• gerryflap@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 hours ago

    It’ll be a prime example of “the road to hell is paved with good intentions”. Can’t imagine I’d be able to keep the country running well for more than a year tbh

  • spirinolas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Yes! A Ferrari, a prostitute (male or female) and a psychologist for every citizen. Also, wine on tap in every home.

    You either get the joke or you don’t.

  • krooklochurm@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    I’d actually be a great leader because I know literally the only secret to good leadership (not great, but good): appoint people that are really really good at their jobs so you can do fuck all all day.

    • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 hours ago

      But are YOU good at spotting talent? Or at the least do you know someone who is?

      This crucial first step (and it is only a first step) runs right up against the Principle-agent problem, and a major result of our inability to recognize talent generally leads to a Market for lemons.

      Dictatorships suffer immensely from these problems because the dictator is a national focal point for decisions. Every swindler and scammer in the country is running around trying to fool the dictator. Since the benefits of being on the dictator’s good side are sky-high and the costs of being on their bad side are severe, the incentives for honesty and transparency in communications are nonexistent. This is the source of dictatorship dysfunction.

      About the only thing dictators tend to be good at (if they survive) is navigating a complex web of sycophantic and untrustworthy relationships. There is a constant need for surveillance and purging of potential traitors which has the effect of inspiring fear and paranoia throughout the regime. This in turn feeds into the dictator’s own paranoia, which becomes a vicious cycle.

        • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 hours ago

          How are you gonna do that?

          Edit: also, how do you keep your talent spotter loyal to you when everyone they hire will be loyal to them, not you?

          • krooklochurm@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Ask around, then trial and error.

            Who fucking cares? I’m doing as little as possible all day. As long as things are getting done well in a timely manner I couldn’t care less.

            I’m here to do fuck all and make money for it, and the best way to do that sustainably is for things to work well.

            When you empower the people under you to do their jobs well then you’re not an impediment to their goals.

            • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 hours ago

              Then you’re not really a dictator then are you? You’re a slacker and the talent spotter is the real dictator. And then people start questioning why you’re even in the picture in the first place. No problem! They get rid of you!

              • krooklochurm@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 hours ago

                If everything is running well, as it would when you hire competent people to do their jobs, empower them to do them, stay out of their way, and fire incompetent ones, then the people will love you and removing you will be political / actual suicide.

                If it isn’t, then you can fire the people responsible (the person doing the hiring in your scenario - I’d argue that there’s be no reason to be loyal to the person that hired if them if they’re empowered to do their jobs, which I’ve covered, but I digress).

                I’d argue that if the person you’ve chosen to appoint people is somehow acquiring / retaining the loyalty of everyone they’re hiring despite their job having nothing at all to do with the jobs that they’ve hired someone for is a) not actually good at finding talented people b) not doing their job and c) a great example of someone to be fired as per my original system.

                I mean. If you get hired in a sales role and the hr person that hired you is like: tell me your secrets, you’re not going to spill all the beans just because she brought you on.

                The system works. Hire people that are good at their jobs. Fire those that aren’t. Do nothing.

                • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 hours ago

                  I think I see the issue. You’re not just assuming that you’ve been made dictator of an existing society, you’re assuming a completely blank slate society that you get to build up from scratch. Real dictatorships don’t have that luxury. They have to work within existing relationships and power structures. They need the loyalty of powerful people to become dictator in the first place. They don’t just get to hand-pick whoever they want for every role.

    • Venus_Ziegenfalle@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Also no closed door meetings, no side hustles, no conflicts of interest. And regular audits just to be safe. If you want to work for the public your business is of public interest.

      • krooklochurm@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        18 minutes ago

        All those things sound like a lot of work that I don’t want to do.

        As a good leader (not great, but good. Top 30% at least), I will hire people. I will fire those who need to be fired. I will hire replacements.

        That is it. If any of my underlings require more than a howdy doo every once in a while they are too high maintenance.

        Anything that detracts from my doing nothing as much as possible will be replaced.

  • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    9 hours ago

    A friend of mine literally said that he’ll be a great leader and should not be questioned after throwing out all sorts of silly ideas on how to improve our city. I told him he’ll be worse than the current government and this is why democracy is still the best, because it does not rely on a single point of failure: which is one leader making bad decisions after bad decisions. A good autocrat is only one in a million.

  • magic_smoke@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    On one hand not using it to limit the death penalty to billionaires and powerful politicians, to end the war on drugs, to bring ubi and universal healthcare is a loss. To give that up seems immoral.

    Also to take the power seems immoral.

    Not sure there’s a good answer for a good person here.

  • Agent641@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    15 hours ago

    People talk about Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot like they are monsters, but the truth is, they were just regular humans, they had feelings, mothers, ambitions, anxieties. They were just normal men. To call them monsters ignores the full range of human capabilities.

    Now if if you want a truly monstrous dictator, and not one of these posers, vote for me.

  • anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    16 hours ago

    We need someone strong of character and values, experienced but able to change, willing but not eager to take up the mantle of leadership, someone who knows that their duty is not to build the future themselves, but to empower others to do so and bring together their successes in one coherent vision.
    What I’m saying is: Linus Torvalds for world governor!

  • ComradeSharkfucker@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Guys

    What? You mean it? I promise I won’t do anything weird haha. All of my laws will be super normal and not involve any of my kinks haha. Y’all are so sweet 🥺. I am very normal and can be trusted with state power

    • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      15 hours ago

      This, you’re not going to be successfully holding on to the position of dictator by directing available resources to what’s best for the people.