literally every dictatorship is unstable as fuck JFL
Politicians in a representative democracy are the same
In a good, stable, and educated society, I would avocate for Democracy. Unfortunately, there is no such thing as that right now, so dictatorship run by a nationalistic dictator would 100x be better.
I know
Yes, I would rather live in a dictatorship with a direct and clearly defined vision than in a democracy with dozens of political factions fighting for power and pinning the masses against each other with their political agendas.
Then what was your point?
Banana republics in the third world don’t count. Spain was stable and prosperous under Franco until his death. The dictatorship could easily have continued into the modern era, but the Spanish king, whom Franco chose as his successor, decided to voluntarily restore democracy.
why did he do that
He was politically a liberal and wanted Spain to integrate with the rest of west Europe
Establishing such a form of government would require a dictator first. I doubt the masses would vote to establish such an elitist system even if it was for their benefit.
You have to break eggs to make an omelette, to use the tired saying. If a dictator is the prerequisite step to pave the way, then so be it. The hard part is going to be finding the right dictator who has a vision beyond his own juvenile lust for power and control, and can envision a future for his people hundreds of years after his death.
The Greeks and Romans weren’t kikes…
Most of these countries are third world shitholes that will always be bad regardless of their form of government. There are many examples of effective dictatorships that raised the standard of living of their people, such as the aforementioned Franco in Spain, Piłsudski in Poland, and even Hitler and Mussolini in their countries, whose only mistake was to get involved in an external war that they could not win.
That's besides the point, because that's how it has been for the vast majority of people throughout recorded history. I am asking from a theoretical and all-encompassing point of view.
Interestingly, many of those people and cultures are more receptive to autocratic rule than a democratic one. The more individualistic you are as a person and culture in any given society, the less amenable you are to autocratic rule.
theoretically I hate politics we should be free man
The ones in Spain and Poland happened around 100 years ago.
Franco's dictatorship ended in 1975, and the fact that some of the dictatorships were from a century ago is irrelevant. Representative liberal democracy is already centuries old at this point, and this argument discredits it even more, as liberal-democratic states are bound by the same laws and procedures they established when they were founded. Responsible dictatorships, on the other hand, are allowed to be more pragmatic and adapt to the times.
Democracy, if it works. If we are talking about an ethnically and religiously homogeneous society, where only men who own property can vote, as well as those who, if necessary, will defend the country with weapons in their hands. Democracy should not extend to foids, old people. Only for young men who, if necessary, will fight to defend the fatherland.
