This got me thinking about Singapore, which has recently overtook the US on the basis of GDP (PPP) per capita. Singapore's system is officially democratic, but in fact quite authoritarian with competent rulers. The direction of the country has been in control by the Lee family for decades, but they put a lot of smart 'commoners' to some of the highest posts in the country. And given the track record, few can argue against the ability of the Lee family in the areas of economic and overall material development. The city-state also has little corruption and its citizens receive some of the best education in the world.
Does the example imply that such a "meritocratic monarchy" is the most rapid way to develop a country economically?
If we consider the way South Korea went from profound under-development to first-world in 50 years under a somewhat autocratic republic with heavy economic dirigisme, yes, probably.
Does the example imply that such a "meritocratic monarchy" is the most rapid way to develop a country economically?