BENIGN DICTATORSHIP or BAD DEMOCRACY - WHAT'S BETTER?
Is a BENIGN DICTATORSHIP better than a BAD DEMOCRACY,where the bureaucracy would hinder development and only allow a percentage to get mega rich exploiting the States wealth and not passing on the rewards to the State. Or would a BENIGN DICTATORSHIP where the Leader would secure the best deal for the people of the State and encourage growth in all areas, is that worth the right to vote?
Discuss
Views: 179
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Harry Naio on -
while dictatorships are never a good thing, I would be inclined to say that a benevolent dictator that actually secures good deals and helps development would be better than an inept democracy rife with corruption and generally useless.
-
Permalink Reply by Amaka Uchegbu on -
I agree, so far as the person/people in control of a nation manages to improve the general wellbeing of it's inhabitants, the type of government in power does not matter as such. For example, if we compare hitler's Germany to a corrupt democratic state such as Nigeria we will see dictatorship being economically favourable to those living in the country.
-
Permalink Reply by Harry Naio on
-
yes, however it is important that if there is a dictatorship that it's not only economic well being that is being increased. to use the hitler example, yes there was improvement in the economy but at the cost of one of the most evil acts in human history, the death of upwards of 67 million people and the eventual destruction of many cities and lives. so i think it's important to say that only a benign dictator is better for the people
-
Permalink Reply by Rebecca Meredith on -
I agree, but also, the Nazi economy didn't actually improve that much - it was based on protectionism which didn't actually create profit. There were little consumer goods and wages were capped to create the best opportunities for the state rather than the people. The Nazi economy boomed big at first, but it couldn't last because it was essentially there to finance Hitler's rearmament programme. Hence, the debate isn't really economy vs. holocaust, but that the point of dictatorships is that they are inherently predicated on the self-interest of one individual and their ideals
-
Permalink Reply by Attia on -
Yep, I agree with the above comments...in my opinion a benign dictatorship is much better and more beneficial than a bad democracy. Shame the western countries are only concerned with spreading the latter!
-
Permalink Reply by Bridget Minamore on -
All the previous comments are so true, but i'm tempted to say a bad democracy. Even though a dictator may improve the wellbeing of the people, the people feel as if they are being dictated to and in a lot of cases this causes personal unrest. At least with a bad democracy the people feel as if they've had a say in what goes on, which gives them hope for the future... it's a matter of pride.
People (especially from developing countries) want to feel like they are standing on their own two feet, even if they know deep down they're not. False economy? Probably. But using the example of Nigeria again, the Nigerian people (as well as many other parts of Africa) feel a huge sense of pride when they get the opportunity to vote, which means a lot.
-
Permalink Reply by Attia on
-
Good pointttt bridget!! I didnt think of that....At the same time, though, would the people think they're being dictated to? Leadership should never be imposed , the government shouldn't be something people can always FEEL the presense of, does that make sense? If all is good and well, then the people would appreciate it without having to feel good or bad about the situation. People will only feel neglected if their points aren't taken into consideration....and that would only happen in a bad democracy, in my opinion anyway..
-
Permalink Reply by Harry Naio on
-
I would personally agree that pride is really important, but I'd rather live comfortably, democracy can come later but first the country needs to be free standing, or close to it. if not a fragile democracy will be overthrown and replaced by someone not so benign.
Attia, you're right, the west love exporting democracy regardless of the damage, unless of course the dictatorship is on their side!
-
Permalink Reply by Attia on
-
Exactly..
'd rather be living in a stable society and have nothing to do with the government rather than live in an unbalanced society caused by "democracy".
We're all conditioned to think that stability comes as a result of democracy (of the representatitve kind anyway) and that it's amazing, all-curing way of running a country, but it really isn't...!
-
Permalink Reply by Bridget Minamore on
-
I think I would rather have live in a stable society & have nothing to do w/ government too, but a lot of people wouldn't. The pride surrounding democracy is so huge, and is so hyped up by the West that I think a lot of people would feel insulted at the thought of 'being looked after' i.e. a benign dictatorship.
On a slightly related note, it's mad to think though that's it's been only 53years since the first African country (Ghana) gained independance and started having democratic elections... less than half a century and all these problems have arisen.
-
Permalink Reply by Harry Naio on
-
the problem is that pride is an emotional response rather than anything practical, I would argue that very few people who are starving and dying would choose pride in their democracy over an autocratic leader with their interests at heart.
-
Permalink Reply by Bridget Minamore on
-
you'd be surprised. Humans are emotional creature & our emotions are illogical - if we became practical 99% of world conflict would be over tomorrow. I'm not sure about everyone, but in a small country like Ghana where my family comes from, the single thing they are most proud of is their democracy and independance before other African nations.
I don't know about everyone, but I know that most of my family would rather starve than have their democracy taken away. Even in African countries like Zimbabwe, where there is practically a dictatorship, the fact that they have elections means that many of the Zimbabwean people do want a change in governement, but are steadfastly against the West removing their 'democratically' elected leader.
© 2012 Created by Live Futures.
Powered by
