1) The form of government must be flexible enough to account for ordinary times ( rule of law, judicial monarchy, and markets), endure warfare (fascism), and distribute windfalls ( participatory commons selection ) – although the latter is always questionably necessary unless sufficient to shift classes.
2) When one says “Absolutism” in government, one can refer to total discretion in the administration of state and production of commons but remaining under rule of law. Otherwise it just means ‘dictatorship’.
3) When one says “absolutism” in rule of law, and therefore morality and ethics, this is my position on the natural law of reciprocity. In that it is an exceptionless rule. And therefore a case of “Absolutism”. In other words “Natural Law of Reciprocity = White Sharia = Absolutism”.
For reasons that are strange if you think about it, westerners have no concept of absolutism because in the west, truth is always beyond our grasp and markets are our means of decision making between sovereigns. (Assuming you’re from the martial/craftsman/property owner rather than priestly or peasant classes).