Who is the sympathetic guy in this moral conundrum?

[tulasdanslos]

Suppose a brutal dictator and a terrorist organization are in the table, negotiating. The dictator's country has a very advanced secondary sector (industries), and the terrorist leader wants the dictator's political opponent in power.
The dictator swears under oath, he is given the Bible or the Quran or the Letter of Rights or whatever, that he will voluntarily step down if 80% of the capitalists stop supporting him. The terrorist leader is under no delusion that the capitalists want the liberticide dictator out of the Govt. since they're all corrupt. So the terrorist organization goes and kills 80% of the capitalists. It doesn't matter that at some point the capitalists will fear for their lives and stop supporting the regime. Just to make it right, the terrorists kill 80% of the capitalists.
The dictator steps down as promised.

Who is the bad guy of the story?

Your votes are visible, so try and justify your answer if you're not just postmaxxing.
As for me, well... let's just say my parents agree with my opinion.

And no, the story is not Shingeki no Kyojin if you're wondering. I just put a ridiculously high percentage and it happened to align with the Rumbling from Attack on Titan.

 

[Lonelyus]

Just appoint me the supreme leader

 

[tulasdanslos]

Just appoint me the supreme leader

You have gulags. Who would you put there? What's your proposed solution to inceldom in your country? Would you want to rise the HDI of your country?

 

[tulasdanslos]

Bump. I see so many people under the influence of the false god called Authority, it's sad to see.
I'd rather have a poor free country than a rich oligarchy.
I'm leaving my vote and hoping people participate in this hypothetical coup.