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

[Slant]

been thinking: unless you choose to believe the idea of voting is a lie/rigged, the fact you can choose who to lead your country as free people seems to have consequences. Donald Trump will go down in history for various reasons concerning this.

so I want to honestly know what's wrong with having one absolute leader until the end of his lifespan, who isn't voted to be put into office but decided based on political figures. The problem is most people view the terms of absolute leadership with evil because just about every recognizable figure ever has been comically evil or self-serving.

But what if it's done with a benevolent person? Could it ever work?

No. It's a stupid idea. We have tested it to over two thousand years.vit does not work.

[Mihalik]

No. It's a stupid idea. We have tested it to over two thousand years.vit does not work.

Wait for Primary Color to come and tell you how we cannot extrapolate future outcomes from past patterns.

"That's intellectually lazy!" - he says as he electrocutes himself by sticking a fork in the power socket for the 467th time.

[Ripster42]

That is the lazy man's line of reasoning.

I'm pretty sure primary color doesn't believe in science, so that comment makes complete sense.

[Slant]

Wait for Primary Color to come and tell you how we cannot extrapolate future outcomes from past patterns.

"That's intellectually lazy!" - he says as he electrocutes himself by sticking a fork in the power socket for the 467th time.

I mean, I can actually go into the argument. But the tendency of the average poster here is to lose attention after the second sentence. So why bother.

[Ghostpanther]

Don't fall for Tsugunai's bait threads.

Don't read it.

A leader ideally needs to represent the will of the people and come from lawful ways, which the representatives of the populace have made. it is the best type of leadership in a democratic society. However, I think a dictator can potentially be good. Depending on the person.

[Machismo]

been thinking: unless you choose to believe the idea of voting is a lie/rigged, the fact you can choose who to lead your country as free people seems to have consequences. Donald Trump will go down in history for various reasons concerning this.

so I want to honestly know what's wrong with having one absolute leader until the end of his lifespan, who isn't voted to be put into office but decided based on political figures. The problem is most people view the terms of absolute leadership with evil because just about every recognizable figure ever has been comically evil or self-serving.

But what if it's done with a benevolent person? Could it ever work?

Great, let me tell you what to do, and if you don't do what I like, I get to shoot you in the face.

That seems to be what you want.

[Noxx79]

been thinking: unless you choose to believe the idea of voting is a lie/rigged, the fact you can choose who to lead your country as free people seems to have consequences. Donald Trump will go down in history for various reasons concerning this.

so I want to honestly know what's wrong with having one absolute leader until the end of his lifespan, who isn't voted to be put into office but decided based on political figures. The problem is most people view the terms of absolute leadership with evil because just about every recognizable figure ever has been comically evil or self-serving.

But what if it's done with a benevolent person? Could it ever work?

No one person is the best at everything the government needs to do. Especially one as controlling as you seem to want.

The end.

[Shadowferal]

But what if it's done with a benevolent person? Could it ever work?

Those that are best suited for the job...don't want it.
Those that would want it wouldn't be suitable.
Re; Maximinus Thrax; Caligula; Commodus; Elagabalus...

[Tohu wa-bohu]

Depends on the leader. Kings, Tsars, Emperors, etc, have existed for a long time. And looking at current trends we seem to be going back to that.

Turkey has its Caliph, Erdogan
China has its Emperor, Xi
Russia has its Tsar, Putin

There was an interestings article recently "The irresistible rise of the civilisation-state" on unherd.

That seems to be the way the world is going after the failure that is secular liberalism.

[Cthulhu 2020]

There will never be such a thing as a dictator that is good for everyone. Eventually someone will get overlooked. Eventually, someone will be ignored. Their plights forgotten or discarded. Everyone here who believes that there can be a good dictator, imagines a dictator who believes in the things they believe in. And when a leader fits one person's mold of perfection, that same dictator can be evil to another. There is no perfect leader, nor is there a perfect form of government.

We have found that the least tyrannical forms of government are those with extremely dispersed powers across lots of people. And ultimately, the conservative ideal of a "decentralized" power, otherwise known as state's rights, opposes this notion of a centralized dictator.

In fact, I remember this same question being asked back when Obama was leader. Both liberals and conservatives on this board answered that thread with "A dictator would be awful". Funny, now, that conservatives on this forum love entertaining the idea of a dictator that Trump is in power.

[Felya]

It could work perfectly... Until that person dies. Then the entire system collapses.

Why? The same perfect leadership, would then select the perfect successor. Why does their benevolence stop at the point of succession planning?

[Ghostpanther]

There will never be such a thing as a dictator that is good for everyone. Eventually someone will get overlooked. Eventually, someone will be ignored. Their plights forgotten or discarded. Everyone here who believes that there can be a good dictator, imagines a dictator who believes in the things they believe in. And when a leader fits one person's mold of perfection, that same dictator can be evil to another. There is no perfect leader, nor is there a perfect form of government.

We have found that the least tyrannical forms of government are those with extremely dispersed powers across lots of people. And ultimately, the conservative ideal of a "decentralized" power, otherwise known as state's rights, opposes this notion of a centralized dictator.

In fact, I remember this same question being asked back when Obama was leader. Both liberals and conservatives on this board answered that thread with "A dictator would be awful". Funny, now, that conservatives on this forum love entertaining the idea of a dictator that Trump is in power.

There is. They may not use the term, dictator, but in reality that is what they are. N. Korea has one. Also China, Russia. To name a few.

I consider myself a conservative and am a Trump supporter as President and I sure as hell do not think he should be President for life. Two terms is enough for any President. They have too much executive power as is.

[Cthulhu 2020]

There is. They may not use the term, dictator, but in reality that is what they are. N. Korea has one. Also China, Russia. To name a few.

I consider myself a conservative and am a Trump supporter as President and I sure as hell do not think he should be President for life. Two terms is enough for any President. They have too much executive power as is.

You bolded a very certain part of my sentence, but didn't seem to consider the rest of the sentence. "There will never be a dictator that is good for everyone." Tons of people try to leave north korea because they hate it.

[Kaleredar]

Depends on the leader. Kings, Tsars, Emperors, etc, have existed for a long time. And looking at current trends we seem to be going back to that.

Turkey has its Caliph, Erdogan
China has its Emperor, Xi
Russia has its Tsar, Putin

There was an interestings article recently "The irresistible rise of the civilisation-state" on unherd.

That seems to be the way the world is going after the failure that is secular liberalism.

Burner account aside, you make a very interesting, but I believe wholly unintentional, point.

Turkey had an actual Caliphate.

China had an actual emperor.

Russia had an actual Tsar.


What happened to them, in the past? I don't recall it ending too well. For any of them.

[Dezerte]

It's great when the leader is benevolent and wise, it's absolutely awful when they are not.

[Teriz]

In the entire span of human history, I can't think of one autocrat who didn't do horrible shit to their own people at one point or another.

[Ghostpanther]

You bolded a very certain part of my sentence, but didn't seem to consider the rest of the sentence. "There will never be a dictator that is good for everyone." Tons of people try to leave north korea because they hate it.

That I did. Sorry. It was close to my bedtime and I did not read that sentence correctly.

[Tohu wa-bohu]

Burner account aside, you make a very interesting, but I believe wholly unintentional, point.

Turkey had an actual Caliphate.

China had an actual emperor.

Russia had an actual Tsar.


What happened to them, in the past? I don't recall it ending too well. For any of them.

Yes.

Two of those were ended by Communism, the other by Secularism.

Both ideologies are now in decline. They strip identity, meaning and roots from culture.

There was another interesting article in the Atlantic:

“The End of the Secular Republic”

Tom Holland echos it on UnHerd, with:

The end of secularism is nigh

“The West's ability to market this culturally conditioned assumption is dying”

I can’t post links, but feel free to look that up. Seems like secular liberal states don’t last as long as Kingdoms.

[Draco-Onis]

Historical examples can't tell you about why something is bad or good, that's why you should only support or oppose ideas based on explanations.

The same concept of why dictatorships are bad is shown on a smaller scale for family owned businesses 2/3 don't survive in the hands of the second generation and 1/2 of that 1/3 survives to the third. Basically even if you get lucky and get a good dictator the odds are his kids are going to be complete fucktards and screw the country.

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

[Tohu wa-bohu]

The same concept of why dictatorships are bad is shown on a smaller scale for family owned businesses 2/3 don't survive in the hands of the second generation and 1/2 of that 1/3 survives to the third. Basically even if you get lucky and get a good dictator the odds are his kids are going to be complete fucktards and screw the country.

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

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.