THINKING: Ok. So, attacking and falsifying my own possible desire for unnecessar

THINKING:

Ok. So, attacking and falsifying my own possible desire for unnecessary monopoly, one can create a natural law nomocracy with a minority, majority, or homogenous population.

1) An Aristocratic Minority (a Caste) – Military, Judiciary, Sheriffs

2) A Republican Majority(a Polity) – Add Banking and Industry

3) A Democratic Monopoly (a People) – Add labor and svcs.

Let’s say you take a caste of people, like the spartans, and specialize in rule. If that rule is by natural law, and produces commons for both rulers and ruled, I think that’s a great arrangement. You might call this fascism, but you might actually have a population ‘hire’ you to rule them for their own good.

Let’s say you take a set of aristocratic families and their relations constituting either a sizable minority or a majority, and rule by natural law and produce commons that the nobility and the propertied classes choose to. You might all this oligarchy, but it certainly appears to be the most successful model on earth.

Let’s say you take a whole population set up an hereditary monarchy, a regional nobility, professional administration(private not public) and a market for the commons where all classes have virtual houses that can produce commons through trade.

I mean, you can implement Natural Law (Nomocracy) via Aristocracy, Republic, or Democracy, with minority, majority, totality (homogenous), by starting with a monarchy, adding a senate, adding houses for the classes with levels of enfranchisement depending upon whom you do and do not want to include.

So is that all I need to produce? And, why do we need a homogenous polity? I mean, arguably demand-for-enfranchisement is actually a bad thing?