[faluzure]

You’re assuming the status quo will continue. How will a small group in the Supreme Court maintain power if there’s enough of a willing population to oust them?

Your example of King Jong Un doesn’t work either, because it’s still a dictatorship, and father and grandfather were both dictators, and they both died, so why does it matter?

The world is overflowing with detritus because the incentive structures are not there. If people lived much longer they might be more willing to spend the time to clean up.

[lisper]

> How will a small group in the Supreme Court maintain power if there’s enough of a willing population to oust them?

Supreme court justices serve for life. The only way to "oust" a supreme court justice (in the U.S.) is through impeachment. In the entire history of the U.S. no supreme court justice has ever been removed against their will. The assumption of mortality is deeply embedded into the U.S. Constitution. (Yes, you could amend the Constitution. Good luck with that.)

> so why does it matter?

Because there is at least a possibility that the next generation Kim might be better. Or that a Kim might die childless.

> If people lived much longer they might be more willing to spend the time to clean up.

Yes, that's possible, but much more likely those in power would continue to do what they do now: build enclaves for themselves that keep out the riff-raff.