Amazon.com Widgets
  • They evil ok???

    Look at Hitler, look at Stalin! What do they all have in common?? THEY'RE EVIL DICTATORS FOR FUCKS SAKE!! Everything goes BOOM because they WANT WAR. Hitler failed many times before and look what has gone through his head, "WAR BITCH, WARRRRR" THAT'S ALL HE COULD EVER THINK OF YOU DUMBFUCKS WHO THINK DICTATORS AREN'T EVIL.

  • Dictators are Evil

    All dictators are harsh I believe this because all dictators went into the country trying to make the country there's and if all dictators didn't do this than I might say no but since they do go in with the idea to be evil I think all dictators are evil.

  • Cos I said

    Cos I said there is bad dictators so their policies reach fruition, with the next leader having to deal with the consequences of the previous administration's actions. So the foresight of a democratically-elected leader tends to last that long, five years say. In a dictatorship, however, since the leader(s) doesn't have to worry about constantly changing governments and since he must rule for very long periods of time, potentially, the regime tends to be more farsighted and can enact policies over decades, as well as deal with their consequences. As some have already mentioned, Pak Chung Hee is a good example in this regard. Seen through the lens of how

  • Dictators are Evil

    Most dictators probably did not start out as inherently evil people, but the more power one obtains the more corrupt and evil one gets in order to retain that power. This is true for dictators who resort to fear, violence and intimidation to keep themselves in power despite poor leadership.

  • Yes - their unwillingness to share power is dangerous

    A dictator who refuses to share the power in his domain is someone to be extremely afraid of. In these modern days, it has been proven time and again that democracy is the policy that is the best ingredient for a successful nation. Having someone with complete control is a constant recipe for disaster and should be avoided at all costs.

  • May great leaders were dictators

    Caesar was never an emperor. He was a dictator. He was a good dictator who put through many important reforms that benefited the people(not the rich folks who later killed him). He put forth many land reforms and fixed the calendar which is almost the same one we use today. 2. Caesar believed in clemency towards his enemies. He could have killed all of his political rival as was the trend set before by Sulla and Marius. This eventually got Caesar killed. Augustus,the 1st emperor, learned the lesson and made sure all of his enemies were pushing up daisies. Caesar was very harsh however to the Gauls who went back on their word and revolted. Had they not revolted, they would not have had to pay such a harsh penalty. 3. As a general he was genius and his battle strategies are still studied to this day. 4. If you look at the big picture, he had no option other than take power. His enemies had forced his hand and they thought he would back down. They were wrong. People make the mistake of assuming all dictators are bad. A dictator is sometimes necessary when the system does not work. The Roman republic was designed to manage a city, not an empire. If it weren't for Caesar, Rome would not have lasted another 500 years

  • No they are not ALL evil.

    Just because they have all the power in a country does not make them evil. People want you to think that and the people that do, only see the bad dictator's. Some are good ones or not bad ones like António de Oliveira Salazar, Thomas "Tom Sank" Sankara, and Adolf Hitler but they're some bad ones like Mao and Stalin.

  • Not wll dictators are bad

    Not all dictators because they did many good thing for their country. Hitler Led One Of The First Anti-Smoking Campaigns. Italian dictator he reclaimed land for Italy,Also, he made farmers concentrate more on farming specific crops. In the long run this made Italy a little more self-sufficient.This proves even bad dictators did something good for their country.

  • Gandalf's Cat says

    It definitely depends, they can be good, but they have the potential to be bad. I think that it would be bad to say that all dictatorships are evil, because some are very good. I am looking for examples of people being afraid to speak there minds because of dictatorships.

  • Gandalf's Cat says

    It definitely depends, they can be good, but they have the potential to be bad. I think that it would be bad to say that all dictatorships are evil, because some are very good. I am looking for examples of people being afraid to speak there minds because of dictatorships.

  • Different eras require different forms of government

    Such as in the Roman times they might have needed a strong leader to bring peace and stability. Human rights as defined by the United Nations says that people should be given opportunities to participate in government. This does not necessarily mean that the government has to be a democracy.

  • As long as they don't actively intimidate their people and leave the man on the street in peace.

    Some dictators concern themselves only with maintaining power and don't repress or oppress the general population in any way, even going so far as allowing denunciations and criticisms of their governments. Hugo Chavez is one example of a man who was, for all intents and purposes, a dictator; but he allowed a free press and did almost nothing to his opposition. Additionally, having power centralized and wielded by one person to achieve one vision can work wonders for an economy. The reason for that, I believe, lies in the length of dictatorial regimes versus democratic ones: in democracies, presidents most be elected and usually served for a limited amount of time before they are replaced. Democratic rulers only have to rule for short periods of time, often not seeing their policies reach fruition, with the next leader having to deal with the consequences of the previous administration's actions. So the foresight of a democratically-elected leader tends to last that long, five years say. In a dictatorship, however, since the leader(s) doesn't have to worry about constantly changing governments and since he must rule for very long periods of time, potentially, the regime tends to be more farsighted and can enact policies over decades, as well as deal with their consequences. As some have already mentioned, Pak Chung Hee is a good example in this regard. Seen through the lens of how far they see into the future, one realizes that even the most evil dictators in history were farsighted men: Stalin, Hitler, Dung Xiaoping, Mao, etc. That's probably what makes a good politician...How far into the future can Obama see?

  • Depending on who you ask.

    Not all dictatorship is evil and brutal. Government rule is modified to the countries cultural needs. If the people in the society find strict rule as a thing they want, they can have it. In this case, the government is fulfilling the needs of its people. Dictators can provide good education, good public transport, recreational facilities, and hydro and electrical access with making people happy, which is not exactly how the media portrays as a dictator.

  • Depending on whom you ask.

    A dictatorship may not be killing its own people. The cultures in other countries result in stricter conditions that fit the peoples needs. Some people want tight rules, and not all people have the same opinion of government as us. With Syria under Al Assad, everybody got education and was no poverty whatsoever, and there were recreational facilities, people were satisfied with the level class he provided, even though security was arguably tight.

  • No They Are Not

    I used to be of the crowd that believed that republics and democracies were the best forms of government; this is only true to an extent. For example, look at some third world countries where there are democracies. A lot of these democratic governments are corrupt, inefficient, and have done nothing to improve the lives of their people. In some cases, strong and benevolent leaders are needed to bring order to a country and eliminate corruption and inefficiency. Look at South Korea for example, it was once one of the poorest nations on Earth; but once Park Chung-hee took over he modernized the country and made it the economic powerhouse it is today, although at the expense of human rights. So yes, while most dictatorships have been corrupt and cruel, in some cases an authoritarian hand is needed to make the country stronger.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.