Dictators are bizarrely stupid

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by birch, Apr 20, 2017.

  1. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    Kim Jong Un is playing a defensive game, using his offense to create his defense. It is like in hockey, during the last 30 seconds, when a team will pull the goal tender so they can apply so much offensive pressure, allowing the defense not to be needed.

    North Korea is stable, as long as there is little outside influence to change anything. It is similar to an abused wife, in a marriage, who is isolated from her family and friends. She can be made to accept her less than optimized circumstances, through a type of Stockholm syndrome, where she begins to relate to her abusive captor and starts to justify his behavior. If her friends and family was to enter the picture, this could destabilize that less than optimized situation. He need to scare them away using offense to mount a defense.

    Kim Jong Un uses the military and his quest for nukes to keep everyone away, so Stockholm syndrome stability is maintained. He pull the goal tender and mounts the perception of offense to create a strong defense against any change.

    As an analogous example and solution, is the Democrats pushed the Russian connection issue, hard in an attempt to discredit Trump. They never had any proof, but only the constant threat of uncovering a bomb shell. This offensive measure was actually a defense. When Trump accused the Democrats of wire tapping, they backed off, since this was what they were trying to defend against, by attacking and blaming him for this. Trump figured out how to make them blink. But he did not take them out like many would have wanted. It is likely he will make a similar offer to N Korea, that will make the feel less defensive and therefore less offensive.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. C C Consular Corps - "the backbone of diplomacy" Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,805
    I've no interest in a futile attempt to convert you. This topic, after all, is along the line of its author making a declaration or advancing a personal "hypothesis", rather than issuing a curiosity-oriented request for information or for other perspectives. The thread's progress thereby should be assessed in terms of how well you are doing in winning others to your opinion.

    In the case of Kim Jong-un, at least, there's no reason for me to set aside the available data for somebody's extraneous feelings about what "ought to be the case" for his situation. Rather than what is his situation in terms of North Korean power struggles / consequences and the impetus of the ideological apparatus engulfing him (military-first, Juche, familism / cult of personality, etc).

    It's not written in stone that he would not choose to improve the less visible citizen's well-being if the other pre-established priorities didn't gobble-up the funds and focus. Similarly, the pope doesn't have supreme dominance over Catholic ideology, either -- what degrees of freedom he does have must still abide within the constraints of the canon and minimum ruffling of other clerical heavyweights' feathers.

    None of the sons seemed much interested in inheriting the demands and paranoia associated with North Korean leadership (with the eldest establishing that from the outset by slipping off to Disneyland). But with the middle son being evaluated as "inadequately virile" and the youngest lad looking most like his father and sharing habits like drinking, smoking, and superficial confidence... The latter's eventual acquiescence to the role is additional testament to the government and the cultural apparatus pressuring, grooming, and indirectly menacing him by example. Months before Kim Jong-un assumed his top status and personally ordered his own later purges, a couple hundred apprentices of the vice-chairman and Kim Jong-un's uncle-in-law were eliminated so to diminish the number of rivals and threats to him.

    Some of the younger generation care less about the institutional idolization of military and the Kim family. This has provoked re-education and punishment camps to correct the deficiency in security and loyalty to Juche doctrine and its supplement mandates.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,364
    Not sure they're ''stupid,'' as much as they are/were arrogant, and that can blind even the smartest of people.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,505
    Their vision, first and foremost, is to enrich themselves. If that comes at the expense of their people, they don't care.

    What dictator does not live in a palace, have a personal fleet of sports cars and private jets, even as his people starve?

    Actually, it is rational for Kim Jong-un to try to develop nuclear weapons, as a deterrent to the US (in particular) from attempting to oust his regime by force.

    The dictator always wants to maintain his own privilege and power, above all else. Resources spent on protecting number 1 and his position are never wasted, from the point of view of the dictator. And citizens are, in the end, just one more expendable resource for the dictator.

    The idea of a "benevolent dictator" is a superficially attractive one. But then there's the old adage that absolute power corrupts absolutely. Human government never works to benefit "the people" without appropriate checks and balances in place. This is why democracy is the least-worst form of government, despite its failings.

    Dictators like Kim Jong-un largely turn a blind eye to the plight of the majority of their people. Their concern is their own position as privilege. They need to make sure that they make the lives of their protectors (often the military, and their close advisors) very comfortable indeed. But outside the circle of power, they do not concern themselves with the general welfare of their people. Any disgruntled people who are out of the loop of power can be ignored unless they start to kick up too much of a fuss. If they become a problem, there are always prison camps and torture chambers to "re-educate" them.

    The mindset of the dictator is to build a power base, take over the country, and afterwards to maintain that position at all costs, forever. They are out to do good, but "good" is only what is good for them and their cronies. People in general are considered expendable resources.
     
  8. sweetpea Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    745
    What's the difference between a King or Queen with absolute power and a Dictator with that same absolute power? Just the title? How did or do the monarchal lines begin if not with some absolute king or queen in the first place? That line then may become a Parliamentary monarchy sometime down the line...thinking here prior to King John days.
    The descent line of Queen Elizabeth the second...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_of_Elizabeth_II_from_William_the_Conqueror
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2017
  9. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Usually, various traditions and customs burden and limit the power of an inherited title. After all, as with all inheritance, its transmission and establishment depend on others.
     
  10. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,952
    Noblesse oblige.
     
  11. sweetpea Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    745
    Yes, but how does the line start in the first place, if not by someone without ablsoute power? I note your ''Usually''.

    I would think some Dictators have some form of help to become dictators in the first place. And then, those 'helpful' people have accidents so to speak. But, that could happen with the absolute king and Queen angle as well.
     
  12. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    One difference between dictators and a long line of kings and queens can be seen with the analogy of a self made billionaire, and their children who don't have to work and struggle, but get a free ride to the top; entitlement.

    The self made billionaire needs a dream, skills, and lot of drive to compete among all the others who want the same things. His children and family don't need these skills, but rather get things handed to them. This easier path to the top can cause one to form an attitude of being entitled by their position and connections. Instead of the entrepreneur who knows it takes works and skills. They become more like an actor playing a role. There is more gaming and showing off at the level of king and queen. It is ceremonial and symbolic.

    Donald Trump was interesting in that he made his children walk a mile in his old shoes. They had to work and learn work ethics from his blue collar workers/roots, even though they could be part of the NY establishment, by entitlement. He was not going for a line of pretentious kings and queens, but he wanted them to be entrepreneurs. Rather than be gamers who like the lime light; politicians, they are trained to be leaders; future dictators who will find their own country.
     
  13. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Of course. Absolute power at the State level is a complex working system. Like all such systems, it is usually an expansion or combination of simpler systems that worked. Absolute power on a State scale is not easily achieved in one shot, and commonly self-destructs - the few that did not are historically famous.

    (One of the simpler systems most often expanded like that is "beat somebody up and take their stuff". If the "stuff" is a fairly large and authoritarian political entity, a complex system already working, one can get hold of quite a bit of essentially absolute power fairly rapidly - but keeping it is another matter).
    Donald Trump got a free ride to the top, and has spent his whole life gaming and showing off in the limelight.

    The system he has taken over was built by others, without his help. He doesn't know how that was done, and he doesn't care. All con men are parasites - it's the nature of their game.

    If he is grooming his children to be dictators, and they have any realistic chance, their future victims should kill them now in self defense. Who would that be?
     
  14. sweetpea Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    745
    Were they the ''old shoes'' he was wearing in 1999 when his father died and left him one million plus?
    If Trump showed his tax return from 1999, then it would be known 'for sure' if he is a 'self made' man.
     
  15. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,094
    I do not know of any non corrupt leaders of any nation.

    <>
     

Share This Page