The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
13 Points

Dictatorship is much better than than democracy.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/23/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,002 times Debate No: 53172
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)




First round is confirming raund.


I accept the debate.
Debate Round No. 1


Tofiq95 forfeited this round.



Dictatorship: rule by a dictator : rule, control, or leadership by one person with total power. [1]

Democracy: a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting. [1]

You have burden of proof to show that dictatorship is much better, no argument in either of the first two rounds definetely hinders your odds but let's be rational what will end this debate is most likely what i'm about to post.

Let's delve into a prime example of Dictatorship:

Adolf Hitler:

A. To begin his political career, he make a call to nationalism (which basically declared him a fascist) by attacking the treaty of versailles.

B. He furthered his political support by aiding the German economy (the Germans felt he alone put Germany back on the map.)

C. Now that he had support from the Germans he was a true in-charge Dictator and could do whatever he wished free of opposition, he happened to kill any opposition and he also banned guns to prevent any chance of a rebellion.

D. So what exactly did he cause?

Answer: The Holocaust[2]

Hitler and his Nazi Regime are responsible for the genocide of above 6,000,000 jewish people, simply because he felt they were "an inferior race". Although his main target was the jewish (especially children since they couldn't work, in total 1,000,000 jewish children were killed.). It is notable that he caused the deaths of above 6,000,000 other who he felt were inferior such as homosexuals and non-europeans.

I could go on for days, but I strongly believe most readers are fully aware:
A. That a dictatorship has no checks and balances.
B. That a dictatorship led to the holocaust.
C. Of what the holocaust is.
D. That you could never find an example of a democracy as bad as Germany under hitler rather yet fulfill BoP needed to show that democracy is far worse than dictatorship.

If you do actually attempt to contest any of these points I will gladly explain them in more detail next round.


Debate Round No. 2


Thanks for your argument, but I think you have not mentioned some issues. First, you saw Hitler as a example. I want to remind you, not all dictators were as cruel as Hitler. For example, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk was a strong dictator. In 1918, Ottoman Empire lost World War 1st. Mudros agreement was very painful for Ottoman Empire. At this moment, Ataturk began to fight for Turks' independence. And he could. In 1923, Turkey got its independence. Before Ataturk there was a chaos inside country. Some of the groups were very propogating and they caused Ottoman Empire to chaos. The freedom of speech and democracy did not benefit to the country, even destroyed. So, you see, democracy is not always the best political system to live. Furthermore, you are seeing the situation of Ukraine today. There was democracy, so there was not a strong leader to rule the country just himself Yanukovich showed weakness to Ukraine, to Russia, and to whole the world. So, today people are fighting in the streets, and killing one another. One strong dictator can save Ukraine today from Civil Wars and Russia. Dictatiorship does not mean just violence or killing. Dictatorship also requires leadership, to make difficult political decisions in the in dire straits. So, we can see, there bad dicators and good dictators in the world, there good parliaments and bad parliaments, too. In fact, if there is no dictator in country in the whole history, this country will be occupied most probably.
My first argument is dictatorship can create a stable condition in the country. It is one of the best ways to defeat rebellions. You know, all rebellions are not right. Some of them even want the country to destroy. So, they begin to stand against government. And what can happen? Some ignoant people can be conceiived, then the beautiful country will destroy. As we saw these situations in Egypt and Lybia. In Luybia, people lived in higher economical standarts in Gaddafi's period. Education and health terapies were free. People were very safe. But some people began to incite them to participate in the rebellions. In conclusion, you saw, the people killed and even tortured Gaddafi's corpse. Now, there is democracy. There are not the higher standarts which was in Gaddafi's period. The country lost previous power and economy. So, dictatiors can keep the stability in the countries.



Good job in fitting in one decent dictator to counter possibly the worst political figure of all time, though this doesn't prove in any way that dictatorship is a must better form of government that democracy.

You said:

"My first argument is dictatorship can create a stable condition in the country. It is one of the best ways to defeat rebellions. You know, all rebellions are not right."

Yes, ruling with an iron fist is a great way to kill your own people. I would like to note that revolts are:

to act in a way that shows that you do not accept the control or influence of someone or something. [1]

Rebellions are acts aimed at altering an established authority. [2] They occur due to poor leadership making the people unhappy, as with our prime example of a dictator (Adolf Hitler) and the vast majority of dictators they force their will upon the citizens who have no choice but to serve the will of the dictator. Hitler did this making it illegal for jews (his main opposition) to carry guns. [3] (also making him or any other Nazi hard to assassinate.) Thanks to this ability to have complete unchecked power, the dictator can do whatever he/she wishes so hitler (our prime example) decided to kill millions of minorities because they he felt they were "imperfect" in what is now called the Holocaust. [4] [5]


So now that we have a prime example of a dictator let's apply this to a prime country, the United States of America (The world's greatest superpower). The U.S. is a great place ruled under democracy, where even the founding occur to guarantee basic civil right. [6]
First of all, under a dictatorship these rights all people deserve would be removed, and the U.S. citizens would be forced to serve under the will of an unchecked master but when democracy rules checks and balances are made to make sure one person doesn't have complete authority over all. [7] [8]

You may wonder how bad could unchecked power in the U.S. could possibly be, let's dive into it now.

Here are some statistics from globalfirepower about the U.S. [9]


Total Population: 316,668,567
Available Manpower: 145,212,012
Fit for Service: 120,022,084
Reaching Military Age Annually: 4,217,412
Active Frontline Personnel: 1,430,000
Active Reserve Personnel: 850,880


Tanks: 8,325
Armored Fighting Vehicles: 25,782
Self-Propelled Guns: 1,934
Towed Artillery Pieces: 1,791
Rocket Projectors (MLRS): 1,330


Total Aircraft: 13,683
Helicopters: 6,012
Aircraft Carriers: 10
Frigates: 15
Destroyers: 62
Submarines: 72


Oil Production: 8,500,000 bbl/day
Oil Consumption: 19,000,000 bbl/day
Proven Oil Reserves: 20,680,000,000 bbl/day
Defense Budget: $612,500,000,000
Reserves of Foreign Exchange and Gold: $150,200,000,000
Purchasing Power Parity: $15,940,000,000,000


Square Land Area: 9,826,675 km
Coastline: 19,924 km
Waterways: 41,009 km

Wait, this is just the tip of the iceberg, let's move onto some Nuclear Warhead facts and statistics.

1. If 100 Hiroshima-sized nuclear bombs were detonated then the smoke would block out sunlight, cool the planet, and produce climate change unprecedented in recorded human history [10]

2. In Hiroshima the estimated death total from one nuclear bomb is 330,000. [11] [12]

3. In Nagasaki the estimated death total from one nuclear bomb is 250,000. [11] [12]

4. The United States currently the U.S. has 7,700 nuclear warheads. [13]

5. The U.S. has nuclear warheads over 600 times stronger than the one detonated over Hiroshima. [14]

So I have presented an example with a prime dictator and given him a prime nation to lead, you can conclude what you think the dictator would do and whether or not that would be much better than rule under democracy however the power would almost surely use the incredible power the U.S. holds to commit the largest genocide in the history of humanity. Democracy has sucsessfully governed the U.S. and never been abused by one leader in pursuit of a nuclear war despite having over 7,700 nuclear warheads. To conclude, in the event of a dictator you must follow any orders and an eventual nuclear war caused by the intentions of one person would be possible while under democracy debate occurs and the cost-benefit analysis wins typically making the majority satisfied while dictatorship meets the desires of one person for the good of only one person.

Debate Round No. 3


Tofiq95 forfeited this round.


Even if you completely discard everything i've posted Pro still fails to meet BoP, sadly he didn't post a last-second attempt to meet BoP in round four. Thanks to anyone who read this debate, I had a paragraph written already for this round but it seems unnecessary and I don't wish to overkill my opponent.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Dishoungh 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited 2 rounds
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: It's a sweep for Con. Pro forfeited two rounds, didn't provide any sources to back up his assertions, and had pretty awful S&G. As for arguments, I agree that he failed to meet his BoP. To say that "Dictatorship is much better than than democracy" implies that there should be a plethora of examples, but it doesn't matter how many you present. You have to put forward reasons why dictatorship generally functions better - and not just better, but MUCH better. The arguments I saw here were few, and Con's responses were sufficient to make me at least question their reasonability.