I think it suffers from the same lack of data that other similar arguments have. Do we know for certain that bad leaders are capable of remaining both bad and in leadership for multiple centuries at a time? We’ve never seen it done.
Arguably, the reason bad leaders persist as long as they do is the fact that the populace does not have sufficient motivation and knowledge to oppose them. Immortal citizens could be expected to be exceptionally zealous about protecting their freedoms. They would also accumulate experience over time and thus be harder to fool.
I think it suffers from the same lack of data that other similar arguments have. Do we know for certain that bad leaders are capable of remaining both bad and in leadership for multiple centuries at a time? We’ve never seen it done.
Arguably, the reason bad leaders persist as long as they do is the fact that the populace does not have sufficient motivation and knowledge to oppose them. Immortal citizens could be expected to be exceptionally zealous about protecting their freedoms. They would also accumulate experience over time and thus be harder to fool.
Immortal citizens might also be less inclined to risk their lives fighting in a civil war to overthrow a bad leader.