• dgmib@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 hours ago

    No.

    Not because I’m evil, but because I am empathetic and someone evil would absolutely figure out a way to use that to manipulate me.

  • orgrinrt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    Yeah pretty sure all evil deeds start with good intentions. So, no. I would very likely mess up my own head by thinking I’m doing the right thing, and if I’m secure in my position as the leader, I’d have a big load of yes men hovering around enforcing and enabling my every thought and idea, be it good or not. Most likely it’ll tend towards the “not good” side over time, and at some point everything just gets distorted and convoluted and by that point, there’ll be no return. And if I’m not secure in my position, then I’ll be dead and replaced before I can spell out my first decree as the ruler. If I’m to be good, I’ll not be ready for the bad coming my way. If I’m ready for the bad shit, I have to be ready to dispense my own bad shit. And that, then, wraps into my first point.

    There’s no way that would work if I was truly benevolent. I don’t believe it’s sustainable or even possible to lead as a dictator that is good or benevolent.

    Edit: that’s in practical terms. Let’s not even begin with the ideals — can one really ever be both benevolent or just generally good, and a dictator? I believe not. Sharing the burden and the authority would almost always be the more moral choice, not to mention more plausible in terms of lasting.

  • Naz@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I personally can, but that’s because my empathetic response is unusually overblown.

    My failure as a benevolent dictator would actually be becoming too detached from ordinary problems, so I’d need to have consistent town hall meetings where ordinary people could redress grievances, petition for aid and so on.

    At that point it goes back to being a normal government, since the (un)elected official is trying their best to do the people’s bidding while remaining accountable.

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    No. Although “turning evil” isn’t what happens to those guys, exactly.

    Dictators, in the sense of one man rule, don’t actually exist. What an autocracy does have is a first among equals in a system where everyone is “looking over their shoulder”. Even if someone who genuinely wants to make life great for the people takes power, there’s severe limits to how they can do that.

    Gorbachev is a great example of this. He was an idealistic person, and thought it would be good if the USSR switched to real democracy. Pretty immediately there were multiple coups until he was out of power, because anybody remotely high up the hierarchy had too many skeletons in their closet to allow that.

    In the end, a dictator only gets to choose what kind of nightmarish dictatorship they want.

  • hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I think the problem for me would be less about corruption and more about me not being capable of taking that kind of responsibility.

  • blarghly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Relevant CGP Grey.

    From the point of view of “can you hold power and not let your heart of hearts be corrupted?” - Yeah, sure, why not? The problem is that as soon as you have a significant amount of power, someone else is going to want it. Probably someone with fewer scrupals. So you will quickly be forced into utilitarian thinking - you must do whatever is necessary to maintain your position of power, lest you be usurped by someone worse. And what is necessary to maintain power, to a common person, is often corruption, violence, and austerity for the people.

  • morphballganon@mtgzone.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Yes.

    Fascism is the alternative people turn to when they can’t cope with their own inadequacies.

    I don’t have that problem.

  • thermal_shock@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    I could absolutely be corrupt for the sake of everyone else’s benefit. I don’t need nor want wealth, I want enough to not worry about money, be able to take a sick day and not worry about it. I want people to be able to have kids and not have to worry about how they’re going to support them. I want people to be able to get an education and not worry about how they’re going to pay for it.

    It’s only a list of about 10 simple changes that could be implemented incredibly easy if leadership wasn’t so worried about degrading one race or gender and lining their pockets.