what's wrong with the concept of an absolute leader (or dictator)?

[Sunseeker]

*reads thread title*
*guesses OP*

Got it in one.

[Shadowferal]

Besides if dictatorships were such a great thing we would have many great countries run by dictators for centuries.

We have had plenty of countries thst were run by kings/emperors for centuries if not millennia. And they were "great" for their times.

[TwistedSkull]

people can be corrupt, mentally deteriorate, be incompetent, stubborn, vindictive, just down right evil ect.

This fit Trump pretty spot on.

[Tohu wa-bohu]

We have had plenty of countries thst were run by kings/emperors for centuries if not millennia. And they were "great" for their times.

Agreed. And there are people looking to go back to this. Turkey, India, China, Russia, Israel, etc, are all trending towards "modern" monarchies again.

For religious people this is also attractive.

[Endus]

So the lesson here is teach your kids better, and learn to anticipate market shifts, and stay competitive. That does not invalidate dictatorships. Just bad parenting and lack of forward looking business sense.

More accurately, the lesson is that people are fallible, and thus your dictator will inevitably be fallible themselves, and you have eliminated any possibility of repairing those mistakes of judgement by making them a dictator for life.

So yes. It does invalidate dictatorships. A system with regular opportunities for leadership change allow the nation to remove a leader who is making mistakes, to install a new leader who will fix them. When one leader fails to anticipate a market shift, you select a new one whose skills in that field are stronger. And their education of their children becomes irrelevant, since that selection process is not sanguinal in the first place.

[Tohu wa-bohu]

More accurately, the lesson is that people are fallible, and thus your dictator will inevitably be fallible themselves, and you have eliminated any possibility of repairing those mistakes of judgement by making them a dictator for life.

So yes. It does invalidate dictatorships. A system with regular opportunities for leadership change allow the nation to remove a leader who is making mistakes, to install a new leader who will fix them. When one leader fails to anticipate a market shift, you select a new one whose skills in that field are stronger. And their education of their children becomes irrelevant, since that selection process is not sanguinal in the first place.

This assumes that people themselves are wise enough to choose their leaders. What percentage of people in the US believe things like Flat Earth? Anti-Vaxx? QAnon? Reptilians?

Dictators (more accurately Kings) are on their way back... are they perfect? No. Are they better than Liberal Democracy; I would say Yes.

[Draco-Onis]

So the lesson here is teach your kids better, and learn to anticipate market shifts, and stay competitive. That does not invalidate dictatorships. Just bad parenting and lack of forward looking business sense.

That's not the lesson your kids are not your clones they aren't going to have the same aspirations. You can teach them all you want but they have their own personalities so when they are born into a role you are basically setting them up for failure. In dictatorships case this failure means disaster for everyone else.

- - - Updated - - -

We have had plenty of countries thst were run by kings/emperors for centuries if not millennia. And they were "great" for their times.

You mean those centuries where being an average person was the worst thing you could be? sure there were some good rulers but most were really bad at you know looking after their own people. Whenever someone is born into a role especially as a result of excessive inbreeding bad things tend to follow for everyone else under them.

[Endus]

This assumes that people themselves are wise enough to choose their leaders. What percentage of people in the US believe things like Flat Earth? Anti-Vaxx? QAnon? Reptilians?

Dictators (more accurately Kings) are on their way back... are they perfect? No. Are they better than Liberal Democracy; I would say Yes.

You're making the mistake of presuming the original selection of the dictator would be any better, and it wouldn't.

The difference is that, in a society with the ability to remove and replace that leader, you'd only have to put up with the Flat-earther Qanon Reptiloid-hater for a short period of time. If they're your dictator for life, that's not something you can make a change to; they will run your country into the ground over their career.

[Tohu wa-bohu]

You're making the mistake of presuming the original selection of the dictator would be any better, and it wouldn't.

The difference is that, in a society with the ability to remove and replace that leader, you'd only have to put up with the Flat-earther Qanon Reptiloid-hater for a short period of time. If they're your dictator for life, that's not something you can make a change to; they will run your country into the ground over their career.

Dictators are not selected. They win via force, charismatic power, or if you are religious, Providence. And dictators are removed if they are bad enough. Either by someone in their own government, or by the people. The Tsars for instance were removed by people ultimately.

In China the Emperor has power as long as they have the "Mandate of Heaven".

- - - Updated - - -

That's not the lesson your kids are not your clones they aren't going to have the same aspirations. You can teach them all you want but they have their own personalities so when they are born into a role you are basically setting them up for failure. In dictatorships case this failure means disaster for everyone else.

You solve this by having a lot of Children. One (or many) may have the personality to follow in your footsteps and be better than you are.

[Draco-Onis]

You solve this by having a lot of Children. One (or many) may have the personality to follow in your footsteps and be better than you are.

You don't get it you have have a million children they are not you they are never going to be you no matter how hard you try. Every child is their own person not a mini version of you, if you force any of them to follow in your footsteps all you are doing is raising a psychopath.

[Tohu wa-bohu]

You don't get it you have have a million children they are not you they are never going to be you no matter how hard you try. Every child is their own person not a mini version of you, if you force any of them to follow in your footsteps all you are doing is raising a psychopath.

Your successor does not need to be an exact clone of you. They just need to be a wise leader who know how to use power to benefit the subjects of the kingdom.

[Draco-Onis]

Your successor does not need to be an exact clone of you. They just need to be a wise leader who know how to use power to benefit the subjects of the kingdom.

yeah but what if they don't want to lead, you can't guarantee that any of them want that.

[Felya]

This assumes that people themselves are wise enough to choose their leaders. What percentage of people in the US believe things like Flat Earth? Anti-Vaxx? QAnon? Reptilians?

Maduro talks to birds and Hitler was huge into superstitions, as far as claiming Nostradamus made his victory inevitable...

While democracy requires majority of idiots to vote against their interest, a dictator only requires 1.

- - - Updated - - -

Your successor does not need to be an exact clone of you. They just need to be a wise leader who know how to use power to benefit the subjects of the kingdom.

Actually, this exemplifies the flaw of your argument. Why is a righteous leader, so incompetent about succession planning? The answer you are looking for, is a successor chosen by the benevolent, is inherently benevolent. Can you guess why?

- - - Updated - - -

yeah but what if they don't want to lead, you can't guarantee that any of them want that.

What if a benevolent leader chooses not to lead? What if a chosen one, chooses to do nothing?

[Tohu wa-bohu]

yeah but what if they don't want to lead, you can't guarantee that any of them want that.

You have lots of kids, you raise them in a wisdom tradition, and wait. One (or more) will want to lead... if not, find a wise person that has the same values as you from the general population. King Arthur is a good example.

[Calfredd]

You have lots of kids, you raise them in a wisdom tradition, and wait. One (or more) will want to lead... if not, find a wise person that has the same values as you from the general population. King Arthur is a good example.

King Arthur was also a myth and was chosen by Divine Right by a lady living in a lake.

[Tohu wa-bohu]

Maduro talks to birds and Hitler was huge into superstitions, as far as claiming Nostradamus made his victory inevitable...

While democracy requires majority of idiots to vote against their interest, a dictator only requires 1.

- - - Updated - - -



Actually, this exemplifies the flaw of your argument. Why is a righteous leader, so incompetent about succession planning? The answer you are looking for, is a successor chosen by the benevolent, is inherently benevolent. Can you guess why?

- - - Updated - - -



What if a benevolent leader chooses not to lead? What if a chosen one, chooses to do nothing?

No person is perfect, but a righteous leader is better than a broken Liberal Democracy. "Fixing" one person (by removal or death, or violence) is easier than changing an X amount of the masses who are generally confused about reality.

- - - Updated - - -

King Arthur was also a myth and was chosen by Divine Right by a lady living in a lake.

The myth speaks to a deeper Truth. That sometimes a lowly individual can be Wise/Righteous King.

[Felya]

You have lots of kids, you raise them in a wisdom tradition, and wait. One (or more) will want to lead... if not, find a wise person that has the same values as you from the general population. King Arthur is a good example.

Of what exactly?

[Tohu wa-bohu]

Of what exactly?

That sometimes a lowly individual can rise and be Wise or Righteous King.

[Felya]

No person is perfect, but a righteous leader is better than a broken Liberal Democracy.

A righteous liberal democracy is better than a righteous leader... your dichotomy is predicated on comparing success to failure. If you treat them equally, you can’t make your argument.

"Fixing" one person (by removal or death, or violence) is easier than changing an X amount of the masses who are generally confused about reality.

No, because the fixing requires the same masses. You are just torturing them until they toss the tea in ocean... get boners for guillotine or erase them from existence.

The myth speaks to a deeper Truth. That sometimes a lowly individual can be Wise/Righteous King.

I’m god... wtf?

- - - Updated - - -

That sometimes a lowly individual can rise and be Wise or Righteous King.

But... it’s a myth... Biden, Hillary, Bill and Obama, all rose from middle class to be leaders.

[Tohu wa-bohu]

A righteous liberal democracy is better than a righteous leader... your dichotomy is predicated on comparing success to failure. If you treat them equally, you can’t make your argument.



No, because the fixing requires the same masses. You are just torturing them until they toss the tea in ocean... get boners for guillotine or erase them from existence.



I’m god... wtf?

To each their own. I know what I like. You can likewise choose what you will. Some like Chocolate, some like Vanilla.