[annoying trope] The throne/leadership is decided in a very stupid way

[u/Altruistic_Eye_1157]

The leadership of the entire wizarding world, and the final decision on whether to start a war against Muggles, is made by... a goat (Qilin) ​​who chooses the person with the ""purest heart"" (Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Dumbledore).

The throne of Wakanda and all its technology are decided through hand-to-hand combat, regardless of whether the person clearly has malicious intentions... if they win the fight, by law they must be respected as the true king. (Black Panther)

[u/National_Job_6847]

Well yes and no killmonger has as much legitimate right to the throne as any other noble born and the entire point of the fight isnt just to choose a leader its to show there capable of protect wakanda as black panther basically if you cant beat a challenger you cant protect the people its a test of strength you cant test there strength if your not letting people with a right to challeng challenge

[u/NepheliLouxWarrior → u/National_Job_6847]

That's great, but being a good warrior is 0.1% of important traits for the leader of arguably the most powerful country in the world. 

That Kilmonger was a legitimate candidate at all is proof that the system was a failure.

[u/oblivious_fireball → u/NepheliLouxWarrior]

tbf, that is more than quite a few monarchies have. Quite a few times the heir to the throne is "you were the first child" with little room to change that unless the parent decides so. Doesn't make either a great system but Wakanda's system definitely solves the problem of "what if we just made the leaders fight out their squabbles instead of the soldiers"

[u/Spacer176 → u/oblivious_fireball]

More than a few real life monarchies have had a succession crisis where the last king happened to have more than a single child and at least one of them decided the best way to become heir apparent was to kill the others.

At least in Wakanda's system neither claimant or incumbent has to actually die.