The Saturday 6-Pack

~~jwb~~ · 05-15-2022, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubber soul

I'm not sure I necessarily agree that Caesar (and his successors) was all that benevolent given the history of the Roman Coliseum and all. When I think of "benevolent dictators" the first name to come to mind is Yugoslavia's Tito and, after talking to a Croatian friend whose parents lived under his rule, maybe he wasn't such a sweetie either.

i think i took it more as a hypothetical... I didn't have a specific dictator in mind but in principle if you had the powers of a dictatorship and you used them to pursue let's say a goal we can agree is benevolent... I would favor that over a well meaning but incompetent democracy.

I probably would favor the style of rule of someone like caesar Augustus over let's say joe Biden. Obviously the reason i recognize dictatorship isn't worth it is because it's only one incompetent or evil successor away from being a nightmare scenario. But i do think we vastly overate democracy. Because it's part of our perceived identity and national origins story. And so we have an almost religious like reverence for it.

Trollheart · 05-15-2022, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marie Monday

um what you describe there is kind of fascist and very oppressive though. If you personally don't experience obvious consequences of oppression that doesn't mean you're not oppressed. The whole idea of a dictator is that they enforce their own authority and opposition is not allowed, which can't be enforced without violence towards dissidents, which is not benevolent.

I guess if you look at Rome vs Nazi Germany, both were dictatorships but within Germany people were scared and very careful not to say the wrong thing, and always worried about being denounced (proof? Who needs proof?) whereas in Rome, well I'm not going to keep repeating myself but for me, if you were a Roman citizen, rule by the emperor, specifically JC, was a form of benevolent dictatorship. I mean, I haven't checked but I assume the word comes from a version of "what I say goes" kind of thing. Anyway, it's just a question. Leave me alone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubber soul

Yeah, that's kind of like saying you don't have to worry about being repressed in America- as long as you're a Republican. (Or a Democrat if they happen to be in charge)

That however is not right. All Americans, regardless of political affiliation, are citizens, whereas in Rome it was, in general, non-Romans who got persecuted, usually on religious grounds. So I would not agree that there's a correlation there. Maybe if Trump had managed to actually stay in power for another term, who knows?

**Marie Monday** · 05-15-2022, 11:49 AM

Yeah I get what you mean, there are different levels of benevolence/malevolence among dictators

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

What rant? I don't understand this comment.

Oh my rant against benevolent dictators

~~jwb~~ · 05-15-2022, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marie Monday

Yeah I get what you mean, there are different levels of benevolence/malevolence among dictators

Oh my rant against benevolent dictators

Where is the rant?

Nvm found it.

Tbh to me saying the dictatorship can't be benevolent is actually a cop out and a refusal to answer a basic hypothetical. It's the equivalent of answering the question of whether you would choose to live forever by pointing out that immortality is actually impossible.

The Batlord · 05-15-2022, 01:11 PM

Wait our benevolent dictator is throwing Christians to the lions? Can I change my answer?

Trollheart · 05-15-2022, 01:36 PM

No.

~~jwb~~ · 05-15-2022, 01:50 PM

For choosing boring old sleepy Joe instead you should be thrown in with the Christians

The Batlord · 05-15-2022, 01:58 PM

What can I say I don't yearn for a fash daddy to spank me.

**Marie Monday** · 05-15-2022, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

Where is the rant?

Nvm found it.

Tbh to me saying the dictatorship can't be benevolent is actually a cop out and a refusal to answer a basic hypothetical. It's the equivalent of answering the question of whether you would choose to live forever by pointing out that immortality is actually impossible.

No not really, because it's a matter of definition instead of realism. But I agree that it's a less interesting answer, that's why I originally put it aside for the sake of the argument

SGR · 05-15-2022, 02:57 PM

I think the problem with the question is risk assessment.

Even if I'm living under a benevolent dictatorship, if that dictator dies, the next one may not be so benevolent.

An incompetent president carries its own risks, but generally there would be more protections against complete disaster - and the likelihood that another president would be in power before too long.

I think there are definitely certain times and places in history that you'd be better off with a benevolent dictator though, despite the long term risks (immediate risks being too dire)

05-15-2022, 01:36 PM	#10866 (permalink)
Trollheart Born to be mild Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: 404 Not Found Posts: 26,996	No. __________________ Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018

05-15-2022, 01:50 PM	#10867 (permalink)
~~jwb~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 4,403	For choosing boring old sleepy Joe instead you should be thrown in with the Christians

05-15-2022, 02:57 PM	#10870 (permalink)
SGR No Ice In My Bourbon Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: /dev/null Posts: 4,327	I think the problem with the question is risk assessment. Even if I'm living under a benevolent dictatorship, if that dictator dies, the next one may not be so benevolent. An incompetent president carries its own risks, but generally there would be more protections against complete disaster - and the likelihood that another president would be in power before too long. I think there are definitely certain times and places in history that you'd be better off with a benevolent dictator though, despite the long term risks (immediate risks being too dire)