Unless one gets extremely lucky (very very unlikely) you would want pretty much the opposite.Return to fundamental principles.

that's my opinion.

You have the entire 20th century to tell you why dictatorships dont work.

Can you give any examples where a dictator has done this in history

Julius Caesar definitly didn't try to restore rome to the republican model. Caesarion didn't play a significant role in roman politics so I don't get what you mean by that.

The name "dictator" actually comes from the title of an official of the Roman republic who was appointed for a six month term, and who was authorized to act completely outside the law.

Obviously, as mentioned, this system eventually broke down as the dictators turned into emperors-for-life.

The roman politician/general Sulla did precisely that actually. After reforming the republic he gave up his dictatorship and retired to the country to write his memoirs.

Of course the reforming meant a great deal of political purging - maybe upwards of 9000 people.

He had a very interesting life but has been overshadowed by caesar in the popular imagination, would recommend reading into it. That stage of the late roman republic is very interesting.

thats a good idea in theory, except that the dictator will never turn over their power. like another commentor said, go back to founding principles

So why would one all powerful politician with no checks on their power be more representative of the people.

Too many people compromised. Too many people would be lynched by their neighbors if turned on the old system and had their crimes made known. They're never going to do that. You see? They're stuck.

Trump is a puppet. He's not playing 68D chess. He's a Zionist. "Dancing Muslims". He's driving us right into WW3.

Nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

Ok, I don't think Trumpnis relevant anyhow. He's just a theater player, IMO. It could be Obama, same result with a different flavor.

My point is that if an UNcontrolled person got into office and wanted to change things, they wouldn't able except by force. Too many corrupt people have too much to lose by voluntarily exposing themselves. Not gonna happen. So a civil war would ensue.

Er I did and answered directly..?

This is in an ideal circumstance, and isn't based on reality.

Sure, what you're saying would work, if dictators actually did that. I can't think of one in history who has. Humans tend to become shitty when given so much power.

This is the argument I always see made about communism.

Agreed. Fixing a broken democracy is near impossible without a complete overhaul...and that is near impossible from within said corrupt democracy.

Democracies work if there is no outside influence, and there is little to gain except the work of making the country a better place.

IOW corporate influence has ruined everything. I don't even think influence from outside countries is a problem if the corporate influence was abolished. It would stand out like a sore thumb and could be easily gotten rid of with a voting system that took care of it with treason.

If an official was working against the will of the people he would be put in prison.

Don't get me started on that one. Ask me about Norway, Finland, Netherlands....anything but the screwjob they did to Switzerland.

What's wrong with Switzerland? I thought it was the best functioning democracy in the world. Maybe even the only working democracy.

Shit. I am confusing Switzerland with Sweden. They tried to do the same with the Swiss but they stopped it.

Do what? Fuck up the country?

Switzerland is a confederacy

Yea but I still confused the 2. I'm on my 3rd Gin and Tonic.

Do what? Fuck up the country?

That one such dictator would have to have complete control of the military and be willing to go against the banks.

I'm not sure one such person can control the entire military. I also think the banks could easily kill any President, even one such as influential as an H.W. Bush.

In my mind, absolute rulers are the most efficient government, so I agree it would be difficult to flip national policy on it's head without an absolute ruler, but I just don't see any one person escaping the clutches of capitalism in order to sustain a revolution in any major nation.

Look at Venezuela. With large proven oil reserves, that country should not have any of the difficulties it has now, but sanctions are crippling them. Capitalism is crushing a ruler attempting to run a nation without them.

Crony capitalism does not free the people and that's the only flavor of capitalism prevailing, unfortunately.

As far as mentioning the people at large, if enough of us work together we can overturn any system.

So I guess it's a matter of what is easier to acheive; getting a dictator with enough power and influence over the military and banks to change a system entirely, or getting a critical mass of the population to work together in order to do so. Both seem astronomically difficult to accomplish.

I agree. Democracy is a scam. One strong ruler can achieve a lot more a lot faster.

The only problem is 99% of the time dictators are pieces of shit.

I can only think of Lee Kuan Yew as a "good" dictator.

You're absolutely correct in your thinking. It took a Hitler to (temporarily) save Germany. Either one will step on in the United States or the United States will surely crumble.

I love all the lolberg rubes in this thread though:

We need to return to the Cinstitution and founding principles.

Sure, the same Constitution and "founding principles" that got us here in the first place. Makes sense. They need to catch up on their Spooner, obviously.

I've never really been sure how they plan to make everyone care about the same principles, all of a sudden, all at once.

I agree with you. If a governing body is so far gone that it cannot be restored by it's own immune system of checks and balances, it would ironically require a dictatorship with good intent to fully restore what was lost before returning the system to the people.

How else would it be done? "Writing to our Representatives" isn't going to unravel centuries of nepotism, back scratching, and elitism that is destroying the foundation from within.

Only drastic and fully unconventional means would serve to rehabilitate such chaos. The dictatorship would have to be, itself, guided by higher principles, like an extremely strict but unconditionally loving parent. Able to enforce sweeping and draconian measures while, at the same time, wielding that force with loving intent bent on reconstruction.

Sounds God-Like to me. I'm not sure if any group of humans, at this point in our evolution, can collectively possess the power and influence necessary to rip up government foundations while remaining impeccable in their intent of restoration.

It would take a group of humanity's absolute best, working in total concert, for it to work without descending into abberrance. These people would have to be fully aware of Universal Law and the Spiritual state of Humans. Their guidance would be from higher dimensions lest the path be diverted by lower frequencies and basic Human Nature.

People of that necessary purity aren't going to be found tromping around the political arena. The dictatorship would have to be composed of fully aware Masters channelling their Higher Aspects.

It seems an impossible juxtaposition for me to fathom.

I sure do like the idea of it, though. Our leaders should be Spiritual Masters. Masters, meaning, masters of their own Human condition, unswayed by lower wants because they are incorruptibly following higher guidance.

Maybe a few centuries from now, the Channelling Party will make their debut.

Why did you post on CMV if you just wanted to see someone agree with you. Fuck your idea of dictatorship being a solution. I put my life on the line to defend freedom amd democracy for ten years, I watched people die for that ideal, I saw dozens of planes filled with the flag draped caskets that are still censored by the media. Fuck you, fuck your idea of dictatorship, I reject your acceptance of the concept. No single strongman or authoritatian leader can deliver on that promise. If you want dictatorship, go live in an autocratic state, there's no shortage of them in the world.

i will consider this a fiction created by your imaginative head.
but: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Condor

The name "dictator" actually comes from the title of an official of the Roman republic who was appointed for a six month term, and who was authorized to act completely outside the law.

Obviously, as mentioned, this system eventually broke down as the dictators turned into emperors-for-life.

The roman politician/general Sulla did precisely that actually. After reforming the republic he gave up his dictatorship and retired to the country to write his memoirs.

Of course the reforming meant a great deal of political purging - maybe upwards of 9000 people.

He had a very interesting life but has been overshadowed by caesar in the popular imagination, would recommend reading into it. That stage of the late roman republic is very interesting.