Honestly, the problem with the Zelda series is that the story-telling hasn’t evolved since… Well, since the NES days, if you think about it (or at least the OoT/MM days).

I mean, it’s implied that the Hyruleans committed genocide against the Shiekah but nobody gives a shit.

Granted, I think Ganon is (objectively) bad (I’ve only just started TOTK) but honestly? He at least becomes more introspective and less violent by the beginning of Wind Waker, at least, meaning that he’s capable of evolving to at least some degree.

Tbh, Ganon is a two-bit warlord.

But Hyrule is literally an absolute monarchy albeit with special rights and privileges to other races (well, it’s got the multiculturalism down, at least, so it’s kinda like the Ottoman empire before the 1800s…)

Regarding Hyrule, it doesn’t seem to be imperialistic (in the feudal sense) as it seems to be mostly secluded from other kingdoms, the few that may exist (like Styla, for example).

Domestically though, it still suffers from power struggles, rebellions, and wars, meanign that life is also clearly not ideal under the absolute monarchy that they appear to have had since, well, its founding over 10,000 years ago.

Honestly, I can go both ways, but Ganondorf would be a cheap solution to Hyrule’s problems.

Hyrule needs a socialist revolution so it can institute real democracy and representation within the country.

Okay, this is my fourth post, but you got me going here, @[email protected]:

A revolution in Hyrule could happen through a bourgeous revolution (or even multiple revolutions) first before arriving at a socialist one.

When they do arrive at such a revolution, they should, in my opinion, keep the Zelda bloodline since they may quite literally need a Zelda, so to speak. We’ve seen this being necessary quite a few times in the series. It may be even that the monarchy exists because the Zelda monarchy has been quite useful… So keep the Zeldas and inculcate the successive generations as good loyal socialists or communists, servants of the people.