Absolutely!
The rulers immediate family would be related to him/her.
It would have happened before history was being recorded.
I believe the correct word would be a "monarch"
This could be described as "tyranny" or by "absolute dictatorship." A modern example would be Kim Jong-un, ruler of North Korea.
The first step would be to read the invisible mathematical problems.
If the private sector could not solve the problems than government would;
I would evolve man to a point beyond the problems he creates himself, they can do the rest.
An absolute monarch is a ruler (king or queen) who does not allow anyone to disagree with them. Their rule is law. During the Enlightenment the people in countries around the world were encouraged to take charge of their lives, their politics and their countries. In order for the people to take charge their ruler must be willing to work with them - an absolute monarch would not be willing.
1. Why do you think that terms limits would resolved the problems that they are claimed to solve? or is the electorate to blame for legislative problems. 2. What arguments are articulated against term limits?
Thomas Hobbes, a philosopher, believed that life without an absolute ruler would be chaotic and unstable. In his work "Leviathan," he argues that a strong, central authority is necessary to prevent the state of nature, where individuals act in their self-interest and conflict is common.
you can solve it by just looking at it really good. another way is to measure it with a ruler..........
In the same way that you would solve equations because equivalent expressions are in effect equations