A Ruthless Dictator Can Be Better Than Democracy

[Gawd]

Democracy is not perfect. If you have a dumb and greedy population, it is a disaster. Just look at the USA: gimme gimme gimme war war war fat fat fat WTF TAXES????!!!!

A ruthless dictator can be better than a democracy because the dictator can stamp out the undesirable aspects of a democracy based on a self-centered population. The tyranny of the masses can be more dangerous than the most ruthless dictator because you have everyone thinking they are right, even the real dumbasses who should not be allowed to operate a crosswalk button.

For this reason, I believe that a country is best served by repeated cycles of dictatorship-democracy-dictatorship with power struggles in between. It is a necessary process to balance out the evil forces.

[Toontown]

For this reason, I think you should be banned for hate-speech-crimes-against-humanity.

[JimC]

And let me guess...

The trains will run on time!

Oh dear...

[Gawd]

And let me guess...

The trains will run on time!

Oh dear...

Is a ruthless dictator any worse than a fat, greedy, dumb mob of citizens?

[JimC]

And let me guess...

The trains will run on time!

Oh dear...

Is a ruthless dictator any worse than a fat, greedy, dumb mob of citizens?

Yes.

Considerably.

[Gawd]

And let me guess...

The trains will run on time!

Oh dear...

Is a ruthless dictator any worse than a fat, greedy, dumb mob of citizens?

Yes.

Considerably.

How so when the fat, greedy, dumb mob of citizens are uncontrollable and start wars?

[FBM]

Not sure how serious this OP is, but Park Jung-hee was pretty damned ruthless and yet managed to transform S. Korea from a backwards nowhere with a per capita income of USD72 into a booming industrialized economy. You can question his methods, but it's hard to question their effectiveness.

[sandinista]

There is no real democracy. The west is run by ruthless dictators as much as anyone else. They're called corporations. So one is not really better than another, they just have different "appearances".

[FBM]

There is no real democracy. The west is run by ruthless dictators as much as anyone else. They're called corporations. So one is not really better than another, they just have different "appearances".

[AshtonBlack]

There is no real democracy. The west is run by ruthless dictators as much as anyone else. They're called corporations. So one is not really better than another, they just have different "appearances".

I'd agree with this.

[JimC]

There is no real democracy. The west is run by ruthless dictators as much as anyone else. They're called corporations. So one is not really better than another, they just have different "appearances".

Far too simplistic. Sure, corporations can be ruthless, and their underlying motives are always in that direction. However, in Western democracies they are emmeshed in a web of at least partial constraints, which include:

* their competitors
* government regulatory bodies
* unions
* revelations by the press
* public opinion by consumers
* market forces & irrational tendencies within the economy

None of these can be said to exert more than partial control, but the net effect is that corporations cannot be the unbridled, rapacious monster that leftists would like to imagine (or perhaps that such corporations desire in their secret lustful hearts...)

Not sure how serious this OP is, but Park Jung-hee was pretty damned ruthless and yet managed to transform S. Korea from a backwards nowhere with a per capita income of USD72 into a booming industrialized economy. You can question his methods, but it's hard to question their effectiveness.

He may have set the scene, but it was ruthless corporations and market forces that did the heavy lifting...

[FBM]

He may have set the scene, but it was ruthless corporations and market forces that did the heavy lifting...

He created the corporations in the first place, though, with gov't subsidies doled out based on favouritism, political allegiance, regionalism, etc, and they had to do his bidding. Except for violent military suppression of dissent and the near-elimination of civil rights, it's a model for bootstrapping an economy/nation. The way the majority of Koreans go about politics and business, I'm inclined to think that if not for Park, S. Korea would still be largely agrarian, along the lines of a Cambodia or Laos, maybe Vietnam.

[JimC]

He may have set the scene, but it was ruthless corporations and market forces that did the heavy lifting...

He created the corporations in the first place, though, with gov't subsidies doled out based on favouritism, political allegiance, regionalism, etc, and they had to do his bidding. Except for violent military suppression of dissent and the near-elimination of civil rights, it's a model for bootstrapping an economy/nation. The way the majority of Koreans go about politics and business, I'm inclined to think that if not for Park, S. Korea would still be largely agrarian, along the lines of a Cambodia or Laos, maybe Vietnam.

Unfortunately, it may be a model that would not work without the "violent military suppression of dissent and the near-elimination of civil rights", at least in terms of rapid industrialisation

[FBM]

Unfortunately, it may be a model that would not work without the "violent military suppression of dissent and the near-elimination of civil rights", at least in terms of rapid industrialisation

True that. Despite all that, Park is remembered mostly favorably by the Koreans. I think it helps that they have the North to compare themselves to. If not for the economic success, Park would be seen as a criminal.

[Pappa]

Jesus, we are attracting some crackpots of late.

Bring back Se7en and Sandy Vagina.