Benevolent Dictator

-

 I belive, if I could be a benevolent dictator.

I am going to talk about a kind of Dictatorship that everyone could just dream about. A benevolent dictatorship. It is that form of government in which, an authoritarian(single person rule) leader performs all important decision makings and could hold absolute political power over the nation. The only difference in this dictatorship is that in doing so, he is expected to keep the social welfare or benefit of the population in his mind. This theory is a relative one because it is just the opposite of a monovalent stereotype of a dictator who focuses on his own benefit. Limited civil liberty is one of its main characteristics. It means that the people who live in such state enjoy a limited freedom. Elected representative with limited power is also one characteristic feature. Although it is not a necessary part of such type of government, it is better to devide the regions limited power to an elected member to ease the governing. 

The absolute political power in the hands of the supreme head of the state remains constant. This is a beauty of such government that it provides elections. Holding election is a very important part of a democracy. It proves that there is a presence of democracy in such state. Democracy is different in such state than the democracy in a democratic state. People have the right to keep their ideas in front of the government, but the power of taking the decision remains in the hand of the head. Here remains a question that, the decision making may depend on the thinking of the head. For an example is he has a patriarchal mindset, and he has to take a decision that is in the favor of women. Although it is in benefitting terms of both women and government, but he denies to provide such right. No matter what position a person is in, his decisions depends on his ideas. Until there is body present in a government which guides such ruler. Like a council of ministers is present in Indian government to guide the President before he or she takes any decision. Everyone wants full control over all the aspects of their life. Being a benevolent dictator may fulfil one's dream. With doing welfare to the people and presence of less conflicts, you can rule over a state till the day that you want. 

In my fantasies, I belive that if I could be one. Like the benevolent dictators that have been previously such as, Mr. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk of Turkey(1923-1938), Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore(1959-1990), Abd al-Karim Qasim of Iraq(1959-1963), Josip Broz Tito of Yugoslavia(1953-1980) and France-Albert René of Seychelles(1977-2004). All of them share a great history in ruling their state. If you look to their Currier, the ruled longer than an average malevolent dictators. It is because people are satisfied with the limiter liberty that they get and there are no such issues of inter party revolt. It makes the governing of the state easier. Let's take a modern example of dictators and learn about his experiences.

• Mustafa Kemal Atatürk- During his leadership in Turkey(1919-1938) he went through Turkish war of Independence from 1919 to 1923. He remained the President of Turkey from 1923 to 1938. His contribution in making Turkey as a republic state and removing of the foreign influence over Ottoman is still remembered with great respect. His contribution in other field such as empowerment of women by giving them rights to vote, agrarian land ownership reforms, making Turkey a secular nation by removing Islam as a state religion, he adopted and accepted the western laws instead of Sharia and reforming the education system in the state. This led to the formation of the Modern Turkey.


So this was the real form of a benevolent dictator. In real terms, Mustafa defined the term himself. He fought for independence he believed in democracy as well and he was a modernist. He believed in changing the reforms to make his state more favorable to attract more communities from all over the world. Such beautiful wonder should be remembered forever. Thank you for reading this article. 

By- Baibhav Ranjan.  |  BA, University of Delhi

Comments

Post a Comment

THANK YOU FOR YOUR RESPONSE I WAS PLEASED TO ENTERTAIN YOU!

Popular posts from this blog

Political Realism(classical) in India

-
Image
  International relations and it's specialist accept that there are difference in ideas and theories of different states which UN have to grapple with. Political Realism stresses that international politics has a competitive and conflicted history, but all of them were dealt with moral, ideal and liberal modes. The only motive behind the moral nature of realism in international politics is to build a co-operative environment. Where the superpowers are in an arms tussle, the concept of realism is proved to be more efficient in diplomatic talks and treaty. Every rising superpower is trying to ensure security of their people, act of persuading their own national interest and struggling to be in a powerful positions in every treaty organization. The only negative part of being realists' is that they only motivated toward achieving their own interests. Interest is often their suspicion in the relevance of moral and ethical standards towards relationship between the stat
Read more

Contemporary and comparative government and politics(modern approaches)

-
Image
  Discuss the modern approaches of comparative government and politics:- When we say that a particular theory is a result of comparative government and politics, then we mean that theory is a result to a comparative study of different political system and there working. According to Wikipedia, it is a field in political science characterized either by the use of the comparative method or other empirical methods to explore politics within countries. This includes the questioning or analysing the working of political institutions, political behaviours, conflicts, and the causes and consequences of economic development of different nation and under different types of governments. The term modern approach is simply used to determine the time of the emergence of a particular theory. The comparative study is supplemented or supported by some methodological approach; modern approach is one of such method of defining the time and idea. Normative methods generally refers to the
Read more

Deliberative Democracy

-
Image
Deliberative democracy, is undoubtedly a better way to govern a state. In my research as a whole, I did not find even a single state which strictly follows deliberative democratic governing body. Deliberative democracy theory states that there should be a deliberative and co-operative form of government. The government should completely follow the rule of discussion with all elite members before taking a huge step. A routine check should be kept on the processes so that no single opinion goes waste. The center most idea should be deliberative decision-making. It means that both consensus decision-making and majority rule  is seen in a combination and full co-operation. Deliberative democracy was never as par with the traditional democratic theory, because it merely believed in voting. Let's learn more about it. It originated from the ideas of Aristotle and his notions of politics. However, Joseph M. Bessette was the first thinker to put all the links together in his 198
Read more