In this civilization, democracy was considered an abject failure. Within democratic systems, the masses are misled into believing votes provide influence. Infused with a sense of empowerment, the people are placated, even to the point of blaming themselves for economic and governmental failures — because after all, they got what they voted for.
In actuality of course, the most powerful within a nation retain their power and influence no matter the outcome of elections. Gains are theirs to keep and failures are passed on to the people. When an economy crumbles, the masses blame themselves and tighten their belts, even though it was those behind the scenes bleeding the economy dry to the point of collapse.
After pulling back the curtain, the people realized the futility of a democratic system and appointed a truly accountable leader. While people loathe bureaucrats, they love leaders, they follow leaders, people don’t have time to live their lives while worrying about economic and administrative matters. Therefore, a powerful yet accountable leader made sense. And if things sour, the leader is responsible.
Of course, how does a society soured on voting appoint a leader? A committee of 100 random citizens is formed. Initially, they create a list of 10 potential leaders based on predetermined criteria, and from that list, they select the leader (participants can opt out). All eyes are on this leader and her actions — everything she does is easily accounted for.
The criteria for leaders includes the following: the leader is one that esteems mankind, wishing to bring forth the best in all, perceiving benefit in helping others, not burden, one with a history of selfless acts, foregoing for the sake of others, one without hostility, a seer of unity, one who is merciful and without want, and one enthusiastic for life, ever cherishing happy moments.