Do you think **you** can become a benevolent dictator without ever getting corrupted or turn evil?
-
This post did not contain any content.
Even if purest it is heart almost impossible. Main issue is the same with any govt type, corruption. Its easy to be benevolent when everyone on your side. They are plenty of animes/games like this.
When humans are looking out for themselves any progress you want is water down significantly and now "cruelties" need to be enacted to make these types fall in line.
Now it becomes do you hit surgically or with a hammer depends on number of factors. Like do you specifically know who or just the departments. Delays are problems because meanwhile these types are probably riling up the masses for their own ends or simply result of selfish actions. Massive pain in butt. Without something like a death note or really amazing internal spy network it be impossible to avoid collateral damage. Even then we are now down the 1984 rabbit hole. All because I couldn't trust the people I wanted to govern or fulfill my will. Massive Tragedy when I just wanted to give ppl the stars.Maybe AI govt workers to handle processing with loyalty chips could work. Until some jerk hacks them cause w/e.
This why we cant have nice things. -
One way would be to instead of putting a hard limit to put a tax to everything above that million or whatever number is decided. A tax on hoarding wealth.
The second point is the biggest issue because it could potentially make the place you live unaffordable by just being where it is.
That limit can be updated yearly following the inflation.
This.
Tax the crap out of wealth over value X, let the ghouls fight to earn slightly more, while the government gets plenty of tax incomme.
This is what I like about the social democratic ideology, it has high taxes to fund a safety net, yet retains a market economy to bring in higher earnings and thus taxes.
-
This post did not contain any content.
If society is at the point where we're making dictators then you likely have to be an immoral POS to stay in power. At every stage below you there are opportunistic people who want to take your spot.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Well I wouldn't view it as evil but extreme measures tend to be viewed as evil by someone
-
This post did not contain any content.
I don't think I could become dictator at all, no.
Seriously, though, power corrupts. I'm not immune. Nor am I immune to being manipulated by those more evil than I, which is another big problem with concentrating power.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote last edited by [email protected]
How would you hold power when the powers that be despise you? You think you can rule without military might, will of the people, and the approval of those who owm the resources of the land? The idea of benevolent dictator is broken because of the conditions that you would need to create to even get in power, and to stay in power, would not be benevolent.
-
This post did not contain any content.
how dare you question my benevolence. to the pits with you.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I would try to turn into a wurm. Maybe my son will finish my work.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Depends how you define "evil". And if I was hungry or tired when I got this power.
There's good odds like every Republican official and donor would go directly into a bad time. Some would say that's evil.
-
This post did not contain any content.
"I think I am perhaps the only one honourable enough who can" thinks almost everyone.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I wouldn't be fucking kids and sending goon squads after minorities and into cities to harass my political opponents if that is what you are asking.
The 'not evil' bar is currently riding on the same high speed train the Republicans put their goalposts on.
-
This post did not contain any content.
yeah, easily
the problem is staying on top of things to ensure my government doesn't do things on the side. that sounds exhausting
so, I'd be fine, but I wouldn't be able to keep government clean. I don't have those skills
but if everyone does as they're told? no issues
-
This post did not contain any content.
No, I don't think I could.
The problem with dictators is that you put every action under the context of a single person's perspective. Even if you go in with the best and most altruistic intention, no single person is able to tackle every issue from every angle, and you will inevitably end up committing an injustice by a simple lack of awareness.
Not to mention that many issues are of relative morality to different groups, so to one group you can be a savior but to another you will always be a despot. Whichever interpretation ends up as the definitive one depends on how willing the offended parties are to overthrow you.
A democratic system is not perfect and (depending on perspective) may not be as effectual at bringing out positive change as an altruistic dictator, but the concept of distributed responsibility/distributed blame reduces the likelihood of a coup/revolution (emphasis on reduces, not eliminates) as long as the political apparatus is seen to incorporate or acknowledge everyone's perspectives in the decision making process.
-
No, because "benevolent dictatorship" can't exist (the only benevolent action of such a dictatorship would be self-abolishment).
Guido Van Rossum would disagree. And he also stepped down.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I could BE a benevolent dictator, I could never BECOME a benevolent dictator. The process of getting there would exclude me, because I would reject the power structure needed to form the dictatorship in the first place.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Maybe, but only if I become a dictator to remove and spread my power to smaller government organizations. Basically instead of having one source of power, I dilute the government into multiple governments that also police each other and not one of them have power to govern over all others. Additionally, police and military would be the only "governments" that have slightly less governing power than the rest because while we still need police and military I don't want them to use their weapons to muscle their way over the other governments.
Note: I am not saying it's perfect or covers all cases, but I believe that having a central point of power is the biggest issue with a dictator becoming corrupt and this applies even to non-dictators (hint-hint). Maybe I am wrong and I invite polite discourse on the subject.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I might still be young enough to pull that off for a few more years yet.
The way I would implement that is to day one set a date for elections of a congress and my own retirement. I'm imagining a Mars Attacks scenario in which the ak ak ak aliens blow up congress and the government of the United States consists of the President's teenage daughter and a mariachi band. If through some set of goofy circumstances no meaningful government exists above me and I am in full command, we're gonna do shit my way for, say, four years, and then we're calling a congress. At which time I retire to a small estate somewhere in the Carolinas with only ceremonial powers, like I reserve the right to throw out first pitches of baseball games.
-
Guido Van Rossum would disagree. And he also stepped down.
With all due respect to Guido, creating software does not have the same weight and responsibilities as leading a country.
-
With my dictatorial powers .... my first action would be to seize and outlaw extreme wealth. No one would be allowed to own more than $1 million.
All the money collected would be used for government and providing a Universal Basic Income for everyone.
And I'd get a designer to make me a big fancy hat.
I am behind this 100%
-
This post did not contain any content.
no but I could become a janitor that cleans up the workplace that nobody ever pays attention to
