A dictator is defined as simply as “a ruler who wields absolute authority.” Absolute authority over a countries’ actions, people, and rules essentially feels harmless, but over time, this authority becomes continuously aggressive. In two completely different countries, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, and Vladimir Putin of Russia both establish, maintain, and secure their power quite strategically. Dictatorships can essentially begin with a leader who holds good intentions, but with the call to complete power, the idea of doing “good” ultimately transforms into the abuse of power, leading into the extreme measures certain leaders take in order to maintain their moment in the spotlight.
The claim to power can initially start very differently for
…show more content…
Many times, Mugabe has been referred to as a fallen leader; he began with strong, positive intentions but once power was gained, the need to have more continuously rose gradually. Vladimir Putin, on the other hand, had been in politics previously, and was readying himself for a higher, more important status, as president. Previous to Putin, Russia was led poorly by Boris Yeltsin, the first President of the Russian Federation from 1991 to 1999. Not only was Yeltsin viewed by the people as a drunk and more simply as a joke, but he was also essentially destroying the country and putting its “well-being” at risk constantly over the span of his presidency. Putin succeeded Yeltsin and almost instantly, Russia underwent a molding transformation. With the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, Putin stepped in and reshaped the economy, reimagined the government, and resurrected the sacred and valued reputation of Russia.
Before a dictator can expand his power to cover greater areas, he must secure his power generally and take strong action when it is thought to be threatened and/or diminished. For Mugabe, the threat to power is something very common, yet something the president has managed to control for more
…show more content…
When a dictator is under a threat, a sudden sense of fear is created to to keep opposition silenced. Mugabe embodies this idea of being a dictator by immediately threatening any opposition figures. In addition to filtering out the media as mentioned earlier, Mugabe chooses to use scare tactics during political campaigns. On example of this was the “Clean The Filth” campaign where Mugabe essentially promised to break up poor communities by destroying their homes and forcing them to spread out to other areas in order to promote a better quality of life in Zimbabwe and reconstruct and revive crumbling communities. The homes were never rebuilt and the people never returned to their destroyed villages because magus had in a sense only created the project to silence his opposition, and again maintain his power. Additionally, Mugabe continues to inspire fear throughout Zimbabwe by arresting those who resist the system and completely limiting who can even enter the country. If a problem is posed towards the president in anyway, quick action is taken in order to stop commotion and keep a sense of
people decide that they want a dictatorship. If I was a ruler during the period of the
The dictatorship also manages to keep its subjects in line through brainwashing. As Prometheus writes, "Everything which comes from the many is good. Everything which comes from the one is evil. Thus have we been taught with our first breath." Also, as children, the ruled are forced to recite, "By the grace of our brothers are we allowed our lives. We exist through, by and for our brothers," meaning that the only moral justification they have for living is service. By imbuing each subject with the moral premise that the "many" is always good and the "one" is always bad, the dictatorship manages to virtually eliminate any thought of opposition. In opposing the dictatorship, one is opposing the will of all people with one's singular will, and thus is evil. The moral creed that the dictatorship inculcates gives it a moral s...
upon how important it was that such tyrannical dictators such as Hitler have been stopped, sometimes with great costs, from
Joseph Stalin became known as the iron man for having a reputation of torturing individuals. Deemed as enemies of the Soviet Union, this was viewed as necessary for instilling a level of control over the perception the people had of their leader. No one would risk speaking out against conditions for fear. As seen in Uganda, Idi Amin killed all those who opposed his reign in the country. Some even said he cannibalized his victims. These rumors, or facts as some claimed, served to mystify the leaders of these dictatorships and as we know, people fear what they don 't understand.
... dictators have been exiled or even executed as a result of the widespread use of these technologies. Dobson also writes that the biggest problem that dictators and authoritarians face is their own people (9). These factors drive dictators to learn their mistakes and their fellow dictators’ mistakes, causing the nature of dictatorship to change over the years. Particularly, Russia and China are still going strong as dictatorial regimes even though they do not appear to be so. Additionally, the involvements of non-state actors such as the CANVAS, have also affected the dictatorial regime power. With these non-state organizations have grown stronger and more powerful over time, the power of dictatorial regime has become more vulnerable to attack. In fact, these non-state actors can easily overthrow some less powerful dictator and might forget their democratic identity.
Vladimir Putin first gained power in the year 1999 when Russian President Boris Yeltsin named him Prime Minister. Putin was then elected President of Russia in the year 2000, only to be reelected again in 2004. By 2008, he stepped down and served as Prime Minister once again only to be reelected as President in 2012. In all of his years of rule, Vladimir Putin proved himself to be a successful leader of Russia due to his economic policies, effective military reforms, and treatment of his people. Vladimir Putin has been a successful Russian leader because of his economic policies.
History has known far more authoritarian regimes than any other form of government. Authoritarianism is a form of non-democratic rule defined by state power being centralized in a single person or a small group of people. Unlike democracies, these individuals in power are not dependent on the people for power. Thus, under authoritarianism, state leaders have little accountability to the public and there is little individual freedom. Additionally, authoritarian regimes are not bound by a constitution that might limit their power. Such democratic liberties such as the right to assembly, freedom of speech, and freedom of the press are highly controlled or non-existent. State policies are designed to maintain the power status quo in favor of the ruling group and perceived threats are marginalized or, in some cases, extinguished.
Imagine yourself in a world where you are constantly having to fear not being able to ever be free from this cage that you've been wanting to get out of for so long. Now imagine that suddenly just being your real life and not just a world that was just imagined, it’s almost too unbearable to think about but this happens. The book “Before We Were Free is a good example of that. The books takes place in the Dominican Republic in the 20th century, when the Dictator at the time was Rafael Trujillo, or in other words El Jefe. Dictators are a ruler with total power over a country, typically one who has obtained power by force. Till this day there are countries that are still ruled by dictators, for example, North Korea However, having a dictator
At first dictators can just be simple leaders but when power gets to them they want more and more and soon become dictators and they often tell lies to keep that power or in some cases people want dictators because it seems right at the moment but in the long run it isn’t always the right choice. George Orwell, the author of the famous book Animal Farm shows us in great detail the consequences of having a dictator through Napoleon the evil pig who murders anyone that gets in his way to gain control. By causing terror, committing violence, and telling lies Napoleon shows us what it could be like having a dictator for a leader.
"Mugabe Rival Quits Election Race." BBC News. BBC, 22 June 2008. Web. 15 May 2014.
Many European countries had to deal with totalitarian regimes with violence and fights. Adolf Hitler was possible because he used totalitarianism in making the people of Germany believe that he would improve things but, after he was elected, he let everyone down and did things the exact way, as he wanted them.
Authoritarian style governments come in different forms and apply varying amounts of violence when enforcing their rule. People who live in democratic style governments often do not understand why people accept living in an authoritarian state, forgetting that in fact the authoritarian form of government is the oldest form of government on earth. A dictatorship government is one type of authoritarian government that gains world attention most notably by the extreme violence used to control their citizens. This paper will review authoritarianism; why humans put up with it; traits of paranoid, narcissistic, and charismatic personalities; and highlight Idi Amin Dada as a case in point.
... first stage is the era of national interest in terms of economic and security, as I said in the introductory part of this paper that Hastings Banda inherited a government full of economic problems and all, so the promotion of socio economic interest and protection of territory integrity was the centre of Malawi’s foreign policy.32
Political greed, the greatest challenge to Africa’s democracy Uganda inclusive is political greed. Presidents in some African countries want to rule for life and extend the patronage to their family members. This greed has led to manipulation of parliaments, constitutions for example according to Uganda’s constitution of 1995; the president had only 3 terms of office. However when Uganda’s president term expired in 2005, he bribed members of parliament with 5millions Uganda shillings to scrap off presidential term limits without holding a referendum and it succeeded. This was a great blow to Uganda’s democracy and contempt of the