Brazil was not overthrown in a coup I believe Brazil would be a Super Power under the Emperor or Empress that still cherished the rights and liberties of its people. What do yiu think? Did Brazil have a superior set up for their monarchy, or was Pedro II just a superior breed of monarch?