A Philosopher King, as enunciated by Plato, that functions as a Benevolent Dictator is a wonderful concept, but there is only one problem, a benevolent dictator is a contradiction in terms. Historically those who seek power will subvert that power for themselves, if they can. The only time the Philosopher King model appears to have worked was in the Second Century AD when Rome was ruled for an extended period of time by the `Five Good Emperors'. Each Good Emperor chose his successor, and it actually worked until the greatest of them all, Marcus Aurelius screwed it all up and for some bizarre reason chose his malevolent son Commodus. The point is, we have yet to develop a selection process that will guarantee that the Philosopher King will exercise his power for the good of all, not the benefit of a few, or even one - himself. Unless this selection process can be guaranteed to always deliver an enlightened, altruistic leader Philosopher Kings have no place in modern government. I will stick with a democratic system with constitutional limits on a leaders power. This doesn't mean I am a fan of democracy, it is a lousy system of government that attracts power junkies. It is, however, better than the alternatives because it circumscribes the ambitions of those seeking power. Churchill once said of democracy: `It is the worst form of government except for all other forms of government'.