I don't think he would be successful, but he can try. I don't think he would be able to pull it off, but world unity would mean that there would be no more wars (other than rebellions), and I've heard North Koreans are pretty happy, probably due to propaganda and stuff. But, at least they're happy.
And in the end isn't that all that matters?
Yes because the ruler can get more things done. While in a democracy an elected leader is constrained by the law and other things making it harder for him/her to make big changes and reforms, while a dictator doesn't have to worry about this, and you wouldn't lose your freedom, you just couldn't decide who gets to lead your country. Of course, if the dictator was a bad person or only cared about power instead of his/her people then it is one of the worst types of government (Hitler for example).
Term limits are un-democratic If the president is doing good why shouldn't he/she be allowed to run again if the people vote for him, and if the people grow tired of him they can just elect someone else in the next election. It dose not make sense to me at all why someone would see term limits as a good thing.
Depends on whether you were gassed or sent to work, but for the most part, it was worse. If I had to choose between being gassed or becoming a slave, I would rather be gassed even though it was a slow death. However, I would rather be a slave if I wasn't, since both took away your freedom, but the conditions were much worse in the camps and at least the slave owners made sure you lived, unlike the Holocaust. Overall, the Holocaust was worse. ~ Hadi