I suspect it’s not a coincidence that the countries which are best at equality overall (e.g. Sweden, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands) also tend to be monarchies. The monarch is a permanent symbol that life is unfair, and that if you take credit for your own success – rather than accepting that it’s primarily down to luck and that you owe a duty of care to the less fortunate in society – then you’re an arrogant prick.
Can\’t remember where I got this from but there\’s an alternative explanation possible.
The monarchies in these places have survived because they were the monarchies which were smart enough to bend with the winds and provide what the people wanted.
So it\’s a version of survivorship bias. Instead of looking only at those places which are still monarchies we need to look at all of the places that used to be and try to work out why some survived: and why most didn\’t.
Historical accident will certainly play a part. But there is still room in there for this argument: that those which survived were the more flexible ones, the grass rather than the oak tree from Aesop\’s fable.