4 ms·
> Crusader Kings III doesn’t actually feature any states in the narrow sense of the word; none of these rulers have a monopoly on the legitimate use of force I
by hourago 4y ago
> Crusader Kings III doesn’t actually feature any states in the narrow sense of the word; none of these rulers have a monopoly on the legitimate use of force
I find this kind of adaptations incredible interesting. Most games look at the past with modern eyes and create duplicates of all institutions from Judges to teachers. But it is not as simple as that.
I hope to see more this kind of approach in more movies and other mass media, even if it could be more historical accurate.
- pessimizer 4y ago> none of these rulers have a monopoly on the legitimate use of force It's a bit of a weird thing to say. It's an internal definition i.e. legitimacy is defined by the sovereign. There's no external force that grants legitimacy on a state or its actions; within a state, the sovereign (even popular ones) will attack uses of force that it hasn't sanctioned.
- int_19h 4y agoLegality is defined by the sovereign. Legitimacy is by definition external to the ruler - i.e. by society or at least some part of it (the "elites"). If the society accepts that some use of force by entities other than the nominal ruler is also legitimate - for example, if the nobles can have private armies and deploy them against each other in some conditions - then the ruler does not have monopoly on the use of force.