A Dictator Is The Solution.

page: 2
15
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 27 2012 @ 04:41 AM
link   
Dictators (or Emperors) in Rome didn't work so well when their names were Sulla, Tiberius, Caligula, Nero, Commodus, Heliogabalus and quite a few others. Even the great Marius made a horrid bloodbath of his final Consulship, which was effectively a dictatorship, and which mercifully ended when he died only a month into it. The Cincinnatus' of Rome were more the exception and not the norm.

Let's not forget that Caesar achieved the power and wealth by which he was able to seize power in Rome because of his wars of conquest in Gaul which killed hundreds of thousands, maybe a million Gauls.
edit on 5/27/2012 by LifeInDeath because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 27 2012 @ 04:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by LifeInDeath
Dictators (or Emperors) in Rome didn't work so well when their names were Sulla, Tiberius, Caligula, Nero, Commodus, Heliogabalus and quite a few others. Even the great Marius made a horrid bloodbath of his final Consulship, which was effectively a dictatorship, and which mercifully ended when he died only a month into it. The Cincinnatus' of Rome were more the exception and not the norm.

Let's not forget that Caesar achieved the power and wealth by which he was able to seize power in Rome because of his wars of conquest in Gaul which killed hundreds of thousands, maybe a million Gauls.
edit on 5/27/2012 by LifeInDeath because: (no reason given)


Ha! Nero wins. You forget that Caesar was the first Emperor. Before him it was a Republic. During that time Dictators were called in times of emergency. When the trouble passed,they stood down.A Dictatorship with a review each two years is what I endorse. Not a 1000 year reich. Dictatorships under the Republic worked great for the most part.

And Glory to Rome. He always gave them a chance to surrender. He was always more than fair to the Gauls that he defeated. He was so fair to the Gauls that it actually caused some trouble for him with certain Romans.

And dont forget that the Gauls attacked the Romans many times. Remember "Vae victis"?
edit on 27-5-2012 by Germanicus because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-5-2012 by Germanicus because: spelling



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 05:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Germanicus

Originally posted by LifeInDeath
Dictators (or Emperors) in Rome didn't work so well when their names were Sulla, Tiberius, Caligula, Nero, Commodus, Heliogabalus and quite a few others. Even the great Marius made a horrid bloodbath of his final Consulship, which was effectively a dictatorship, and which mercifully ended when he died only a month into it. The Cincinnatus' of Rome were more the exception and not the norm.

Let's not forget that Caesar achieved the power and wealth by which he was able to seize power in Rome because of his wars of conquest in Gaul which killed hundreds of thousands, maybe a million Gauls.
edit on 5/27/2012 by LifeInDeath because: (no reason given)


Ha! Nero wins. You forget that Caesar was the first Emperor. Before him it was a Republic. During that time Dictators were called in times of emergency. When the trouble passed,they stood down.A Dictatorship with a review each two years is what I endorse. Not a 1000 year reich. Dictatorships under the Republic worked great for the most part.

And Glory to Rome. He always gave them a chance to surrender. He was always more than fair to the Gauls that he defeated. He was so fair to the Gauls that it actually caused some trouble for him with certain Romans.

And dont forget that the Gauls attacked the Romans many times. Remember "Vae victis"?
edit on 27-5-2012 by Germanicus because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-5-2012 by Germanicus because: spelling


So you say that the time of the true dictators that were truly temporary (who you now laud as the model we should look back on and emulate) and the time of the emperors whose reign is or life is separated by Julius Caesar. Yet in your original post you say that Julius Caesar, who you have now said is the turning point between dictator and despot, is the model we should emulate. Make up your bloody mind.

Scratch that, I'm wrong. At this point you think that BOTH models are correct. The dictator who only leads the republic in desperate times of emergency is deserving of remembrance to you while at the same time you praise assholes like Nero and Julius Caesar who ruled as absolutist despots
edit on 27-5-2012 by Mkoll because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 05:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Mkoll
 




So you say that the time of the true dictators that were truly temporary (who you now laud as the model we should look back on and emulate) and the time of the emperors whose reign is or life is separated by Julius Caesar. Yet in your original post you say that Julius Caesar, who you have now said is the turning point between dictator and despot, is the model we should emulate. Make up your bloody mind.


Well,whoever the [SNIP] you are. No need to be rude. I have made up my "bloody mind". I use Hitler and Caesar as examples because my faith in the average ATS user is not high. Caesar and Hitler are recognizable and well known. I was leading into a discussion. My OP is not my right hook. That was just an opening combo.

And by using those two I have shown that Dictators get results. They are also often loved by their people as opposed to the tyrant we think of when we hear the word 'dictator'. My right hook is the Roman Republic. It is Fabius Maximus. Did you miss that bit? He was dictator of Rome twice. I know that most ATS users can name 3 dictators. 4 if they are lucky. I dont want them too confused off the bat. The amount of txt on the OP is enough to turn many ATS users off. And my OP stands. I made the point that a Dictator can and has worked in the past. I also made the point that a 'Dictator' was not always seen as a negative thing. It was a positive. It can be again.
edit on 27-5-2012 by Germanicus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 06:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Germanicus
I made the point that a Dictator can and has worked in the past. I also made the point that a 'Dictator' was not always seen as a negative thing. It was a positive. It can be again.
edit on 27-5-2012 by Germanicus because: (no reason given)

So ..what are their flares for?

www.classzone.com...

Long before the invention of the telescope, ancient people noticed that the sun is not a perfect, featureless disc. During dust storms and on overcast days when most of the sun's rays were blocked, they noticed that the sun's surface was occasionally marked with dark spots. They even noticed that these spots moved across the face of the sun over a period of several days. Soon after the invention of the telescope, astronomers of the 17th century used their new tool to study and map sunspots in detail.......Text......Sunspots are interesting to look at, but let's face it— they're 150 million km (93 million miles) away from Earth. How could they possibly affect us?.[//ex]



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by nii900

Originally posted by Germanicus
I made the point that a Dictator can and has worked in the past. I also made the point that a 'Dictator' was not always seen as a negative thing. It was a positive. It can be again.
edit on 27-5-2012 by Germanicus because: (no reason given)

So ..what are their flares for?

www.classzone.com...

Long before the invention of the telescope, ancient people noticed that the sun is not a perfect, featureless disc. During dust storms and on overcast days when most of the sun's rays were blocked, they noticed that the sun's surface was occasionally marked with dark spots. They even noticed that these spots moved across the face of the sun over a period of several days. Soon after the invention of the telescope, astronomers of the 17th century used their new tool to study and map sunspots in detail.......Text......Sunspots are interesting to look at, but let's face it— they're 150 million km (93 million miles) away from Earth. How could they possibly affect us?.[//ex]




I am very confused by that. Did I mention flares? A metaphor?
edit on 27-5-2012 by Germanicus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 06:33 AM
link   
idunno.. wasn't it 'bout systems? anyway.. technically
btw ...isnt coronal same lingua natura ? www.space.com...






posted on May, 27 2012 @ 06:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by nii900
idunno.. wasn't it 'bout systems? anyway.. technically
btw ...isnt coronal same lingua natura ? www.space.com...









Ha! Thats the best ATS post I ever read


You rule.

Edit- and touche if thats what you are going for. People know different things. Some are into politics, some are into other stuff.
edit on 27-5-2012 by Germanicus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 07:57 AM
link   




If a dictatorship is up for review every two years we have no need to fear a dictatorship. These guys are responsible for destroying the term 'Dictator'. Genocide and meglomania do not have to be what a dictatorship is all about. Dictatorships were a great thing for the Roman Republic when things were dire. Things are dire for the people of the West right now. I am sure that we will see the next great leader emerge from Europe in the next few years. The world has not seen a great leader for many years. We are due,and the conditions are perfect.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:25 AM
link   
I'm with you on this, OP. I don't think a dictator has to be as bad as people think. Julius Caesar is a great example, and if he had lived today, he would've been just as loved by his people as he were in the past. Not only would a dictator have a better chance of pulling us out of this damn worldwide recession - but he would also be able to restore our faith in our leaders, which has been lost by the corrupt dogs we call politicians. So, yeah, if I have the choice, I'll take a benevolent dictator over our current system any day.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gauss
I'm with you on this, OP. I don't think a dictator has to be as bad as people think. Julius Caesar is a great example, and if he had lived today, he would've been just as loved by his people as he were in the past. Not only would a dictator have a better chance of pulling us out of this damn worldwide recession - but he would also be able to restore our faith in our leaders, which has been lost by the corrupt dogs we call politicians. So, yeah, if I have the choice, I'll take a benevolent dictator over our current system any day.


Hey man. Glad someone is with me


And yeah,what we have right now is not worth fixing.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 09:29 AM
link   
dictators get the job done because they don't have the red tape , that some of the other world leaders have. They can bypass , and get straight to the point , Which is great for fast acting results. I like the idea of a yearly review of the dictator , Or perhaps a dermirt point system. If he breaks so many he loses it even before the year , kinda like a driver license ;p

The dictators of history all have their ups and downs , some just get to power hungry , go over board and make it seem like a bad thing. Which is what the probation period and dermit points are for to help avoid :p.

Comes down to intention of the dictator and his actions , but i think it would get results done , less red tape , but just have to keep his powers in check , before he takes some meth and goes postal on innocent people



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Germanicus
 

Lucius_Cornelius_Sulla: dictator legibus faciendis et reipublicae constituendae causa ("dictator for the making of laws and for the settling of the constitution")

Sulla's dictatorship came during a high point in the struggle between optimates and populares, the former seeking to maintain the power of the oligarchy in the form of the Senate while the latter resorted in many cases to naked populism, culminating in Caesar's dictatorship. Sulla was a highly original, gifted and skilful general, never losing a battle; he remains the only man in history to have attacked and occupied both Athens and Rome. His rival, Gnaeus Papirius Carbo, described Sulla as having the cunning of a fox and the courage of a lion - but that it was the former attribute that was by far the most dangerous. This mixture was later referred to by Machiavelli in his description of the ideal characteristics of a ruler.[2]

Sulla used his armies to march on Rome twice, and after the second he revived the office of dictator, which had not been used since the Second Punic War over a century before. He used his powers to enact a series of reforms to the Roman constitution, meant to restore the balance of power between the Senate and the tribunes; he then stunned the Roman World (and posterity) by resigning the dictatorship, restoring normal constitutional government, and after his second Consulship, retiring to private life.


as an anarchist, i prefer to be my own dictator, though
edit on 27-5-2012 by DerepentLEstranger because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Caesar and Hitler - models of 'great dictators'. I dunno whether to cry or laugh.

Dear OP, do you know that for all the time Caesar was a dictator, he was seldom in Rome to govern the city?

All Caesar was, was only a brilliant military commander, second to none in our world even today, with all things being level with the state of tech then.

But at home, do you know who ruled in his place, as 'Master of the Horse' - a titular office that is second to that of the dictator? None other than the drunkard Mark Anthony, who spend taxpayers funds, rode the streets rome on a carriage pulled by lions, terrifying romans, and was utterly corrupt to the core? So much that when Caesar returned from Britan, he had a civil revolt on hand? If not for his legions, Rome would have burned there and then, with the conservative elements ruling it.

Caesar instituted social reforms, but he never succeeded. His world then was not ready. The patrician senate would not co-operate or only paid lip service. Thus his murder. If that is how you view him as a successful dictator - a military genius but a social idiot, then I guess Lucky Luciano would make a better poster boy for great dictator.

At least Sulla was a better dictator than Caesar ever was. He ruled Rome with an iron fist, corrected social imbalance with the economy and restored the priviledges of the patricianate ( after proscribing/murdering/robbing the biz class), and then gave up the title when it was done after a few years to indulgences.

Being the dictator means one answer's to NO mortal. It is godlike power and proclaimation of self perfection of himself on Earth, ruling and controlling over EVERY SINGLE aspect of human life of others except himself.

No human had ever proven himself incapable of corruption by power. Should you be the one who offends him, or even look at him sideways, and have your neck on the block, I am sure you will sing a different tune to the original post you made in worship of dictators.

HItler? I refuse to write more. He's the devil incarnate.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Germanicus
 


Not to glamorize Hitler, I have pointed the things you mention out to people before and I haven't seen mention yet in any of the followup post about Hobbes.

Thomas Hobbes wrote the book Leviathan were he put forth almost the same reasoning.

A Benevolent Dictator is what almost ALL religions call for at the end of days.
Jesus is coming to Rule,, the 12th Iman,, the Matraya of Buddhism etc etc.

All want THEIR LEADER at the head of this sorry game.

So for anyone who wants to look into the thought as put down by Hobbes,, I would suggest this book as it is the Pointer in History to this type of thought.

Personally,,, I rather hope for the day when Humans can just be responsible for themselves enough not to need ''Leaders"

benevolent or otherwise,,, not fond of Dictators
edit on 5/27/2012 by EarthCitizen23 because: (no reason given)
edit on 5/27/2012 by EarthCitizen23 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
reply to post by Germanicus
 

Lucius_Cornelius_Sulla: dictator legibus faciendis et reipublicae constituendae causa ("dictator for the making of laws and for the settling of the constitution")

Sulla's dictatorship came during a high point in the struggle between optimates and populares, the former seeking to maintain the power of the oligarchy in the form of the Senate while the latter resorted in many cases to naked populism, culminating in Caesar's dictatorship. Sulla was a highly original, gifted and skilful general, never losing a battle; he remains the only man in history to have attacked and occupied both Athens and Rome. His rival, Gnaeus Papirius Carbo, described Sulla as having the cunning of a fox and the courage of a lion - but that it was the former attribute that was by far the most dangerous. This mixture was later referred to by Machiavelli in his description of the ideal characteristics of a ruler.[2]

Sulla used his armies to march on Rome twice, and after the second he revived the office of dictator, which had not been used since the Second Punic War over a century before. He used his powers to enact a series of reforms to the Roman constitution, meant to restore the balance of power between the Senate and the tribunes; he then stunned the Roman World (and posterity) by resigning the dictatorship, restoring normal constitutional government, and after his second Consulship, retiring to private life.


as an anarchist, i prefer to be my own dictator, though
edit on 27-5-2012 by DerepentLEstranger because: (no reason given)


He went back to his farm. If you like Roman History you may enjoy Mike Duncan History of Rome podcast.
thehistoryofrome.typepad.com...
Mike Duncan is awesome.

And yeah, Libertarian Socialism is a good idea. I think National Socialism will allow us to transition into something closer to anarchy.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
Caesar and Hitler - models of 'great dictators'. I dunno whether to cry or laugh.

Dear OP, do you know that for all the time Caesar was a dictator, he was seldom in Rome to govern the city?

All Caesar was, was only a brilliant military commander, second to none in our world even today, with all things being level with the state of tech then.

But at home, do you know who ruled in his place, as 'Master of the Horse' - a titular office that is second to that of the dictator? None other than the drunkard Mark Anthony, who spend taxpayers funds, rode the streets rome on a carriage pulled by lions, terrifying romans, and was utterly corrupt to the core? So much that when Caesar returned from Britan, he had a civil revolt on hand? If not for his legions, Rome would have burned there and then, with the conservative elements ruling it.

Caesar instituted social reforms, but he never succeeded. His world then was not ready. The patrician senate would not co-operate or only paid lip service. Thus his murder. If that is how you view him as a successful dictator - a military genius but a social idiot, then I guess Lucky Luciano would make a better poster boy for great dictator.

At least Sulla was a better dictator than Caesar ever was. He ruled Rome with an iron fist, corrected social imbalance with the economy and restored the priviledges of the patricianate ( after proscribing/murdering/robbing the biz class), and then gave up the title when it was done after a few years to indulgences.

Being the dictator means one answer's to NO mortal. It is godlike power and proclaimation of self perfection of himself on Earth, ruling and controlling over EVERY SINGLE aspect of human life of others except himself.

No human had ever proven himself incapable of corruption by power. Should you be the one who offends him, or even look at him sideways, and have your neck on the block, I am sure you will sing a different tune to the original post you made in worship of dictators.

HItler? I refuse to write more. He's the devil incarnate.



Most people dont know Sulla. Best to use examples people know.

And you could not be more wrong about Caesar. He was a very talented statesman. This was shown early in his political career before he was a General and again all throughout his career. He was genius actually. What on earth do you base your opinions on?

Do you even know about the first Triumvirate? Again,caesar was a political genius. You obviously do not know much about caesar to call him a "social idiot". Political genius.

I have already shown that Dictatorships have been successful. Shown that not all end up in meglomania. So....... wrong again.

And your attitude toward Hitler is typical. This is why nobody knows anything about him. I explained that his Dictatorship worked very well and he achieved many great things for Germany and the German people before the war. A 'Dictatorship' gave him the power to do all those great things.

A Dictator is the solution.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 10:39 AM
link   
OP If you study history, you will find the vast majority are parasites who cause far more harm than good, and not only that but have a thing for killing the countries most moral, intelligent, and generally worthy of the best of ATS. Sure there can be good despots, but they are a minority, and most of the good ones were only good before the nature of absolute power got to their minds -it's a very human trait to believe one's own propaganda (especially after years-decades of it).

The solution is not a dictatorship, but a revival of democracy. It has to be done, the last one in America lasted a good 200 years before it arrived in current insulting to the concept democracy, form. And 200 years is obviously a lot longer than the life span of even the best dictator. That's the other problem: You might have a good dictator, but who replaces him when he dies? Oh of course the spoilt son-daughter, family, or the dictator (or their power hungry rivals).

You need to read the book: The Nature of Despotism. It mostly covers the psychology of dictators, including a few "benevolent" ones, but the sad fact is a good 90% are extremely evil people. Nor is this surprising when you think how almost every dictator has to kill someone, and murders are not exactly the first people you think of giving great power too -of course this killing, and the odd mistakes made, is going to corrupt the beholders mind eventually (if it wasn't already corrupted). One you become cold from the inside, so do, increasingly your actions (or at least according to the evidence from history).



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Germanicus
 
It's nothing personal, really. But with thread after thread on dictators, socialism, nationalism. . . .

I'm embracing an anarchy-type viewpoint.

Egads! Democracy, representative-republics, communism, socialism, fascism, dictatorships. . . . .

AAAIIIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




posted on May, 27 2012 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen23
reply to post by Germanicus
 


Not to glamorize Hitler, I have pointed the things you mention out to people before and I haven't seen mention yet in any of the followup post about Hobbes.

Thomas Hobbes wrote the book Leviathan were he put forth almost the same reasoning.

A Benevolent Dictator is what almost ALL religions call for at the end of days.
Jesus is coming to Rule,, the 12th Iman,, the Matraya of Buddhism etc etc.

All want THEIR LEADER at the head of this sorry game.

So for anyone who wants to look into the thought as put down by Hobbes,, I would suggest this book as it is the Pointer in History to this type of thought.

Personally,,, I rather hope for the day when Humans can just be responsible for themselves enough not to need ''Leaders"

benevolent or otherwise,,, not fond of Dictators
edit on 5/27/2012 by EarthCitizen23 because: (no reason given)
edit on 5/27/2012 by EarthCitizen23 because: (no reason given)


Hey. Thanks for posting. I have not read about Hobbes. Sounds like I should.

And I agree. We shouild not need them. The structure must be broken though. I think a dictatorship is a step in the right direction. It will allow us to transition in my opinion. It will allow for it better than what we have now.





new topics
top topics
 
15
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join