A Hindu Dynasty rules India from the 1400s

they are divided people, every tribe got blood feud with one another, just follow basic policy of divide and conquer, if you have to make marriage alliance accomplish it then do just that. use loyal tribe to wipe out those who won't bend the knee.

Indeed, and replace the tribes that were wiped out with loyal troops and people from the other factors of the Empire.

How sustainable would this Empire be? There will be Emperors who aren't as good as their predecessors or successors.

By the modern day I can see modern day Pakistan, India and Bangladesh making up the Indian state.
 
Indeed, and replace the tribes that were wiped out with loyal troops and people from the other factors of the Empire.

How sustainable would this Empire be? There will be Emperors who aren't as good as their predecessors or successors.

By the modern day I can see modern day Pakistan, India and Bangladesh making up the Indian state.
i can see the eventual civil war in future, toppling of this dynasty and rise of a new one, its survival depends on two things, shared identity, and ideology and language, because if you can convince the population that they got better benefits if they remain within mother nation then empire is sustainable, most of the colonial empire was situated in different continents thus they were much harder to rule also colonies like that only served to extract resources for their owners, so if you can enforce an ideology that will survive beyond any kind of dynasty, i can see eventual rise of democracy because no matter how enlighted no autocrats wants to surrender absolute power.
so we will see a clash of interest, maybe it will turn into a constitutional monarchy.

"We are told to remember the idea, not the man, because a man can fail. He can be caught. He can be killed and forgotten. But four hundred years later an idea can still change the world. I've witnessed firsthand the power of ideas. I've seen people kill in the name of them; and die defending them."
 
I'd argue at most executive monarchy is what we'd see especially in the wider world of this timeline where the idea of democracy in the form we know it today is laughable and not imaginable
 
ohhh, like??
Instead of this elaborate charade we have now, some countries will have elections where the candidates are chosen by the crown and put forward for the public to vote on. In other countries there might be a parliament but the crown does the main legislative work. In other places the crown directly meets the people and addresses theirnissues
 
Instead of this elaborate charade we have now, some countries will have elections where the candidates are chosen by the crown and put forward for the public to vote on. In other countries there might be a parliament but the crown does the main legislative work. In other places the crown directly meets the people and addresses theirnissues
read this page, https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...ar-trek-timeline.398608/page-10#post-13780884

read Part 2: 2000-2030: The Next Generation - Life Inside the Eastern Alliance, particularly Cold but Fair - Internal Politics and the Precinct System. that seem to fit most, ironically that story is also about indo-centric superstate.
 
read this page, https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...ar-trek-timeline.398608/page-10#post-13780884

read Part 2: 2000-2030: The Next Generation - Life Inside the Eastern Alliance, particularly Cold but Fair - Internal Politics and the Precinct System. that seem to fit most, ironically that story is also about indo-centric superstate.
Cool and whilst there would be a United States it wouldn't come tonhold nearly as much influence as it does now politically. In Europe executive and constitutional monarchies would be the norm, with whatever democratic institutions there are being in the hands of the crown not anyone else.
 
Nothing stopping them abusing their power just as there's nothing stopping elected leaders abusing their powers.

And not for India.

Some European monarchs control 40% share of power.

In Britain the crown has 70% control
 
Nothing stopping them abusing their power just as there's nothing stopping elected leaders abusing their powers.

And not for India.

Some European monarchs control 40% share of power.

In Britain the crown has 70% control
you can at least impeach elected ministers, can you do that in case of rulers?
 
And how often does impeachment happen? Barely ever. A monarch is tied to the future of their country and elected official can fuck off after five years
yes, but what stops him abusing his people, you can not just expect people will accept the abuse with a smile in their faces, there will be dissatisfaction, there will be protests, and autocrats always try force to deal with them, and then that will spark the revolution. civil war is a terrible thing look at Syria for example.
 
Top