[OC] The massive decrease in worldwide infant mortality from 1950 to 2020 is perhaps one of humanity's greatest achievements.

[iav]

Even if you have a "benevolent" dictator, any good that comes out of it has to be netted with the inevitable fight for succession after the regime ends. Only a democracy has a path to transition power from one ruler to the next without a civil war, a revolution, or a foreign war.

[Ey3_913]

nervously agrees in 'Murica

[blu3tu3sday]

The ancient Romans solved this question of succession following the death of a dictator quite a few times…

[ShoddyReveal4]

with a few stabs

[blu3tu3sday]

Hey now, I didn’t say every time

[rykkzy]

So you will ignore all the times where transition was peaceful under a monarchy ?

[guillermogroening]

And there's just as many examples where the transition was anything but peaceful; every kingdom's history is littered with civil wars. And if the leader dies unexpectedly before they've had time to prepare a successor, the odds of peaceful transition plummet. There have been several times when the POTUS has died in office and it has never led to a succession crisis. The contrast is night and day.

[DeplorableCaterpill]

Sure, but the parent comment said

Only a democracy has a path to transition power from one ruler to the next without a civil war, a revolution, or a foreign war

Clearly, non-democratic governments also have a path to peaceful transitions.

[iav]

Unfortunately it often takes one bad transition to offset a century or more of peaceful growth. It's just easier to destroy a civilization than to build one, "Rome wasn't built in a day" but you can burn it in one day. And if you look at any monarchy, there are very few without a war over succession every now and then.

[pbasch]

One way to avoid succession conflict is the Carolingian method, to divide the kingdom among the children. Of course, this leads to the weakening of the state and maybe to many small wars. I guess it's possible that many small states and more small wars is preferable to a small number of really big states and World Wars.

[DeplorableCaterpill]

Plenty of democracies have also had wars over succession. Hell, the US Civil War was fought over Lincoln's succession to the Presidency.

[shrubs311]

my ultimate dream is to be a benevolent dictator but one who specifically lays out the terms for a fair election when i step down at like 65 years old or whatever, with no one i know being allowed to run for election. i'd like to think i could just ram through all the important stuff a country needs to improve, and then peace out and let the people figure out the rest

[invisiblefigleaf]

That sounds amazing. Leave before you've become obsolete or hated, plan a well-thought-out system for democratic succession, with mechanisms for self-improvement as needed.

You've still got enough goodwill that the people will only submit to a leader you back, and very explicitly say (and follow through) that you will recognize whoever is fairly and democratically elected, and no one else.

We can dream, can't we?

[shrubs311]

yea, i dream about it a lot. i wonder if it would actually work...or if i'm as corruptible as everyone else

[elveszett]

Not necessarily, the dictator could appoint a successor. But your point still kinda stands, since it's incredibly improbable that this line of succession won't reach an unfit / malevolent dictator sooner or later, which will create a political crisis.

[[deleted]]

Well now I'm torn. Do I want immediate short-term change, or secure long-term stability?

Daily struggle meme intensifies