Yes and yes. People who want to rule are generally those least qualified, but also, the nature of incentives to hang on to power takes one to whole new levels of depravity.
Fundamentally, the best despots are those who don’t want the job in the first place, because they recognize that no single human being is capable of knowing better than everyone in the country and rule with the lightest touch they can get away with, harming as few as they can (and make no mistake, you will be harming people, regardless of your intentions). Wanting to do it suggests you don’t fully appreciate the responsibility, are grossly overconfident in your own abilities or both.
“Heavy is the head that wears the crown” or at least it should be. Even if you’ve been trained from birth, no one is ever qualified for the job. It’s not a question of if you’ll fuck up, but how you’ll fuck up and how badly.
But also, understanding that to make a real, significant change takes time means if you want to succeed in anything worth doing means holding on to power, and to do that, you better be controlling your pillars or your pillars will control you
The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.
(Douglas Adams)
Only a piece of shit would seek absolute power.
Everything I learned about government I got from CGP Grey and the book his video is based off of, The Dictator’s Handbook.
Thank you for this
Holy flying fuck i almost lost all hope for lemmy useres. I swore the title asked if DOCTORS were born pieces of shit and the whole thread jumped in suppor5 of thinking all docotrs are now socially deemed p.o.s. boy do i wish there was less doom and gloom posted here. Goddamn if that didnt have me clenching my jaw for no reason 🤣🤣🤣
A little of column A, a little of column B.
You don’t get into a position like that without being a piece of shit – you don’t become ‘dictator’ by accident. And once in, they’re surrounded by yes-men and sycophants who encourage and reinforce their worst impulses.
Cincinnatus didnt fall for that trap.
The short answer is yes all dictators are POS starting out and never change.
Thing is there are examples of dictators some where the answer to your question is more complex.
Ataturk, he basically revolutionized and modernized Turkey, he granted women rights, he implemented a modern economy and created educational systems. He basically dragged Turkey (Now Turkiye) kicking and screaming into the 20th century. Unfortunately he was an authoritarian fuck who would crush anyone who opposed him. While he was the military leader of Turkish army is generally agreed that he did not take part in the Armenian Genocide, but he did pardon many who did.
Tito kept the ethic stew that was Yoguslavia together for decades and greatly raised the quality of life for everyone who was part of that “country”. Compared to other Eastern Bloc nations things were pretty good, unfortunately he too was brutal to opposition and once he died and his iron hand was no longer keeping the lid on the cauldron of rage that is that part of Europe. Powerful groups started killing everyone who went to a different church in the name of freedom.
The definition of dictators is very much flexible and politically charged. We decide someone is a “piece of shit” and after that, we call them dictators. By instance, when the Taliban where CIA assets, they where not called dictators, but freedom fighters and where glorified in Rambo III.
Just because pejorative terms are weaponized by propagandists doesn’t make them without meaning.
