What are the conditions in countries, that encourage radical dictatorships?
What are the conditions in countries, that encourage radical dictatorships? In studying Afghanistan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Russia, what are the conditions that encourage radical leaders to get power. Other examples might include Germany and Hitler, Somalia, Haiti, Palestine and even France.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
A dictator assumes the role of head of state which lets them create laws without legislative assembly (more or less). Holding such power in their hands, it’s not surprise that the position is abused. According to wikipedia (the place for most of my information gathering), modern day dictators assume the role when their country is in an emergency state. I suppose this could be during or post wars/battles, but also when a country gains independence from another. When a country’s people need someone to depend on, a dictator may step up to the plate however they may abuse their power and oppress their people further.
What is it about the listed countries that encourage radical dictatorship? Well first off, I think I can say the listed countries aren’t as well developed as western countries. Not specifically speaking, the people in these countries could face things such as food shortage, lack of personal well being, and oppression from the government or military. When faced with these things, one could think to themselves that there needs to be a change, and someone willing to be that change will step up to the plate. A coup d’etat could overthrow any power and that one person begins to be in charge. Although their first intent was to create a revolution, once in power, that power goes to their head and they use their power to perhaps create their ideal state by means of oppressing or abusing their people. The need for a revolution is what encourages dictators because there is a need for change.
These people don’t come out of nowhere though, a look at some dictators show that they come from notable families or had military involvement of some sort. Both Saddam Hussein and Adolf Hitler were in the military at one point in their career.
These radical dictators have a certain ideal in their head to how their country and their people should be. It’s this ideology that drives them and seeing their countries in poor states is what encourages them to try and make it a “better” place. The problem is, their ideology might not be carried out in the best of ways and may not be accepted by everyone.
Basically what encourages a radical dictatorship is when a country is in desperate need for a leader. Like in a war is in tact, or the country is failing miserably.
All it takes is for a person to promise a country all these great things like lower taxes or protection from war.
Once these people (who you don't even know) are voted into power, they completely ruin things (most of the time. Like Saddam Hussein. Why on earth would they vote him into power? He seemed alright at first. It is all based on first impressions. Any ways he seemed alright at first and then he ended up gassing his own people. Now what kind of leader is that?
Also what encourages a radical dictator is the countries economic situation. If they are poor, and someone says they can definitely make the stronger and richer,then obviously that person would get voted in. Its all based on lies!!
There are only a few times that is is tolertable to have a dictator in power, and if there is a dictator in power he should be removed before he gets attached to the power bestowed upon him is sucking him of his humanity and he becomes a power hungry monster. The only conditions where radical dictatorship is needed is if the people in a country are disunited, if there is civil war, and if the country is at war while the country is in disunity. That way the dictator can get the people united by force to restore order and the dictator can use any means to win a war, even if it is a heavy cost. It is better though than being repressed by the warring nation if it is to take over the country. But the radical dictator should be instantly removed from power when unity is brought upon the country and a more democratic party can come up with means to restore the country without the use of force.
what is a dictator? it is a absolute ruler of a country who uses forces and fear to keep themselves and friends in authority. A dictator is usually places because the country does not have a democracy. Dictators are also put in place because the country could be in war or battles and needs someone to step in and lead. Dictators also step in when the country finally gains their independence. Not all dictators are bad just when they let their power and authority get to their head and abuse it.
Adolf hitler is one of the most known dictators of all time. he was a german politican who was the leader of the "Nazi party" in 1934 he became a dictator and gained complete control of germany. The nazi party managed to block and eliminate all other political parties which game them more authority. With all the power they had they managed to kill about fifty million people and ten percent of them were jewish. When Hitler was put into the german government he abused his power. He ended "freedom of speech" and killed or punished everyone he did not like. During Hitler's time he wanted more babies to be born so that the only race alive would be the "master race" which is blue eyes blonde hair. He refused to see any jewish people because he thought they were not worthy to live which lead to the Holocaust. Hitler did not really benefit his country and he did not change because he killed him at the end.
Vladimir Lenin was the first leader of the so viet union. he was a russian revolutionary and the leader of the Bolsheviks party. When running Lenin provided the russians to motivate them to support his party was peasants land, workers; bread and control of factories, soliders; peace and national minorites; self determination. Lenin also had a party of two hundred thousand followers. he also rallied " all power to so viets" hoping to be a model of the world. When Lenin was in control his government faced hunger, fear, disunity, war and no industries of some sort. Lenin signed a treaty called Brest-litovsk which resulted of places of lands were given up so that the germans would stop invading his country. Lenin also brought the new economic policy which out aside socials skils and kept control of banks.
Josef Stalin was the second politcal leader of the Soviet Union. He stayed in authority because he removed anyone that he thought was a threat to him. He was obsessed over himself and was glorification of himself as a human. Because Stalin was in power he got in country to be powerful and modern but his authority also cost millions of deaths. Stalin also made a five year plan which included the development of iron and steel, machine-tools, electric power and transport.
Either way Dictators are usually seen as hero's but at the end of it they end up taking what they want instead of whats best for their country.
What is a dictator? The dictionary defines it as a person exercising absolute power, esp. a ruler who has absolute, unrestricted control in a government without hereditary succession. So when I think of a dictator I think right away of Hitler. I think people would allow a dictator only if their country is at its lowest. For example a country going through poverty, unemployment, poor leadership and plus there is a war going on. That’s when someone whose powerful can step in and take control of everything and no one could stop him because the people have there own issues to deal with. Its not the fact that people allow them to, it just sorta happens. When the people are down they always look for some type of hope, like a leader to make things all better. But I think I dictator is better than a bad president, in a way it keeps the people “satisfied” but there are some things they might do bad but when a country’s in need of leadership, a dictator will have to do. Some examples of dictators and there countries are Adolf Hitler (Germany) – he served in the world war then he went into politics and made the Nazi party. The loss in war and peace terms brought a widespread of discontent. Then he came into power and took over many countries but had some wrongs like gassing the Jewish people. Eventually the world revolted and won. Another example is Kim Jong-Il (North Korea)- Kim basically followed his dads shoes in politics. When he went into power, things worsened like economy, floods and other natural disasters. Kim has North Korea under very tight control. International human rights groups attack the government for engaging in public executions, torture, slavery, forced abortions, and the establishment of concentration camps. Lastly, another dictator is Moammar Khadafi (Libya) he was the one who called Bush to get the WMD. Also he was hit by missles by Bush Sr. and killed half his family. These leaders did some good for their country but mostly bad. Like Hitler and Kim Jong both had concentration camps and both violates human rights. Also Kim Jong reports having more than 200,000 political prisoners and are currently being held in North Korea. Japanese officials accuse North Korea of kidnapping Japanese citizens to be brought into N. Korea. They have the ability to keep the people in order but not happy.
A dictator is one whom takes over a nation that is instability and provokes fear.
When Hitler came into power Germany was a democrascy.Then the Reichstag building( where the people voted) burned down, he told the people of Germany that is was a sign that a communicast would come into power. Hindenburg then gave Hitler all the power and hitler gladly took it. Hitler prayed on Hindenburgs fear of communicaium. Hitler discontnued all other parties from gaining power because he eliminated democrasy and the right to vote for vast parties. He then went on to rule with and iron fist. Sending out the SA to roam the streets to "keep order." They beat anyone whom did not agree with Hitler.
When Saddam tried to gain power he assinated the communist leader of the Batth party. After he was sent to jail he tried to kill the Head of the Iraqi government. Due to the frear that he would be killed he ran away to Syria. Once again Saddam was sent ot jail but when he got out this time he helped the Batth party gain control and rise in power. He was only a central figure in the party but when Bakr stepped down he moved up in power and became the soul leader of the Batth party.
These dictators rule by force and fear. In the beginnig they have great political views and seem like heros because they step up when countries are in distress. These countries are usally third world countries and are not westernized. They lack food,money and unity. These countries are usally in a state of emergency as well. That is why it is so fortuitus that these dictators step into power. The start out as heros but eventually distroy the countries and themselves on there journey to gain power.
Both Saddam and Hitler were thought that rase had a big role in power. Hiltler thought that those who were not caucasian were unsupperior and Saddam thought that only those who where islamic should reign and wanted the world to be all Islamic. Dictators take over and keep there power by there strong and mass military bestoying upon the nation apprehention. They grab the attention of the people by promicing a better life with them in power. Its all bout the power and the push to see how much u can gain. in the end the hero soon become the villian
To add to my earlier statement, I will refer to older dictators that have come to power and have had to been forcefully removed from that power. Hitler, Stalin, Fidel Castro, Saddam, all of these people have one thing in common. They have all died in order to free people from thier oppressive ruling. They have all murdered, they have all tortured, and they have all lost sight of what they set out to do. In the beginning I bet you they did not start out thinking that they were going to destroy hundreds of thousand of peoples lives, and I bet they all started out thinking they were going to make a difference to peoples lives for the betterment of mankind. This is the ultimate proff that power corrupts, they had all unified their countries in the beginning, and then at a certain point they fell from grace and all started going to hell. All these countries before their rule have all been in chaos or poverty, and these dictators have changed that so the country may evolved, but then they end up corrupt and end things worse off than they started.
A dictator in my opinion is a person overabusing his powers and bility to overrule his country and absolutely provokes fear. A huge example which i think when people thinks of dictatorship is Adolf Hitler. It is right what i read about other peoples opinion that having no President,PM, or any ruler who would run their country is worse than having a dictator but hurting/killing their own people like what Hitler did to his own coutnrymen which is similarly comparable to what Saddam Hussein did just years ago gassing his own countrymen because of Saddam thinking they were threats to him and the country. this way of doing things against people is just unforgivable indded it is.
Hitler and his fellow members of the National Socialist (Nazi) Party, who were determined to bring down the republic and establish dictatorial rule in Germany, did everything they could to create chaos in the streets, including initiating political violence and murder. The situation got so bad that martial law was proclaimed in Berlin. This is how Hitler started after he joined politics and being in the Nazi party. Hitler thinks that his way/ideals of running his country may be better for themselves or the country itself but some other people doesn't really envy him with the way he does things.
In life, there is usually more than one side to everything. When it comes to government, it is not any different. Throughout history, we have many examples of different styles of running a country, and its trials and tribulations, and its overall outcome. The type of government that is the issue, is a dictatorship. When is it good for a country? When is it bad for a country?
What is a dictatorship? It is a government where a single party, with a specific leader has complete control over its citizens, usually compromising every aspect of their lives. It is with that power that they dominate the country, and there is nobody to object them because of the abuse of power when it is used unjustly.
Since a dictator has absolute power, there is nobody to degrade their opinions. This, in itself, can be good or bad. There is the one argument, where it can be a focused approach, and it actually does work and do the country some good. Things get done faster and the country progresses. Hitler would have never gotten so powerful if he did not have a good cause behind him. The problem for the world, though, was the fact that he manipulated people into thinking that the cause was good. Dictators often manipulate the citizens they rule over. Because a dictatorship is run by a single party, usually with a single leader, there is action. It puts some pressure on the leader, which creates more things being done, because if nothing happens, the heat is all on that one leader. It is run by a single person, whose ideas and actions do not take into consideration the effect it’d have on the people, but only the benefits the leader themselves would get. On the other hand, the fact that the one leader does take all the heat is bad. No one is there to tell them that what they are doing is wrong. There is no “opposition party,” or democracy where citizens get to vote and decide. It is all just done.
When things get done in a country with a dictator for the head of their government, it is usually done with force. This force cripples the peoples’ rights. Once it gets to this point, it is almost impossible to stop. It is this famous stage where Hitler became famous. With what started as what seemed like a change for the better, it flipped, and the people became prisoners of a dictator. Instead of living in a free country, people reform and eventually live under strict rule. It could possibly turn into the type of world portrayed in George Orwell’s 1984. A world where you are constantly being watched, surveillance follows you day and night, and if you have even a shadow of a doubt in your faith of the government, bad things will happen to you.
When a dictator is involved in a country’s government, it usually does not end well. As a normal citizen, I do believe that democracy is the way to go. However, if the leader I vote for has the drive of a dictator, yet still gives us the freedom, rights and benefits of a democratic government, the balance can be found, and the country will grow. So, for a simple answer to “When is a dictatorship good for a country?”, I think the answer to that is never. Only because in a government, you need compromise, and opposition, and a dictatorship does not have that type of set-up. A dictator is selfish, and a leader should be about the people, not against the people.
Most dictators aren’t usually chosen by the public to be their leader. Countries are usually over powered by an individual with promises of money, power, freedom, or just mere brute force. These countries with dictators don’t have governments to prevent such things from happening so the dictators control everything. Although not all dictators are ruthless and terrible, some are actually good leaders who help their country become prosperous but for the ones that don’t, just simply terrorize and strike fear in the people of the country.
Leaders such as Saddam Hussein and Adolf Hitler both had something to offer. Saddam Hussein may have killed thousands and even his own family, he had stability of his country. Since her fall as the leader Iraq has been in terrible instability not only politically but also the stability of the entire country from economical to the power struggle currently happening.
Adolf Hitler was one of the most extreme dictators in history. He killed millions and was the reason and cause for World War 2. He started with winning over the hearts and minds of the people of his country and worked his way to the top, but that wasn’t enough. He wanted to become the most powerful person in the world and therefore began his rampage.
I believe that dictators are never good for any country and a country should have more than more than one person making decisions determining what goes on in the country.
A dictator is someone who has full power over a country. They are not bined by any laws or constitution making them very powerful. Dictators should be used for government if the country is in need of help such has to keep a civil war out of the picture. Many dictators use their power to abuse and there havent much dictators who has not used thier power for teh wrong doing. An example would be one of the most popular dictators which ofcourse is Mr. Adolf Hitler (the funny square moustache guy). He used his power to kill jews and other people who he just couldnt stand. Saddam Hussein was a dictator who did do some good by keeping the Iraq together. He kept the Sunni's and Shiites from creating a civil war, provided productions in and out of the country. But ofcourse he did what Hitler did just to a lower extent, kill people he did not like, in this case it was the kurds. Many dictators are smart and find ways to persuade their citizens, whether it was to promise food supplies, give people jobs, promise a better living. Most where put as bad dicators and none have been known as a great dictator so far.
To conclude, dicatorships should not be used for the bad, they should listen to what Uncle Ben said to Peter(spiderman) "with great power comes great responsibility".
Post a Comment