Look at the parts of the world that don’t have empires, don’t have kings. The Native Americans have Coyote. The aboriginal australians have the Rainbow Serpent. The Polynesians have Maui. Not tyrants.
Now look at the parts of the world that do have human tyrants. The Greeks have Zeus. The Egyptians have Ramses. The Mayans had Kukulkan. People worship gods that resemble their own leaders and their own natural environment.
The only exception to drag’s theory is Asia. China had huge empires, but Buddha isn’t a tyrant. Maybe the Jade Emperor is; drag doesn’t know as much about Tao as drag would like. Anyone got reading suggestions for getting into Taoist mythology? (Other than Journey To The West. Already love that story)
You know, given that information, it would have made a lot of sense for drag to specify “tyranny” rather than general badness, put the Mayans in the “oppressive gods, oppressive society” category, and point out that Asia is home to plenty of tyranny despite the presence of Buddhism. It sure is a lucky thing that drag did all three of those things. Thanks for looking out.
None of the definitions of tyranny I see have a restriction on scale. You can be a tyrant ruling a hundred people or a billion. It’s technology (transport, food storage, writing/communication) and geography that limit the size of a tyranny. I’d argue lots of small tribal societies wander into tyranny; it’s just hard to rule over multiple islands when you don’t have writing or metals.
There’s religions in Asia other than Buddhism.
Given that information, it would have been good for drag to mention Taoism.
Two religions is not more statistically significant than one.
Referring to yourself in the third person and acting like this comes off as extremely condescending.