Ruler character matters less than whether domination is institutional and impersonal.

Evidence

India’s fate is considerably more favorable under British rule than under that of the East-India Company. In these cases, it is irrelevant, of course, whether the larger collectivity itself (for instance, England) is governed by a monarch provided that the technique of the domination which it exercises has, in the largest sense, the character of super-individuality. Thus, the aristocratic regime of the Roman Republic oppressed the provinces by far more than did the Roman Empire, which was much more just and objective. — Georg Simmel, The Sociology of Georg Simmel, 5785

Categorization

• XREF: Bearies directly on the reader’s Shapiro-guardian framework: super-individual, institutional oversight is what protects subordinates, regardless of who sits atop it.