• Paragone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    You’re missing a point, though:

    Succession.

    Say you get dictatorship of all-you-value-and-agree-with, but 20y later it turns into something that hates all you are…


    Dictatorship’s only useful for correcting ( e.g. for chopping-out all-pervading corruption … I don’t think any “democracy” ever could clean-up Northern Mexico, e.g. ), but it has to be dictatorship that is committed to eradicating dictatorship, strategically, in the long-run, including itself.


    The dictatorship/democracy question is actually a specific remapping of another question:

    Which is “better”?

    • consensus-rule
    • capable chain-of-command

    ??

    The true answer is:

    It depends on the situation!!

    Got all the time in the world? Consensus’s your answer.

    Ship’s sinking, & you need to stop that happening, NOW?? Capable chain-of-command’s your answer.

    Will the world’s human-viability situation get SO bad that only benevolent-dictatorship CAN save a remnant of humankind??


    Also, “democracy” only allows attacking corruption down to a level that doesn’t threaten the deep corruption: once any “democracy” threatens that deep roots-level corruption, then …

    Sorry, no more anti-corruption allowed. …

    Only appearances are allowed to change, iow, and that’s a human socio-political law underlying all cultures, East, West, civilian, military, corporate, not-for-profit, religious, atheist/anti-theist, ALL of them.

    I read, years ago, that the surest way to get a prison to riot, is to prevent the “blowing off steam” petty-crimes/cheats/underground-economy in it.

    Once you prevent the petty-criminality-economy from working, pressure BUILDS, until killing is happening.

    Like clockwork.

    “Acceptable” civilization/society’s the same way, kinda.

    You either accommodate the criminality underlying acceptable-appearances, or it will BREAK your life & your cleaning-up action.

    ( this principle doesn’t mean that removing corruption isn’t possible, it does mean that there needs to be a spectrum of “OK…not-ok” for people to experiment in/with, in order to … it translates from thoughtshapes into English as “discover their underlying selves/natures”, but I’m not certain that’s a good/complete rendition of it )

    Dictatorship seems to be the only possible means of breaking corruption-is-the-underlying-law, but it’d have to be dictatorship of someone who had non-human nature, or more-precisely, who didn’t have the normal human unconscious-ignorance-protecting instinct.

    Good luck finding such a someone.

    Normal AwakeSoulist/Buddhist monks/nuns aren’t anywhere-near that level, though true Zen-masters are ( that level means having shed/destroyed one’s unconscious-LifeMind’s ignorance-substance identity-crystal … that was the basis for both their ego & their projected mirage-nature SurfaceMind, which no-longer has any existence/basis ).


    Human-process is a process, right?

    How could a dictatorship be a mundane human dictatorship, & simultaneously keep tracking what humankind actually requires, in order to keep evolving, at pace, while ClimatePunctuation, economic-conditions, ecological-butchery, geopolitics, etc, all keep changing?

    You’re categorically looking at something outside of mundane-human, then.

    _ /\ _

    • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      Didn’t miss it at all. Your talking point ignores the reality.

      If the issue is succession and we pick the US, you have this potential issue every 4 years on the presidential level. You have the same issue on the house and senate level. You have a worse issue on the supreme Court.

      If the leaders change in 4 years, you’re equally screwed as if your dictator changed in 4 years. However a dictator generally is in power for decades or many decades. So really, you’ve shown the opposite. It is better to be in a stable dictatorship because the succession unknown is less often.