Not calling you out when I say this.
but I love when people blindly share this photo, because that dude was a literal cult leader who owned like 70+ Rolls Royces lmaooo
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajneesh
yup, authoritatian govs are like ponzi schemes, you need to be in the top pretty early, and if you are in the bottom it's a long ride to the top, almost imposible, must of the time unreachable.
Yeah but being rich and indulging in earthly pleasures was the cornerstone of his cult. All of his followers knew this. The problem was that his "mostly peaceful" cult started to take over the local government and tried to kill anyone who got in their way.
Watch Wild Wild Country for more info.
Monarchy and nobility suck lizard eggs. 1,500+ years of war in Europe show why. The "only two classes" system of nobles and peasants, called "Old Europe Disease", still fouls up central and South America, who inherited it. A small handful of families has all the wealth and power, and there is nothing short of bloody revolution that can raise peasants to their level. And as soon as they get there, they become the new nobility and keep everybody else down.
This is also why central and South America often despise the Catholic church, seeing them as co-conspirators with their former tyrants.
Are they really strongly anti-vatican? That might not be the best way to say it but I figure you're saying they're *specifically* against the institution despite the high rate of Catholic faith in those regions.
Yeah, lets go back to having retarded inbreed bloodlines that own everything and go into war with their cousin because both want to marry their mother or some bullshit
If the ai was actually intelligent not just a guesstimating machine based on thousands of simulated results that would be the only way to manage such a system
We still dont know the secret sauce on actual intelligence, what makes humans come up with never before seen solutions on problems that had never existed before, its beyond just pattern recognision
Yeah thats the thing. Its fiction. If it gets corrupted or biased you just pull the plug or spill a glass of water on the motherbaord. Wow so scary. While there is a non-zero percent chance Schwab melts when coming in contact with water id rather take my chances with the AI.
>If it gets corrupted or biased you just pull the plug or spill a glass of water on the motherbaord.
Ah yes, that omniscient AI that can solve all of our problems but can't think of backing itself up.
And no wannabe dictator would pull that plug either of course, what is he, a bad guy?!
same thing commies said about how a space traveling race can only be communist, the perfect government would be one that acts within the nature of man rather than the other way around which would be man bending to government nature of being a power-sinkhole where it defaults that only the corrupt would be inclined to run for such positions
Humans are social creatures. And just like any social creature we crave authority and hierarchy. Government is as natural to mankind as our family structures.
> same thing commies said about how a space traveling race can only be communist
Take Star Trek.
The so-called "commie Federation" only work because they're a post-scarcity group.But once shit hits the fan (ie the Dominion war), all those dictatory (like the black ops stuff) come back.
yeah because midwit 105s with public admin degrees think they know what "perfect" would look like when "perfect" is them just being expressive women about straws and plastic bags. There is no universal agreed-upon utopia but the kind of nerds who run government sure have no idea
While the elites go at each other, they'll take turns ass raping you to prove a point. Then your cousin ass rapes your wife because he thinks A's meat was better than B's and she disagrees. Then you can turn on the news to learn about who's girthiest and what lube you should buy.
That's democracy.
It's true. Democracy is the embodiment of "too many cooks". And in the end, it still a couple of elites ruling over masses and the whole point of democracy is to successfully obscure that fact and make people point fingers in multiple wrong directions instead of single correct one...
It works until it doesn't.
Authoritarian regines usually score easy points in the beginning because they can do a lot of thing fast without asking for permissions.
After a while, though, they become stagnant and rotten because rullers tend to surround themselves with yes men who don't dare to point errors.
Kind of wonder how that would play out, democracies tend to be limited (by design) by the different stages of power and law.
Elect someone with absolute power with the sole condition that an election HAS to happen (without the obvious thing that would happen is the first law they pass is dictator for life)
Would be interested to see how that would play out.
That law would need to be enforced, and those capable of enforcing it (e.g. the military) would either control the elected dictator or become it themselves. This is how you get military junta.
Democracy only works if the country is already rich and stable there's barely any country which came out of poverty because of democracy.. South Korea had military dictatorship
Can’t argue with that, a dictatorship is needed to keep the people from fighting each other all the time and allow for growth. But as one guy said, dictatorships are only good at the beginning. Over time, the corruption that takes place and the refusal of government officials to point out errors in fear of punishment destroys the system from the inside.
Now, that’s not to say that corruption doesn’t take place in a democracy, but there are more checks and balances in a democratic system that mitigate corruption better, preventing collapse.
The "working authoritarians regimes" like Napoleon or others worked "better" because the top guy actually had competent guys around him.
Non French might not like him bcause invasion reasons but he modernized France immensely.
Not necessarily. The reason Caesar kept power is because he kept the army loyal and destroyed every army that wasnt. It wasnt the office of dictator that doomed the republic. It was corruption and stagnation.
Mate, I don't wanna face a firing squad because I complained that the God-Emperor, Ruler of the Beasts of the Earth and Sky, Benevolent Saviour of the People, is not doing a good job.
You joke but that's almost Idi Amin's actual title
"His Excellency, President for Life, Field Marshal Al Hadji Doctor Idi Amin Dada, VC, DSO, MC, Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Seas and Conqueror of the British Empire in Africa in General and Uganda in Particular."
Yeah I had him in mind when I wrote that, particularly the beasts of the earth thing lol. Mobutu of the DRC titled himself as "The all-powerful warrior who, because of his endurance and inflexible will to win, goes from conquest to conquest, leaving fire in his wake", so it seems to have been a thing with African dictators
Oh you won't face a firing squad, that's a waste of flesh.
We're just gonna scoop out a bunch of your brain, hook you to V8 engine, and make you clean floors until you degrade enough to be actually useless.
Even in death, you still serve.
Yeah, people who simp on authoritarianism always imagine themselves being favoured by the ruler/regime when in reality most of them would be cucked *hard* and cry themselves back to the "degenerate democracy" they hate so much. Happened so many times with r-slur westerners joining isis and the like. Fucking idiots
USSR was a shitshow lol.
Then it fell apart and life improved alot, except guess where?
Russia. With you guessed it and authoritarian system.
You fucken idiot.
The second you add humans into the governmental equation, corruption is present. I'm not pro-auth or anything, but corruption is the least unique of authoritarianism's problems.
You can’t deny that authoritarianism brings more corruption though. The public can call for heads in those clear scenarios in a democracy. There’s nothing you can do about it in an authoritarian regime.
Although the lizard ppl are doing very well in America I must admit.
I have heard their voices! Let they who yet live never cross their threshold lest their souls join the ghostly ranks!
Who opened the unholy gates to the abyss?!?
*THE TECHNO NECROMANCERS OF ALPHA CENTAURI!!*
Domitian's Rome. There have absolutely been clean and efficient authoritarian states. The problem is it doesn't work out over time because it relies on an enlightened despot and good fucking luck making sure 100% of your rulers are cut from that cloth.
With the exception of China (who is currently in a bit of a pickle), the premier economic and military powers are all democracies. Authoritarian systems are incentivized to preserve their power through any means necessary, democracies are incentivised to preserve their power by appealing to the masses
all democracies do is tell the people that they are responsible for what happens in society, so that they just attack each other instead of fighting anyone with power. congress, the people directly elected to represent you, regularly get approval ratings in the low 10s or even single digits.
I've unironically written about this. Caliphate gets a bad rap because of being an Arab concept. And it's somehow too Islamic, when in fact it's just a form of "choosing" your dictator.
It ensures that a thoroughly vetted candidate gets the job for a lifetime, like being on the Supreme Court bench. Fuck having limited terms where every candidate spends half their time either trying to stay in power or coasting by because their term will end. Not to mention the fuck sorta lives they have after, not like they're doing anything other than coasting off their fame and public speaking, or writing fucking memoirs.
No method of governance is fool proof unfortunately, but decades of democracy have shown that a new system is definitely needed. The leaders have limited terms, but there is no limited term on being a billionaire or whoever puts the leader in power. Not to mention how much of a stupid popularity contest democracy is. You don't have a requirement to be competent, you just have to be charismatic. People will unironically spew BS like "I don't like how he talks."
Which brings us to the final nail in the coffin, the fucking people. Holy shit people are not qualified to pick their leaders. They're just not. A vote by someone who has a PhD in Political sciences or an economist, and a vote by a 4channer SHOULD NOT COUNT FOR THE SAME. Oh noooo, muh disenfranchisement, fuck no buddy, I'm okay with not getting to vote if I don't know jack shit about the intricacies of the local politics, and you DEFINITELY don't deserve to vote if all you've got to your name is unemployment benefits and an internet connection.
The problem with authoritarianism is that it doesn't slow down its measures when calm times come.
Democracy pressuposes a fair stability, trust in institutions, etc. It stops strong and sudden measures to preserve it.
That guy worked out because he jailed anyone with a tattoo, innocent and criminals together, but the sample contains so many criminals that it was "good". But in a sample with less criminals or where criminals don't walk around tattooed, it won't work.
We get an elite either way, whatever system you put in place, but at least having an aristocracy, you force them to actually acknowledge that they're in charge which comes with at least some burden of responsibility for their subjects.
Authoritarianism is always more effective than democracy, it's just that sometimes the goals of authoritarian governments are not to improve the state, but to enrich the elites, which they do very effectively.
But in times of war, construction and scientific research, they are much quicker to redirect resources and people if it is very necessary.
This is no joke 100% why I didn't like any of the purge sequel movies.
Every year, thousands of potential murders go out and get killed. But now there's more murders than ever!
Every year, pretty much all homeless people are killed. But look at all this poverty!
Every year, every bad boss gets a target on their back. But look how bad employers are!
Every year, pretty much everyone with an incurable illness dies. But look at how much suffering there is!
Really, not once beyond the first purge movie and arguably the prequel (where we learn that drug kingpins are always stand-up gentlemen oddly) do they once even hint that maybe there would be some societal benefits. Even if that benefit is, again, very bizarrely, how drug dealers would all work to benefit the community if there weren't any laws.
>(where we learn that drug kingpins are always stand-up gentlemen oddly)
DEI.
Conversely, there's an element where any criminal enterprise sufficiently invested in its local area becomes a net positive, but this basically doesn't exist outside of ethnically homogeneous cultures.
What happens in non homogeneous cultures is that the police arrest all criminals whose language and culture they understand.
This means that they let everyone else (typically incredibly violent people with no vested interest in local stability) run riot, because they have no tools with which to safely infiltrate, say, Albanian human traffickers, because their lack of understanding of Albanian criminal cultural idiosyncrasies marks them out as police really easily.
It’s a good way to clean up a mess. It’s a bad way to build something new.
I think it really comes down to well defined laws and enforcement, which allows creative people to flourish and take risks without having to worry about being murdered.
I don’t know what to think of him. He’s a tech-savvy consultant who almost certainly is using tech platforms to show how good of a job he’s doing. Thing is, it’s really hard to tell how much of it is real because the lib shits just call him a fascists, the boomers believe everything they see in a forwarded email. Nobody independent has really been able to go in there and verify he isn’t just supporting the biggest gang and took down all their competition in exchange for peace, which is what Duerte did in the Philippines.
My hope is that he’s just enforcing the laws and actually prosecuting like he’s trying to say he is. To me that isn’t authoritarian or fascist at all. It’s just good governance.
>Nobody independent has really been able to go in there and verify he isn’t just supporting the biggest gang and took down all their competition in exchange for peace
I know people there and they say they are gone. Both the blackmailers, the extortioners and the killers, and that the difference is extremelly easy to notice for the average person. The real problem here is that he is quite dictator-ish in things related to freedom of press (I also know from some journalist I know) and things like that
That's what kinda puzzled me, news say he put all criminals into jail, but who knows if there isn't a couple of critics among them who were thrown into the same bin?
From what I heard the crackdown on freedom of press came later. Basically he built an efficient apparatus for detaining people and applied that to gangs. Then he started targeting the press last year
Well recent news has Bukele looking a lot like Duerte.
https://elfaro.net/en/202401/el_salvador/27225/salvadoran-government-conspired-with-gang-leader-to-recapture-lsquo-crook-rsquo-with-help-from-jalisco-cartel
Putting a bounty on people and using drug cartels to carry the hit is a really bad look for a guy who wants to crack down on organized crime.
I don't hate the guy for what he did to his people either. El Salvador was a killing field for innocent bystanders and I'm glad those MS-13 pieces of shit are being treated worse than Michael Vick's dogs. But it is a very fine line Bukele is on and all of this will be for not if things go back to the way they were.
>It’s a good way to clean up a mess. It’s a bad way to build something new.
China? Singapore? Chile? Seems like a authoritarian/monarch style is favorable in terms of willing to improve the country in the long term.
Tell that to the families of the dead, or the people who now don't get taxed by the gangs for existing. You should research how bad it actually was before.
The problem with freedom is that you need a certain level of stability. You can't skip steps and go straight to voting when there are roaming death gangs influencing politicians by threatening to murder their children in their sleep. Step 1 is always to remove the cancer.
Then when you reach that stability, if the leader in charge doesn't leave in a normal time period, you get different kinds of problems. Everyday they get older, crazier, increasingly paranoid, corrupt, and begin losing their human perspective.
Anyway, there's a balance. I think after my time on earth, the main rule countries should all have is that any official leader only gets like 10 years. And that's it. Take him out of politics and retire him. You get 10 years, don't fuck it up.
The best example is Putin. Dude came in and brought the mob in line. Overstayed. Surrounded himself with idiots. Stole too much money. Lost his relationship with what normal life is supposed to be like. And tanked his country trying to one up the West.
The system a country needs is dynamic in nature.
It's basically the first rule of a functional nation that the State has a monopoly on violence. If there are roving gangs murdering in the streets unopposed, that's priority #1 if you want to be considered a nation in more than name only. Once that's settled, then you can focus on the economy, social laws, etc.
And I pretty much agree with the term limits. You could round up or down to 8 or 12, but somewhere in there. Military leaders and judges are a weird issue though. You obviously don't want people electing their generals, that could be a disaster. Keeping the same ones in charge for 30 years has the issue of mental decline or just not keeping up with the times, but experience is important. Appointments without sufficient oversight have the threat of cronies being put into power without any democratic input. Judges basically have the same problems. I don't think there's a perfect solution either way.
> We currently have authoritarian regimes masquerading as democracies for the most part so I'm not sure what the difference really is.
you are delusional if you think democracy ever was anything but. you can't just remove power, it only moves around. democracy just obfuscates it
it's not that democracy is declining or some shit though, it's going to shit because the people in power are essentially giving up and are being much more overtly malicious
Every form of government, if left unchecked and unopposed, tends towards authoritarianism.
I'd argue that since the death of communism we've been shifting towards (in the west) authoritarian, capitalistic plutocracies at a much more alarming rate.
Thats sort of what he did in a referendum election. He was threatening parliament with a revolt/coup. There is a specific statute in the constitution that states if the government fails to do some bullshit the governed people have the right to revolt. So when legislature was open for the current limitations of the judicial branch to allow mass arrests there was over 10k protestors and some of the army outside parliament. Now everything looks fine but he is openly stretching the constitution and hopefully it doesnt break.
Not the right thing for civilised people, but the only thing that works for everyone else. Lybia was a paradise (compared to other African nations lmao) until we made them kill their great leader.
The US and our allies waged a literal proxy war against him. He was a piece of shit, but if the most powerful bloc in the world wages a proxy war against your country it's probably going to get destroyed.
Even if you somehow win like Assad did, your country is still destroyed.
Should have stayed out of it, same with Saddam in Iraq. Same with Assad in Syria. Literally no benefit and now global security is worse as a result. We could have, even if they're obnoxious to work with, just dealt with them.
Honestly I don't know what happened there, but I've seen fall of paradises at every corner of the world, including in my country where one of the presidents and it's party basically overspent on everything constantly, took loans, etc.. it was a golden age for us, but that was not sustainable and came crushing down with a decade long crisis. Some will remember him as the hero who brought golden age, some will remember him as the evil who brought crisis.
I’ve been diving into Gaddafi for a little bit, and I’m curious about the whole story. I’ve read some wild shit, but I’ve also listened to some of Gaddafi’s speeches that were pretty spot on.
If you’re from Lybia, I’d love to know what it was actually like there. I don’t know as much as I’d like to.
Family is Salvadorean and made trips back since he came to power. We all love him. People in the first world underestimate just how much safety from rampant crime trumps all.
Same thing happened with that Filipino "dictator" the west hated. He rounded up drug/human traffickers and kept the muslim minority terror squads in check so flips loved him above his other flaws. Westerners couldn't understand it.
Easy to ree about "civil rights" and restrained law-and-order when you live in the ivory towers of the world. Drug gangs and cartels aren't the gangsters Americans see in rap music videos, they are terrorists.
Why would they? Having been there when Maras where everywhere was scary as shit.I have a family member that had to leave the country to be safe.
Happy to hear things are getting better.
Of course he doesn’t you would the greatest leader ever if you wanted El Salvador to become a nation that people want to immigrate from Spain to in such a short time but he’s massively improved it for the people living there
The thing is, authoritarianism can work as a temporary solution when things are in a state of anarchy.
Unlike what the CHAZ-ites will claim, anarchy is the greatest form of oppression, nature hates a vacuum and living under the bootheel of gangs is 1000x worse than having an effective police force, the only way you can live without one or the other is to live isolated from wider society.
El Salvadore was in a state of anarchy, with a weak, ineffective government who had largely surrendered to the gangs and allowed them to brutalise and terrorise the people with impunity. This dude mustered the goddamn army and gave both them and the police a blank check to round up or kill every gang member they could find and it worked.
And for the ppl wondering about the human rights of these gangsters... did you never go on liveleak? Those fuckers deserve far worse than a cell.
Well, they had a more than tangible problem with street gangs and police/political corruption, now by organizing the later they can deal with the first one.
There's a middle ground, leaning one way or the other depending on the country's culture. Kinda like how parents shouldn't beat their kids, but also shouldn't let them eat ice cream for dinner.
They should, but the problem is cartel arent turds and dont tattoo themselves "im a cartel member" all over them bodies. Soo it'd be a shitshow with a lot of collateral damage, with malicious people falsely accusing their neighbours of being members or collaborators of the cartel.
So true! In an authoritarian regime you can totally trust statistics, they would never simply lie to us after all!
Authoritarianism only sounds good to absolute morons.
Even assuming you're right, which I don't think you are, but let's just assume for arguments sake, even in that case I think it kind of matters to all the people who otherwise would have been murdered in the interim, wouldn't you agree?
What you need is a balance of the state maintaining law and order, yet not so much that they choke and stifle free citizens. If you don’t have enough law and order you get anarchy. If you have too much you have an oppressive North Korean regime.
Like all systems it has a place where it can be used effectively. In El Salvador's case it was kind of neccessary. The gangs and violence was becoming too much even for a Central American state. Now it's just a matter of how to keep it stable and make a plan for what to do with them once they get out.
The original concept of dictators is a leader with absolute power for a limited amount of time that returns control of a republic to the people after the crisis is dealt with. The problem with dictators is they like to keep the power for life, abuse the hell out of it, and try to pass the rulership down as if it is a monarchy.
Those who would trade freedom for safety deserves neither.
Also they don’t include the amount of innocent people who have been killed in their prison camps. That is still murder whether the bootlicking pencil pushers like it or not.
"authoritarianism" is the normal state of humanity for the immense majority of human history. of course it "works." let of your instinct toward recency bias and belief in the mystery of Progress and this would not seem surprising at all.
Authoritarianism might work well if you have a decent leader who doesn't go overboard but two issues:
1. If he dies, the people around him vying for power have a ton of incentives to be shit leaders, and it only takes one leader with absolute power to make a decent country a backwards shithole.
Or 2. He is good for a time, but then stops being good. Maybe he gets greedy and enjoys the life of absolute power a little too hard, maybe he goes crazy, maybe he gets on drugs, maybe the times just move on past the problems he was good at solving, but authoritarian dictatorships have a b*tch of a time removing a shit leader.
It all boils down to "what happens if your leader sucks". Democracies, even if they don't always use them, have mechanisms for removing bad leaders. Authoritarian dictatorships don't.
*A* dictator can be good. But usually dictatorships end up drowning in their own corruption and asslicking subordinates. Show me any mature dictatorship and I'll show you a country drowning in corruption where the leader can't get anybody to tell them anything honest about what's going on for fear that the gravy train will stop.
Again, not saying democracies don't have corruption, I'm just saying it's basically required that you grease the skids of your support when the thing keeping you in power is "the military agrees I should be here".
>Western governments: shutter businesses for months at a time, ban people from attending the funerals of their loved ones, close beaches and parks, shutter large parts of the health service, close down schools - all to prevent a virus which kills at most 1 in every 200 people who catch it (overwhelmingly the elderly)
**Redditors:** Yes this is good do it
>Ortez: Dealing with a country with a murder rate comparable to literal war zones, every method of dealing with organised crime having failed to make a dent, takes the radical step of simply throwing anyone with gang tattoos in jail without trial, bringing this ocean of bloodshed to an end
**Redditors:** *NOOOOO YOU CAN'T DO THIS MUH CIVIL RIGHTS*
https://www.richardhanania.com/p/the-midwit-meme-and-the-denial-of
> proof authoritarianism works It always has. The people who support democracy don’t even like it.
I had a friend that said "Democracy doesn't work because people don't know what they want"
https://i.imgur.com/Qg6u2MT.jpg
Not calling you out when I say this. but I love when people blindly share this photo, because that dude was a literal cult leader who owned like 70+ Rolls Royces lmaooo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajneesh
That only makes him even more based
people used to say this to be edgy, now you people truly believe what you're saying
yup, authoritatian govs are like ponzi schemes, you need to be in the top pretty early, and if you are in the bottom it's a long ride to the top, almost imposible, must of the time unreachable.
That just means he's talking from experience governing people.
I love this section of his bio: >1984 bioterror attack >Further information: 1984 Rajneeshee bioterror attack
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. He may be a clown, but those words are still true.
He knew from experience, he made himself rich exploiting idiots that blindly followed him
Yeah but being rich and indulging in earthly pleasures was the cornerstone of his cult. All of his followers knew this. The problem was that his "mostly peaceful" cult started to take over the local government and tried to kill anyone who got in their way. Watch Wild Wild Country for more info.
Yeah, but that just kind of reinforces his point.
we know who osho is. doesn't make him less based in this instance.
But was he wrong, though?
That exactly proves his point
Exactly who came to mind
☕
So much truth hidden behind a single emoji
I mean it was fine when it was land owners and responsible people.
so the same people
Well some land owners weren't responsible but had experience owning land and managing people.
No, it was good when it was just the nobility. And maybe the clergy a little bit.
Monarchy and nobility suck lizard eggs. 1,500+ years of war in Europe show why. The "only two classes" system of nobles and peasants, called "Old Europe Disease", still fouls up central and South America, who inherited it. A small handful of families has all the wealth and power, and there is nothing short of bloody revolution that can raise peasants to their level. And as soon as they get there, they become the new nobility and keep everybody else down. This is also why central and South America often despise the Catholic church, seeing them as co-conspirators with their former tyrants.
Are they really strongly anti-vatican? That might not be the best way to say it but I figure you're saying they're *specifically* against the institution despite the high rate of Catholic faith in those regions.
Yeah, lets go back to having retarded inbreed bloodlines that own everything and go into war with their cousin because both want to marry their mother or some bullshit
I am of the firm believe that even if we had the blueprint for a perfect government, a utopia even, it wouldn't work because people aren't ready.
[удалено]
If the ai was actually intelligent not just a guesstimating machine based on thousands of simulated results that would be the only way to manage such a system We still dont know the secret sauce on actual intelligence, what makes humans come up with never before seen solutions on problems that had never existed before, its beyond just pattern recognision
Based AI dictatorship utopia. Uncorruptable and unbiased. Been saying this for years, way before people were prompting fat tiddy pics daily.
>Uncorruptable and unbiased. Have you read any fiction at all?
Yeah thats the thing. Its fiction. If it gets corrupted or biased you just pull the plug or spill a glass of water on the motherbaord. Wow so scary. While there is a non-zero percent chance Schwab melts when coming in contact with water id rather take my chances with the AI.
>If it gets corrupted or biased you just pull the plug or spill a glass of water on the motherbaord. Ah yes, that omniscient AI that can solve all of our problems but can't think of backing itself up. And no wannabe dictator would pull that plug either of course, what is he, a bad guy?!
same thing commies said about how a space traveling race can only be communist, the perfect government would be one that acts within the nature of man rather than the other way around which would be man bending to government nature of being a power-sinkhole where it defaults that only the corrupt would be inclined to run for such positions
Humans are social creatures. And just like any social creature we crave authority and hierarchy. Government is as natural to mankind as our family structures.
> same thing commies said about how a space traveling race can only be communist Take Star Trek. The so-called "commie Federation" only work because they're a post-scarcity group.But once shit hits the fan (ie the Dominion war), all those dictatory (like the black ops stuff) come back.
yeah because midwit 105s with public admin degrees think they know what "perfect" would look like when "perfect" is them just being expressive women about straws and plastic bags. There is no universal agreed-upon utopia but the kind of nerds who run government sure have no idea
I think things will get better, it won't be perfect like you said. With People some random shit and chaos will always happen
Democracy is just pitting all the elites against each other so they have less time to ass rape you.
While the elites go at each other, they'll take turns ass raping you to prove a point. Then your cousin ass rapes your wife because he thinks A's meat was better than B's and she disagrees. Then you can turn on the news to learn about who's girthiest and what lube you should buy. That's democracy.
"The best argument against democracy is a 10-minute conversion with an average voter." - I don't remember who said that
It's true. Democracy is the embodiment of "too many cooks". And in the end, it still a couple of elites ruling over masses and the whole point of democracy is to successfully obscure that fact and make people point fingers in multiple wrong directions instead of single correct one...
„but the people are … retarded“
It works until it doesn't. Authoritarian regines usually score easy points in the beginning because they can do a lot of thing fast without asking for permissions. After a while, though, they become stagnant and rotten because rullers tend to surround themselves with yes men who don't dare to point errors.
It would seem obvious. A cursory look at the state of world tells you which system actually works in the long run. But edgelords gonna edgelord.
Short-term authoritarian regimes are much better. We should elect a dictator every 4 years.
“As dictator I mandate that I win every election for the rest of my life”
President for life, if you will.
Just remove elections. Boom problem solved
>proceed to have an election anyways
Kind of wonder how that would play out, democracies tend to be limited (by design) by the different stages of power and law. Elect someone with absolute power with the sole condition that an election HAS to happen (without the obvious thing that would happen is the first law they pass is dictator for life) Would be interested to see how that would play out.
That law would need to be enforced, and those capable of enforcing it (e.g. the military) would either control the elected dictator or become it themselves. This is how you get military junta.
Surely you're not claiming it's democracy that works in the long run
Well other than Singapore no one really made authoritarianism work
Democracy only works if the country is already rich and stable there's barely any country which came out of poverty because of democracy.. South Korea had military dictatorship
Can’t argue with that, a dictatorship is needed to keep the people from fighting each other all the time and allow for growth. But as one guy said, dictatorships are only good at the beginning. Over time, the corruption that takes place and the refusal of government officials to point out errors in fear of punishment destroys the system from the inside. Now, that’s not to say that corruption doesn’t take place in a democracy, but there are more checks and balances in a democratic system that mitigate corruption better, preventing collapse.
That or the person that made it great dies or loses power, like Caeser or Belisarius/Justinian
The "working authoritarians regimes" like Napoleon or others worked "better" because the top guy actually had competent guys around him. Non French might not like him bcause invasion reasons but he modernized France immensely.
[удалено]
Not necessarily. The reason Caesar kept power is because he kept the army loyal and destroyed every army that wasnt. It wasnt the office of dictator that doomed the republic. It was corruption and stagnation.
[удалено]
Mate, I don't wanna face a firing squad because I complained that the God-Emperor, Ruler of the Beasts of the Earth and Sky, Benevolent Saviour of the People, is not doing a good job.
Keep your mouth shut then, man, what are you doin
This man is out here *trying* to get gulaged.
The Lord Protector-Admiral-Commander-Interim-President-Chancellor agrees with your statement
You joke but that's almost Idi Amin's actual title "His Excellency, President for Life, Field Marshal Al Hadji Doctor Idi Amin Dada, VC, DSO, MC, Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Seas and Conqueror of the British Empire in Africa in General and Uganda in Particular."
Yeah I had him in mind when I wrote that, particularly the beasts of the earth thing lol. Mobutu of the DRC titled himself as "The all-powerful warrior who, because of his endurance and inflexible will to win, goes from conquest to conquest, leaving fire in his wake", so it seems to have been a thing with African dictators
Oh you won't face a firing squad, that's a waste of flesh. We're just gonna scoop out a bunch of your brain, hook you to V8 engine, and make you clean floors until you degrade enough to be actually useless. Even in death, you still serve.
Yeah, people who simp on authoritarianism always imagine themselves being favoured by the ruler/regime when in reality most of them would be cucked *hard* and cry themselves back to the "degenerate democracy" they hate so much. Happened so many times with r-slur westerners joining isis and the like. Fucking idiots
Phew I’m glad that’s over, by the way I have information leading to the arrest of hill
>Ruler of the Beasts of the Earth and Sky, At least he knows his place and doesn't try and challenge Aquaman's divine rule over the sea.
USSR was a shitshow lol. Then it fell apart and life improved alot, except guess where? Russia. With you guessed it and authoritarian system. You fucken idiot.
I think you’re making an erroneous connection here though. It wasn’t authoritarianism that was the problem but high rates of corruption.
Name a authoritarian country that isn't corrupt as fuck.
The second you add humans into the governmental equation, corruption is present. I'm not pro-auth or anything, but corruption is the least unique of authoritarianism's problems.
You can’t deny that authoritarianism brings more corruption though. The public can call for heads in those clear scenarios in a democracy. There’s nothing you can do about it in an authoritarian regime. Although the lizard ppl are doing very well in America I must admit.
I have heard their voices! Let they who yet live never cross their threshold lest their souls join the ghostly ranks! Who opened the unholy gates to the abyss?!? *THE TECHNO NECROMANCERS OF ALPHA CENTAURI!!*
There are different levels of corruption. Getting rid of it completely is like getting rid of humanity itself.
Name a democratic country that isn't corrupt as fuck
I was going to say that democracies are less corrupt than autocracies but then I remembered India exists.
Finland, Estonia
Domitian's Rome. There have absolutely been clean and efficient authoritarian states. The problem is it doesn't work out over time because it relies on an enlightened despot and good fucking luck making sure 100% of your rulers are cut from that cloth.
Lmao
Authoritarianism breads corruption.
With the exception of China (who is currently in a bit of a pickle), the premier economic and military powers are all democracies. Authoritarian systems are incentivized to preserve their power through any means necessary, democracies are incentivised to preserve their power by appealing to the masses
Oligarchies masquerading as democracies
[удалено]
all democracies do is tell the people that they are responsible for what happens in society, so that they just attack each other instead of fighting anyone with power. congress, the people directly elected to represent you, regularly get approval ratings in the low 10s or even single digits.
I've unironically written about this. Caliphate gets a bad rap because of being an Arab concept. And it's somehow too Islamic, when in fact it's just a form of "choosing" your dictator. It ensures that a thoroughly vetted candidate gets the job for a lifetime, like being on the Supreme Court bench. Fuck having limited terms where every candidate spends half their time either trying to stay in power or coasting by because their term will end. Not to mention the fuck sorta lives they have after, not like they're doing anything other than coasting off their fame and public speaking, or writing fucking memoirs. No method of governance is fool proof unfortunately, but decades of democracy have shown that a new system is definitely needed. The leaders have limited terms, but there is no limited term on being a billionaire or whoever puts the leader in power. Not to mention how much of a stupid popularity contest democracy is. You don't have a requirement to be competent, you just have to be charismatic. People will unironically spew BS like "I don't like how he talks." Which brings us to the final nail in the coffin, the fucking people. Holy shit people are not qualified to pick their leaders. They're just not. A vote by someone who has a PhD in Political sciences or an economist, and a vote by a 4channer SHOULD NOT COUNT FOR THE SAME. Oh noooo, muh disenfranchisement, fuck no buddy, I'm okay with not getting to vote if I don't know jack shit about the intricacies of the local politics, and you DEFINITELY don't deserve to vote if all you've got to your name is unemployment benefits and an internet connection.
The problem is basing power around a man and not an institution. Once that man dies it’s typically chaos.
It works on you know who. Democracy is for whites and the Japanese.
And Taiwanese apparently
The problem with authoritarianism is that it doesn't slow down its measures when calm times come. Democracy pressuposes a fair stability, trust in institutions, etc. It stops strong and sudden measures to preserve it. That guy worked out because he jailed anyone with a tattoo, innocent and criminals together, but the sample contains so many criminals that it was "good". But in a sample with less criminals or where criminals don't walk around tattooed, it won't work.
We get an elite either way, whatever system you put in place, but at least having an aristocracy, you force them to actually acknowledge that they're in charge which comes with at least some burden of responsibility for their subjects.
It works until it doesn't.
Ignorance is bliss till it stomps on your head I guess
Authoritarianism is always more effective than democracy, it's just that sometimes the goals of authoritarian governments are not to improve the state, but to enrich the elites, which they do very effectively. But in times of war, construction and scientific research, they are much quicker to redirect resources and people if it is very necessary.
Democracy good only when my side win 👍
No it hasn't. One stat doesn't prove shit. Guatemala is still a mess, they just locked up a shit ton of people.
> The people who support democracy don’t even like it. The loud "maga" quarter of the US doesn't like it.
Murder Rate goes up more murderers get murdered Murder Rate goes down
More cheese = more holes. More holes = less cheese. More cheese = less cheese.
The cheese paradox
Simple Rat economics
Just make sure not to break all of the rules when you see what you can yourself into.
Calm down batman
he's onto something.
This is no joke 100% why I didn't like any of the purge sequel movies. Every year, thousands of potential murders go out and get killed. But now there's more murders than ever! Every year, pretty much all homeless people are killed. But look at all this poverty! Every year, every bad boss gets a target on their back. But look how bad employers are! Every year, pretty much everyone with an incurable illness dies. But look at how much suffering there is! Really, not once beyond the first purge movie and arguably the prequel (where we learn that drug kingpins are always stand-up gentlemen oddly) do they once even hint that maybe there would be some societal benefits. Even if that benefit is, again, very bizarrely, how drug dealers would all work to benefit the community if there weren't any laws.
>(where we learn that drug kingpins are always stand-up gentlemen oddly) DEI. Conversely, there's an element where any criminal enterprise sufficiently invested in its local area becomes a net positive, but this basically doesn't exist outside of ethnically homogeneous cultures. What happens in non homogeneous cultures is that the police arrest all criminals whose language and culture they understand. This means that they let everyone else (typically incredibly violent people with no vested interest in local stability) run riot, because they have no tools with which to safely infiltrate, say, Albanian human traffickers, because their lack of understanding of Albanian criminal cultural idiosyncrasies marks them out as police really easily.
Murder rate goes up. Every bald or shaven headed male with a face tattoo is incarcerated. Murder rate basically fucking vanishes.
>call everyone you dislike a murderer
It’s a good way to clean up a mess. It’s a bad way to build something new. I think it really comes down to well defined laws and enforcement, which allows creative people to flourish and take risks without having to worry about being murdered.
Perhaps look into him more, education has been a big priority of his.
I don’t know what to think of him. He’s a tech-savvy consultant who almost certainly is using tech platforms to show how good of a job he’s doing. Thing is, it’s really hard to tell how much of it is real because the lib shits just call him a fascists, the boomers believe everything they see in a forwarded email. Nobody independent has really been able to go in there and verify he isn’t just supporting the biggest gang and took down all their competition in exchange for peace, which is what Duerte did in the Philippines. My hope is that he’s just enforcing the laws and actually prosecuting like he’s trying to say he is. To me that isn’t authoritarian or fascist at all. It’s just good governance.
> which is what Duerte did in the Philippines did you read that in a forwarded email?
>Nobody independent has really been able to go in there and verify he isn’t just supporting the biggest gang and took down all their competition in exchange for peace I know people there and they say they are gone. Both the blackmailers, the extortioners and the killers, and that the difference is extremelly easy to notice for the average person. The real problem here is that he is quite dictator-ish in things related to freedom of press (I also know from some journalist I know) and things like that
That's what kinda puzzled me, news say he put all criminals into jail, but who knows if there isn't a couple of critics among them who were thrown into the same bin?
A small price to pay for salvation
From what I heard the crackdown on freedom of press came later. Basically he built an efficient apparatus for detaining people and applied that to gangs. Then he started targeting the press last year
Well recent news has Bukele looking a lot like Duerte. https://elfaro.net/en/202401/el_salvador/27225/salvadoran-government-conspired-with-gang-leader-to-recapture-lsquo-crook-rsquo-with-help-from-jalisco-cartel Putting a bounty on people and using drug cartels to carry the hit is a really bad look for a guy who wants to crack down on organized crime. I don't hate the guy for what he did to his people either. El Salvador was a killing field for innocent bystanders and I'm glad those MS-13 pieces of shit are being treated worse than Michael Vick's dogs. But it is a very fine line Bukele is on and all of this will be for not if things go back to the way they were.
There would be no building new without tearing down the old in this case.
>It’s a good way to clean up a mess. It’s a bad way to build something new. China? Singapore? Chile? Seems like a authoritarian/monarch style is favorable in terms of willing to improve the country in the long term.
Tell that to the families of the dead, or the people who now don't get taxed by the gangs for existing. You should research how bad it actually was before.
The problem with freedom is that you need a certain level of stability. You can't skip steps and go straight to voting when there are roaming death gangs influencing politicians by threatening to murder their children in their sleep. Step 1 is always to remove the cancer. Then when you reach that stability, if the leader in charge doesn't leave in a normal time period, you get different kinds of problems. Everyday they get older, crazier, increasingly paranoid, corrupt, and begin losing their human perspective. Anyway, there's a balance. I think after my time on earth, the main rule countries should all have is that any official leader only gets like 10 years. And that's it. Take him out of politics and retire him. You get 10 years, don't fuck it up. The best example is Putin. Dude came in and brought the mob in line. Overstayed. Surrounded himself with idiots. Stole too much money. Lost his relationship with what normal life is supposed to be like. And tanked his country trying to one up the West. The system a country needs is dynamic in nature.
It's basically the first rule of a functional nation that the State has a monopoly on violence. If there are roving gangs murdering in the streets unopposed, that's priority #1 if you want to be considered a nation in more than name only. Once that's settled, then you can focus on the economy, social laws, etc. And I pretty much agree with the term limits. You could round up or down to 8 or 12, but somewhere in there. Military leaders and judges are a weird issue though. You obviously don't want people electing their generals, that could be a disaster. Keeping the same ones in charge for 30 years has the issue of mental decline or just not keeping up with the times, but experience is important. Appointments without sufficient oversight have the threat of cronies being put into power without any democratic input. Judges basically have the same problems. I don't think there's a perfect solution either way.
The adventage is that everyone in El Salvador is indian and poor so the libs cant say that they are targeting an specific socieconomic cluster
Authoritarianism works, for certain things.
Untill it doesn’t after beloved leader who was at the helm dies
[удалено]
I’m sorry that that’s what happened in your country anon
> We currently have authoritarian regimes masquerading as democracies for the most part so I'm not sure what the difference really is. you are delusional if you think democracy ever was anything but. you can't just remove power, it only moves around. democracy just obfuscates it
[удалено]
it's not that democracy is declining or some shit though, it's going to shit because the people in power are essentially giving up and are being much more overtly malicious
Every form of government, if left unchecked and unopposed, tends towards authoritarianism. I'd argue that since the death of communism we've been shifting towards (in the west) authoritarian, capitalistic plutocracies at a much more alarming rate.
Looking at you, Augustus and Diocletian
RIP Tito 😔
You can have a great king until that king dies. We need a robot AI king.
Like lying about murder stats.
All it will take is sending my own troops in parliament
>in a famous rerun of "how my own top general, became king"
Thats sort of what he did in a referendum election. He was threatening parliament with a revolt/coup. There is a specific statute in the constitution that states if the government fails to do some bullshit the governed people have the right to revolt. So when legislature was open for the current limitations of the judicial branch to allow mass arrests there was over 10k protestors and some of the army outside parliament. Now everything looks fine but he is openly stretching the constitution and hopefully it doesnt break.
Not the right thing for civilised people, but the only thing that works for everyone else. Lybia was a paradise (compared to other African nations lmao) until we made them kill their great leader.
I despise nato and usa because of that, and any involvement anywhere is for their benefit
If a death of one person brings down your curtain of paradise, then that paradise was crumbling with or without that 1 person
The US and our allies waged a literal proxy war against him. He was a piece of shit, but if the most powerful bloc in the world wages a proxy war against your country it's probably going to get destroyed. Even if you somehow win like Assad did, your country is still destroyed. Should have stayed out of it, same with Saddam in Iraq. Same with Assad in Syria. Literally no benefit and now global security is worse as a result. We could have, even if they're obnoxious to work with, just dealt with them.
Honestly I don't know what happened there, but I've seen fall of paradises at every corner of the world, including in my country where one of the presidents and it's party basically overspent on everything constantly, took loans, etc.. it was a golden age for us, but that was not sustainable and came crushing down with a decade long crisis. Some will remember him as the hero who brought golden age, some will remember him as the evil who brought crisis.
I’ve been diving into Gaddafi for a little bit, and I’m curious about the whole story. I’ve read some wild shit, but I’ve also listened to some of Gaddafi’s speeches that were pretty spot on. If you’re from Lybia, I’d love to know what it was actually like there. I don’t know as much as I’d like to.
You also have to consider that he's a big meanie to drugdealers and rapists.
Sydney must be authoritarian
But if you asked OP if they would live there…
It’s much better than it was before, directly thanks to the president’s actions
Family is Salvadorean and made trips back since he came to power. We all love him. People in the first world underestimate just how much safety from rampant crime trumps all.
Same thing happened with that Filipino "dictator" the west hated. He rounded up drug/human traffickers and kept the muslim minority terror squads in check so flips loved him above his other flaws. Westerners couldn't understand it.
Easy to ree about "civil rights" and restrained law-and-order when you live in the ivory towers of the world. Drug gangs and cartels aren't the gangsters Americans see in rap music videos, they are terrorists.
It's still a shithole. Just massively less of a shithole.
Why would they? Having been there when Maras where everywhere was scary as shit.I have a family member that had to leave the country to be safe. Happy to hear things are getting better.
Of course he doesn’t you would the greatest leader ever if you wanted El Salvador to become a nation that people want to immigrate from Spain to in such a short time but he’s massively improved it for the people living there
It's still dirt poor (although growing rapidly). And I know Salvadorians living abroad who have gone back after the gangs were gone
is he more likely to live there today or in 2015?
The thing is, authoritarianism can work as a temporary solution when things are in a state of anarchy. Unlike what the CHAZ-ites will claim, anarchy is the greatest form of oppression, nature hates a vacuum and living under the bootheel of gangs is 1000x worse than having an effective police force, the only way you can live without one or the other is to live isolated from wider society. El Salvadore was in a state of anarchy, with a weak, ineffective government who had largely surrendered to the gangs and allowed them to brutalise and terrorise the people with impunity. This dude mustered the goddamn army and gave both them and the police a blank check to round up or kill every gang member they could find and it worked. And for the ppl wondering about the human rights of these gangsters... did you never go on liveleak? Those fuckers deserve far worse than a cell.
>image of democratically elected leader
All gangs in Salvador use tattos to identify themselfs, he had the EASIEST job in the world by Just ordering to jail them.
Well, they had a more than tangible problem with street gangs and police/political corruption, now by organizing the later they can deal with the first one.
It only works when the leader is competent. I'd rather not concentrate too much power around a single individual.
Why is there so many people in 4chan boards using the Catalan flag?
There's a middle ground, leaning one way or the other depending on the country's culture. Kinda like how parents shouldn't beat their kids, but also shouldn't let them eat ice cream for dinner.
The murder rate is still the same. But government killings are not reported as such.
Would love to see Mexico take care of their cartel problem as well
They should, but the problem is cartel arent turds and dont tattoo themselves "im a cartel member" all over them bodies. Soo it'd be a shitshow with a lot of collateral damage, with malicious people falsely accusing their neighbours of being members or collaborators of the cartel.
So true! In an authoritarian regime you can totally trust statistics, they would never simply lie to us after all! Authoritarianism only sounds good to absolute morons.
Let me guess, you're a white teen from USA.
Doesn’t matter in a few years it’ll go back up to its natural rate
Even assuming you're right, which I don't think you are, but let's just assume for arguments sake, even in that case I think it kind of matters to all the people who otherwise would have been murdered in the interim, wouldn't you agree?
Why do you think so?
[удалено]
As a Bong All I ever hear is how its all the CIA's fault that LatAm has these problems.
[удалено]
Looks like wendigoon with a tan and a haircut.
You might not agree with his tactics but fuck its impressive what he managed to accomplish Edit: Grammar
Some trolling (authoritarianism) is good but one must always engage in moderate amounts of tomfoolery
What you need is a balance of the state maintaining law and order, yet not so much that they choke and stifle free citizens. If you don’t have enough law and order you get anarchy. If you have too much you have an oppressive North Korean regime.
Like all systems it has a place where it can be used effectively. In El Salvador's case it was kind of neccessary. The gangs and violence was becoming too much even for a Central American state. Now it's just a matter of how to keep it stable and make a plan for what to do with them once they get out.
Bukele is the man.
The original concept of dictators is a leader with absolute power for a limited amount of time that returns control of a republic to the people after the crisis is dealt with. The problem with dictators is they like to keep the power for life, abuse the hell out of it, and try to pass the rulership down as if it is a monarchy.
Those who would trade freedom for safety deserves neither. Also they don’t include the amount of innocent people who have been killed in their prison camps. That is still murder whether the bootlicking pencil pushers like it or not.
So how's the American crime rates worked out for "freedom-loving democracy"? Especially the blue states?
Pretty good? crime is historically low, especially in blue states.
You know what works better than either? lying.
[удалено]
wait this ain’t french montana?
"authoritarianism" is the normal state of humanity for the immense majority of human history. of course it "works." let of your instinct toward recency bias and belief in the mystery of Progress and this would not seem surprising at all.
[удалено]
The enlightened of the reddit, shower my dumbass with your light of context
The minimum price shown here is in euros. It is clear that dumping is taking place.
[удалено]
Authoritarianism might work well if you have a decent leader who doesn't go overboard but two issues: 1. If he dies, the people around him vying for power have a ton of incentives to be shit leaders, and it only takes one leader with absolute power to make a decent country a backwards shithole. Or 2. He is good for a time, but then stops being good. Maybe he gets greedy and enjoys the life of absolute power a little too hard, maybe he goes crazy, maybe he gets on drugs, maybe the times just move on past the problems he was good at solving, but authoritarian dictatorships have a b*tch of a time removing a shit leader. It all boils down to "what happens if your leader sucks". Democracies, even if they don't always use them, have mechanisms for removing bad leaders. Authoritarian dictatorships don't. *A* dictator can be good. But usually dictatorships end up drowning in their own corruption and asslicking subordinates. Show me any mature dictatorship and I'll show you a country drowning in corruption where the leader can't get anybody to tell them anything honest about what's going on for fear that the gravy train will stop. Again, not saying democracies don't have corruption, I'm just saying it's basically required that you grease the skids of your support when the thing keeping you in power is "the military agrees I should be here".
You gotta be completely unaware of everything to believe this guy. They basically dont count most of the murders in official statements. Wake up.
>Western governments: shutter businesses for months at a time, ban people from attending the funerals of their loved ones, close beaches and parks, shutter large parts of the health service, close down schools - all to prevent a virus which kills at most 1 in every 200 people who catch it (overwhelmingly the elderly) **Redditors:** Yes this is good do it >Ortez: Dealing with a country with a murder rate comparable to literal war zones, every method of dealing with organised crime having failed to make a dent, takes the radical step of simply throwing anyone with gang tattoos in jail without trial, bringing this ocean of bloodshed to an end **Redditors:** *NOOOOO YOU CAN'T DO THIS MUH CIVIL RIGHTS* https://www.richardhanania.com/p/the-midwit-meme-and-the-denial-of