Comments
Follow Comments Sorted by time
fire_is_hot
· 7 years ago
· FIRST
an elected dictatorship? elective dictator? Dictatorcracy? I dunno my brains hurts..
11
geluregis
· 7 years ago
Depends if they still get to vote afterwards and if there's still bodies of government that can check and balance them.
12
·
Edited 7 years ago
fire_is_hot
· 7 years ago
Reminds me of Venezuela lately
1
deleted
· 7 years ago
Depends if the votes are done under duress or paid for lol
pokethebear
· 7 years ago
Yes
average_potterhead
· 7 years ago
Strictly defined, a dictator is someone who conquered a country using force. Now, if they forced people to vote for them, it's a fake democracy, but it's still a democracy. However, a true dictator literally fought and overthrew the existing government/ruler. That is a dictatorship.
geluregis
· 7 years ago
Both Hitler and Mussolini were legally appointed, yet they're still pretty much considered dictators. I think the most important thing about being a dictator is having unchecked power.
2
guest
· 7 years ago
It's a Ricktatorship
▼
buttscarleton
· 7 years ago
Its democracy then it isn't
living
· 7 years ago
It depends on whether the dictator was the only person one could vote for
3
guest
· 7 years ago
@trump
▼
dancadamorte
· 7 years ago
I don't think you understand what a dictator is. If Trump was a dictator, everything he said would become law. The ACA would be gone, and judges wouldn't be able to hold up his immigration ban. Our government is working exactly as it was designed to, we're just seeing the checks and balances used more vigorously in recent years as politics polarizes. Trump is not and cannot be a dictator.
16
guest
· 7 years ago
And how is that different than Turkey?
▼
dancadamorte
· 7 years ago
Turkey doesn't have the same checks and balances working. Nothing is stopping Erdogen from making so many changes. Another difference is that changes to the Turkish constitution can be done by referendum, allowing a single public vote to make changes and screw the other branches depending on current public sentiment. Changes to the US constitution that would fundamentally change our checks and balances system need ratification by a certain number of states, not people, specifically to avoid a fearful populace taking a vote in a fervor and fucking up.
2
