Dictatorship

Discussion in 'Quackenbush's' started by Captain Murphy, Feb 8, 2008.

  1. Captain Murphy

    Captain Murphy 250+ Posts

    I don't want to put this on the West Mall because I don't want it to be about George Bush or the Iraq War or Islam. Today I read one of the saddest articles I've ever read.
    The Link

    Here are some quotes: "There are many motives for these crimes and parties involved in killing women, by strangling, beheading, chopping off their hands, legs, heads...When I came to Basra a year ago," he says, "two women were killed in front of their kids. Their blood was flowing in front of their kids, they were crying. Another woman was killed in front of her 6-year-old son, another in front of her 11-year-old child, and yet another who was pregnant."

    And: Boldly splattered in red paint just outside the main downtown market, a chilling sign reads: "We warn against not wearing a headscarf and wearing makeup. Those who do not abide by this will be punished. God is our witness, we have notified you."


    Many people, myself included, assumed that Iraqis would be better off as a result of the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. After all, Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator. There was no political freedom in Iraq. If you complained about the government, you would be imprisoned or killed. Life sucked, in other words.

    But in light of numerous developments, including the treatment of women in Basra, I've begun to question my assumption that the people of Iraq would necessarily benefit from a democratic form of government. We can debate the degree to which the government of Iraq is functional. But one thing that seems certain is that for many Iraqis, life in Iraq today is worse than it was under Saddam.

    Which leads me to the point of my post. In certain circumstances, under certain conditions, can dictatorship be a good thing?
     
  2. KC-97HORN

    KC-97HORN 500+ Posts

    A Dictatorship is almost always good for the upper class, they get in good with the leader and they can have anything else they want.

    But in general, the old saying of power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely holds true.

    Look at Venezuela, Chavez is a de-facto dictator, the entire country has one industry (oil), and their ruling class lives high on the hog, but the rest of the country is very poor- although, they really, really like their leader, him being in power is NOT doing the rest of the country good by trying to increase their economy into something other than oil.

    Cuba is another example- yes they are technically communist, and the vast majority of the people love Castro, but again, the populous as a whole is not faring well with him in charge (although, to be fair, the fact that the U.S. wont do much trade with them hurts any chance for an economic recovery)

    Libya is run by Khadafi, and until recently, their people didnt have much hope. but, they have finally opened their borders and started building more infrastructure, so who knows, maybe in that case, him being in charge for so long is actually a good thing.

    Overall, throughout history, when a leader isnt elected by right or by popular support, the country's as a whole, fare worse, and the common people suffer more.

    A country doesnt have to be a democracy (or republic if you want to get technical) to be well rounded.

    Hell, look at the Saudi's- negating their terror folks, that country is doing their damndest to get their male populous as educated as possible, to increase their infrastructure and economy, they are a pseudo Monarchy, and their women are oppressed, but compared to 50 years ago when they were all nomads, and uneducated, they have done a tremendous turnaround.

    Same goes with Dubai- their King realized they couldnt live on oil for much longer, and rather than sit on his ***, make more millions and leave the economy in shambles when the oil ran out, they have spent the last 15 years building themselves into the Middle-East economic and monetary go-between, or stopover. Their common people are still oppressed, but they are becoming more educated, and less reliant on the state to survive.

    I just dont think a true dictator can really help improve a country.
     
  3. Fat Crazy Hippie

    Fat Crazy Hippie 250+ Posts


     
  4. Macanudo

    Macanudo 2,500+ Posts


     
  5. zzzz

    zzzz 2,500+ Posts


     
  6. FondrenRoad

    FondrenRoad 1,000+ Posts

    KC,

    Its funny that you deride Chavez's regime, but seem to almost praise the Saudis. Saudi Arabia doesn't have any other industry besides oil either. On top of that, a Joe Schmo Venezuelan has much more freedom than a Joe Schmo Saudi. Women are also free to do whatever they want in Venezuela. Saudi Arabia is atrocious in that department.

    The other stark difference is that Chavez was always popularly elected. He's not a dictator. I say this as someone who has many Venezuelan friends that don't like Chavez at all, nor do I care for him much myself. I was there about 2 years ago. People are most certainly free. Most of the hate for him here comes from the fact that he doesn't like American leadership much. Venezuela wasn't tearing it up economically prior to Chavez. Really, they are doing slightly better with him.
     
  7. Fat Crazy Hippie

    Fat Crazy Hippie 250+ Posts


     
  8. Macanudo

    Macanudo 2,500+ Posts


     
  9. Fat Crazy Hippie

    Fat Crazy Hippie 250+ Posts

    Its just semantics then.

    That said a government is by definition a ruling class.
     
  10. KC-97HORN

    KC-97HORN 500+ Posts

    jesus ******* christ people, this is a QUACKS thread- not a ******* west mall thread.

    to me and my shortended typing to keep the thread from being a 15 page treaties on the subject. I did a quick abbreviation, I think its reasonable to conclude a ruling/ upper class are the same thing in a dictatorship (and interchangable)- if you dont like it- go freak out on West Mall all you want.

    I really dislike the Saudi's, but you have to at LEAST give them credit for realizing they need to improve the common people in the their country in order to move onward (albeit with a MAJOR issue that woman are subhuman)

    The same cant be said for Venezuela and their population.

    And in response to the ORIGINAL QUESTION, as a dictator, Chavez is not doing well as a dictator, so my theory holds serve there.
     
  11. Captain Murphy

    Captain Murphy 250+ Posts


     
  12. zzzz

    zzzz 2,500+ Posts


     
  13. DMLonghorn

    DMLonghorn 100+ Posts


     
  14. Fat Crazy Hippie

    Fat Crazy Hippie 250+ Posts


     
  15. zzzz

    zzzz 2,500+ Posts

    I was referencing life under Saddam's rule. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died because of the wars he started with Iran and Kuwait. And the entire country had to live under sanctions as a result of the latter.
     
  16. Fat Crazy Hippie

    Fat Crazy Hippie 250+ Posts

    When determining a moral action one cannot go back and chery pick dissasters long finished. Again if you are to make the claim that Saddam was worse than the occupation you have to look at the Saddam that ruled Iraq during the the time of the invasion. Notice the lack of atrocities?

    Does that mean that he should be absolved? nope but justice is another topic for another day.

    PS Sanctions are the responsibility of the west. The barbarity of food and medicine embargo should never be forgotten.
     
  17. Macanudo

    Macanudo 2,500+ Posts


     
  18. zzzz

    zzzz 2,500+ Posts


     
  19. Fried JJ Pickles

    Fried JJ Pickles 1,000+ Posts

    Democracy is not a gift. I can't be given. It has to be earned.

    Until the people of Iraq are ready to earn it, democracy and freedom won't take root.

    Until then, the best thing for Iraq is stability.

    A dictatorship can provide that stability. Hussein's rule was cruel and he was a tyrant. As bad as it is to have to say it - things were better under his tyranny than under the current lawless civil war.

    A dictatorship is never good, but until the people are ready to claim their God-given right to self government "good" isn't an option. There's only bad and worse. Right now, we can say things went from bad to worse.
     
  20. Captain Murphy

    Captain Murphy 250+ Posts

    zzzz,
    Point well taken. But for purposes of argument, let's factor out his invasions of neighboring countries. That still leaves lots of dead bodies. But I would argue that the carnage we have witnessed over the past 5 years far exceeds the number of political opponents killed under Saddam. Also, don't forget the millions of Iraqis who have fled to Syria and Jordan as a result of sectarian violence.

    All I'm trying to say is that sometimes, under certain circumstances, a dictatorship makes more sense than a democracy. Who cares about freedom of speech when you're worried about getting blown up if you go to the market to buy food for your family? As Fried JJ Pickles put it, dictatorships can provide stability.
     
  21. zork

    zork 2,500+ Posts

    Is not the typical shiite in Iraq better off now than under the brutal totalitarian Saddam's control? Baath party membes are much worse off but they were gettig the spoils from 85% of the rest of the country. The Kurds are much better off now too.
     
  22. zork

    zork 2,500+ Posts

    Isn't the typical Shiite better off now without Saddam in power?
     
  23. Captain Murphy

    Captain Murphy 250+ Posts


     
  24. Remove Rowdy

    Remove Rowdy 100+ Posts

    I have always thought the best leader for Iraq was Saddam. Not so much Saddam literally, but this kind of leader is right for certain types of countries.

    Some countries just don't seem fit for democracy. Some countries don't seem fit for a dictatorship.
     
  25. Eastwood22

    Eastwood22 250+ Posts

    Any new govt. establishment should be free of religion.

    Until Iraq gets free of being an Islamic govt., they are stuck with what they have.

    DISCLAIMER: This is not a slash at Islam, it is a slash at any govt. that is run as a religous state. The same applies for any country of any religion.
     
  26. Macanudo

    Macanudo 2,500+ Posts


     
  27. Nivek

    Nivek 500+ Posts

    My guess is that the people are worse off. Because with Saddam you knew where you stood and which actions would get you in trouble and which would not. The current situation is not so easy.
     
  28. zork

    zork 2,500+ Posts

    60-70% were/are Shiites in Iraq. The huge majority now has a say in what the future of the country is or will become. Majority rule, not rule of the 15%. That is what the libs built shanties for, for South African rule by the 10-12%, yet they are now saying it is what was better under the brutal dictator Saddam?

    The Coaliton, the USA, didn't force Islam on these people after Saddam left. Even if you just count the Kurdish population you probably have more people living better under current conditions than under Saddam.(that discounts all of the Shiites who are most certainly living better)

    Which is not to say there are not some Shiites living worse of course. There are no absolutes in these matters.

    Take post-Yeltsin USSR now Russia for example. The people are much better off because they have freedom to get the f**k out if they want or to stay and try and make it under their own choices for the most part.

    Freedom to make choices is a huge intangible item that, to me anyway, overcomes electrical troubles caused mainly by those who want dictaorship, or at least chaos, to rein. Islam thrives on chaos. They can subvert people to their teachings much easier when the people have nothing left.

    Read about it. That is the HAMAS creed. Chaos breeds more members. HAMAS and the fringe Islamic leaders share that goal.
     
  29. Macanudo

    Macanudo 2,500+ Posts

    Something that seems to be lost on this discussion is that the death and destruction being wrought in Iraq today is not government sanction. Sure, there may be corrupt cops doing some of this but from the highest levels of government, persecution is not being sought on the people of Iraq.

    It's two different arguments:

    democracy vs. dictatorship

    state sanctioned killing vs. terrorism
     
  30. Captain Murphy

    Captain Murphy 250+ Posts


     

Share This Page