A little over 200 years ago a small group of men decided that it was a good idea to let the people rule themselves. They inocently based this "new" form of government upon earlier forms of government originally championed by the Greeks and the Romans. Again, in their innocence, they titled this "new" government, Democracy, which in Greek translates loosely, "Let's let the ignorant masses screw it up this time instead of a well educated King."
A curious thing to note about humans is that in small groups, and with even the smallest of problems to solve, they have the inate ability to generally, and in all ways, muck things up. If these half-witted, apelike creatures are given larger groups, and bigger problems with which to relate, they inevitably come up with a much larger, and generally much more involved way to muck things up.
Proof of this comes, not from the United States
, which inexplicably has yet to *completely* muck things up, but from a half a dozen other examples throughout history. Strangely enough, all of these examples come after the advent of Democracy
. Stranger still, all of these examples will seem to belay, or even destroy
my reason for this node
. Bear with me faithful reader, it will all be clearer than muddy water
when I am through!
When in the course of human events a group of enlightened persons produces a seemingly more enlightened individual, it is a common ideal to raise that person to sheer godhood within the bounds of those individuals' place of residence. I know, that bit of political psychobable made very little sense... Give it time, and perhaps a few examples, and my point will be made...
France, early 1800s - The French, a generally unintelligent and spineless group whose purpose in life seems to be smelling bad, being rude, and producing truly great wines, are fresh from their own "Revolution." While it is unclear even to modern historians what the French were driving at when they decided to behead their heads of state (pun intended), it is even more inexplicable that less than 15 years after said "revolution" was completed they allowed a young, semi-accomplished Army officer to crown himself Emperor after small successes (and one failure) on the international battlefield. And of course, by "allowed" Napoleon to do this, I mean that, in general they thought it was a good idea. Perhaps it was the fact that after years of spineless leaders and a true lack of real presence on the international stage, they saw promise in the one man in the whole country who actually accomplished anything. Or perhaps they were all drunk off their gourds on a truly magnificent wine... In any case, they thought it was a good idea - which is why people should not be allowed self-rule.
Russia, 1917 - The Russians, whose purpose in life it seems is to be generally morose about their lot in life, occupy areas of the Earth which under normal circumstances most people would die in, and create truly great Vodkas, raised, um, themselves up as leaders of the country. Well, this was the theory anyway. In truth they raised a virtually unknown political theorist to a near God-like state. Whether this was an acknowledgement that a truly Marxist society cannot truly exist without Spiritual leadership, or merely a lack of common sense due to being wasted on Stolichnia is unknown... In any case, they thought it was a good idea - which is why people should not be allowed to self-rule
Germany, 1933 - The Germans, whose purpose in life it seems is to be nutcases, create truly great beers and really good shnapps and consume them at over twice the healthy rate, and every fifty years or so get pissed off and try to take over the world, Elected as their supreme dictator a highly decorated war-hero/politcal mastermind/ex-convict/evil genius. And by "elected" I of course mean that, by and large the Germans thought this was a good idea. Perhaps they were in the throes of a violent change of governmental ideas brought on by the ill-concieved Treaty of Versailles. Or perhaps they were really enamored of that cute little moustache Adolf Hitler had... In any case, they thought it was a good idea - which is why people should not be allowed to self-rule.
I'm sure that by now you are getting the point. I could of course talk about Italy in the 1930s, Cuba in the 1960s, Korea and Vietnam in the 1950s, Iraq in the 1970s, Haiti, Yugoslavia, etc, etc, etc... but, as i said you get the point. People should not be allowed to self-rule, because inevitably they make a poor leadership choice that spirals them into destruction (See George W. Bush).
Now, I know exactly what you are thinking. You are sitting there, reading this rather satyrical, and quite possibly rambling node, saying to yourself, "Now wait a second, this guy is supposed to be arguing for dictatorship, and yet, he's shot down every single one of the greatest modern dictatorships." Well, on that thought you would be right. Notice if you will, I did not point out any ancient dictatorships (Alexander, Caesar, Nero, Ghenghis Khan, The Pope). Well, that is simply because ancient rule was not determined by the people, it was setup by the ancient ruler. This brilliant act came in three forms -
1: The, my father/uncle/grandfather/relative was ruler here, and so am I. No one chose Him/Her, they chose themselves, and like the sheep they are, the people said, "Really? Well then, let's build you a really nice place to live and give half of what we make to you for no apparent reason."
2: The, I have a really huge army and the backing of the supposed committee that runs this Empire, so I am, by default, ruler. (This is every Roman Emperor in case you are confused). To this, the poeple usually said, "Well, how's about you kill some Christians while we watch, then you can be our Emperor."
3: The, by an incredibly complex set of rules created by a large group of people who are already in charge, and claim to be there because of God, I have been chosen by God to lead you. This actually has worked for rulers other than the Pope (see Constantine, Charlamange, Joan of Arc, and George W. Bush). To this line, the people say, "O chosen of God, which race whose beliefs run contrary to ours should we go and kill this week?"
And thusly, since none of these rulers was truly chosen by the people, they don't count. Instead they are our models to emulate.
This is the part where this node starts to make sense...
So, what we have discovered from our breif visit into to annals of history, is this -
People should under no circumstances chose their own leaders. This will only add insult to injury and result in their country either disappearing off the face of the planet (see: The Roman Empire), their country never having self-respect again (See: France), or their country having to find a new way to conquer the earth (See: Germany, the EEU, and China).
The best way for a leader to take power and rule well and benevolently is by force. Thus, Dictatorship of one's own means, and not by the people is the single best form of government, and the only way that the poor decision making skills, and general sheeplike behavior of the human race can be subverted.
Oh, wait, you aren't human are you? Damn, you are? Forget it then, it'll never work. Didn't you read the part about humans always mucking it up?