|
| Thread: a good dictatorship |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 · «PREV |
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
posted July 16, 2009 01:49 AM |
|
|
Well, but if you think this will be madatory reading or that it holds great litterary value, then you're just as bad as hardcore twilight-fans.
EDIT: Is there any other place in the world other than Europe and the Americas? 
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted July 16, 2009 01:54 AM |
|
|
@Dagoth: was that directed to me? I'm not sure what you mean.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted July 16, 2009 01:57 AM |
|
|
The edit was directed at you!
I... Ugh... Nevermind, it's perhaps a joke of poor taste... And I don't want to go on and explain the joke that would be even worse.
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 16, 2009 03:29 AM |
|
|
Dagoth:
There's China, Japan, and Bangalore. Also Australia and New Zealand.
Other than that, though...
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted July 17, 2009 05:21 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Which means, a dictatorship is not necessarily established by force - it may be deemed necessary by everyone or at least by a majority because QUICK decisions may be necessary, and the more people share governmental power the more time and compromise it takes to find a decision. Moreover, a dictator is not forced to suppress things. If things run fine under a dictator people won't complain. In Germany you wouldn't have seen many complainers within the first two years of NS-dictatorship, and even later, when the screw got turned for the Jews most people accepted that as part of the deal.
People continued to accept it as part of the deal because it didn't affect them. This is the problem. Popular ideas and people don't require force, because they're popular. But if you're part of the minority, you're vulnerable, and without a pre-existing contract to keep your rights secure, you're in a spot doomed to suppression. So for any minority, there is certainly force involved.
Smoking is a good modern example. It is (fortunately) dwindling in many places, but now that smokers are a fairly weak minority, the majority is predictably moving in for the kill with government regulation to act as a superficially benign father, instead of having the dignity to let people live their lives in peace.
Quote:
You may argie about whether a legal clause in a constitution that DICTATES democracy that way that things must not be changed is a dibtatorship as well since it doesn't allow people to switch.
I suppose, but many constitutions have some kind of amendment process that can open the door to permanent fundamental changes, which can theoretically lead to almost anywhere.
This argument is weak either way because although the masses might willfully decide to put a dictator in power, after that point, any further decisions are closed. If they change their mind, they're screwed, as opposed to if they change their mind in a democracy, changes can be made without them having to coup their own government.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 17, 2009 08:07 AM |
|
|
All true, all true.
But don't forget this is all just theory. Would a benign dicatorship possible and have there been any?
And I answered, yes, there have been a few, and, yes, in theory it IS possible. It was possible in Rome, for example in the Punic Wars, when Hannibal threatened Rome directly, a dictator was called, which was nothing special. When the danger was banned, things were switched back to normal. Amerindian tribes had their War Chieftain as well who had a lot more power than the peace time leader.
This is somehow logical - there is no democratic army. In wartimes decisions have to be made and quickly.
Emergency state laws are existing in democracies as well, and if an emergency is declared, the executive force has quasi-dictatorial powers.
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted July 17, 2009 08:12 AM |
|
|
No, I agree with Mvass. One of the most powerful and well-known writers of all time.
____________
John says to live above hell.
|
|
friendofgunnar
Honorable
Legendary Hero
able to speed up time
|
|
posted July 17, 2009 10:26 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Which means, a dictatorship is not necessarily established by force - it may be deemed necessary by everyone or at least by a majority because QUICK decisions may be necessary, and the more people share governmental power the more time and compromise it takes to find a decision.
I can concede this. In a case of war when self-preservation (not adventurism) becomes everbody's goal, then a benevolent dictatorship becomes possible. That's more an exception than a rule though...
|
| |
|
|
