Dictator

Post Reply New Topic

During times of great peril, Rome's constitution allowed for the election of a dictator for a term of one year with nearly unlimited authority. Julius Caesar was named dictator for life by a captive Senate and later assassinated, ending the office of dictator in Rome. Would the United States do well with such a provision? What if the Constitution were suspended for one year and a dictator named with sweeping powers to revitalize the economy and nation?

They did that in Germany circa 1933.

That would be a wonderful occasion to burn Washington D.C. to the ground and slaughter any government employee we can get our hands on.

All a dictator can do is enslave us. A dictator cannot make a market economy work.

If you think dictatorial powers can "cure what ails us" you have no concept of how a market based economy functions. The late and unlamented Soviet Union had a dictatorship and its population spent half its waking life standing in line for meager and miserable goods. North Korea has a dictatorship and most of its population except for the Army is malnourished. Is that what your want for the U.S.?

ruveyn

Please tell me you're trolling?

That is the worst thing that could happen, both for the economy and for the nation. And it won't suprize me when some idiot politician actually tries it. They will find themselves suddenly and violently reminded that the USA was founded by people telling their overbearing government to go to H#**.

There is nothing inherently wrong with a dictator, but people will not trust anyone to hold that position (aside from themselves in almost every case).

Dictators, by definition are not accountable to anyone for their exercises of force and power. That makes them very dangerous. Do you really believe in benign dictators? I don't. And history back me up to the hilt.

ruveyn

And democracy is any better? Nothing ever gets done.

Also, many ancient societies were dictatorships (either in reality or effectively) and were very successful, far more so than any modern country.

Didn't you learn anything from Nazi Germany, Syria, or Star Wars? Emergency powers are not a good thing

What you say is literally untrue. Much is done in a democracy. The streets are cleaned and patched. The traffic lights work etc. etc. But better nothing be done than evil be done.

ruveyn

Actually I believe that a democratic monarchy would be much better than the current plutarchy we have now.

A king with wide powers elected every 10 years through democratic process.


Would be wonderful imo.

Most of NeantHumain's posts in the politics forum are "satirical" complaints about the Tea Party. I will assume that this is similar: a satirical complaint about The Right in general.



Well, surely in theory a dictator could decide to let the free market and the invisible hand do it's thing, and still remain a dictator.



I would mostly agree with this, though would probably prefer to have authority resting with some sort of broad aristocracy than with a single individual. An authoritarian regime could give a greater sense of direction to society than the party politicial squabble we call democracy (which is mostly just rule by money and media).

A king with that wide a set of powers would contrive an "emergency" and you would not have a next election. It would not be wonderful. It would be a disaster.

ruveyn

The Founding Fathers were well-acquainted with the most effective methods of dealing with dictatorial rulers ...

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

I'll let Charlie Chaplin has a say about dictators

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcvjoWOwnn4[/youtube]

Nah, I do mean a democratically elected king. It would be obvious that in a such a system the king would have no power to do such a thing. Think of it as a 10 year term president that doesnt have to lick the balls of congress and their lobbying special interest groups. s**t would get DONE for a change. Our current system is no longer a representative gov. its merely a plutarchy posing as a democracy.