Not my words, not my misunderstanding:
"No, the only way to run a country is by benevolent dictatorship. A Catholic monarch, who protects his people from themselves, and bestows on them what they need, not necessarily what they want, who protects their rights as human beings."
-- Quoting Michael Voris verbatim, from the thread CatholicTV calls for "Benevolent Dictatorship"?!
I have no argument with that on essence; it is an expression of the same short-horizon problem H.H.Hoppe is talking about in his book, and it is mentioned in the article. However, the author,perhaps inadvertently mixes up monarchy and dictatorship, whioch is a mistake.
Monarchy is a form of property. It is the national infrastructure in possession of a monarch. It does not manage in any way the property of its subjects.
Dictatorship is autocratic management of property of others, without a legal mandate fo any kind, usually in response to a crisis. The idea is to turn the power over to some legitimate body when the crisis goes away, which often is never. Such are numerous military juntas, Pinochet (God bless him), Napoleon, etc.
Dictatorship may institutionalize itself as not merely an autocratic but totalitarian government, -- one that manages every aspect of people's life and not merely their political or economic life. This is what the Communist parties of Russia and China did. They received majoritarian support all along; Yeltzin had to ban the communist Party of the USSR in order to get a non-communist government.