An autocratic country could easily spread propaganda in the democratic country, because of “free speech” rules that most democratic countries have, but a democratic country cannot easily spread its propaganda in the autocratic country.
An autocratic country can buy an election in the democratic country, but the democratic country cannot easily coup an autocratic country.
Are all democracies are doomed to fail?
Is the future of humanity, autocracy? For the rest of humanity’s existence?
I think your questions are more complicated than you realize.
Are Autocracies more powerful than Democracies?
If you separate the form of government from the governing, yes autocracy is a superior form of government. A dictator can instantly marshal resources to face any threat, or completely shift an entire nation, if a direction becomes clearly wrong. The reason they don’t work, is because the leader is always human. Humans make shit leaders, almost always. So distribution of power across a large number of people mitigates the risks of putting it all in one.
Are all democracies are doomed to fail?
Yes. Obviously. Everything eventually fails. The Sun will fail and take the earth with it.
Is the future of humanity, autocracy? For the rest of humanity’s existence?
No. Obviously. Everything eventually fails. The Sun will fail and take the earth with it. I would hope humanity (or whatever species humanity evolves to) lives past that.
but the democratic country cannot easily coup an autocratic COuntry.
CIA: am I a joke to you? Look at my portfolio
Quite the opposite. Due to systemic corruption autocracies are economically highly inefficient with low productivity across the board with all kinds of long term effects this brings. And while it might look bad for democracies at the moment, I think many of the current crop of autocracies will be short lived. In the end, economy is where it’s at, and autocracies are horrible at it.
Not many want to fight for the autocracy either. Bunch of slack-ass soldiers. Fight for freedom? You’ll get people volunteering.
It’s one of those things where evil people actually don’t win - it just looks like it on the short term!
“I destroyed the country but I got rich”
Task failed successfully.
Rich, or bayoneted up the ass, strung up in the square by a mob, executed by the military, etc.
I mean, if you’re rich and can leave for somewhere else, that still works for you. Assad being the latest example.
Until he gets shown out a window by his hosts for whatever reason.
😂
Definitely. Autocracies always end up being poorly run. Any system that concentrates all authority in a single ruler is going to have some pretty bad outcomes. Even if the dictator really was the smartest guy in the country, instead of merely the most ruthless, even geniuses make bad decisions from time to time. Autocrats quickly find themselves surrounded by yes men. This is how you end up with boneheaded ideas like Mao’s backyard steel production or Stalin embracing Lysenkoism.
Autocracies are short-lived power grabs by certain people or groups of people. They pillage what they can, oppress who they want, and then run or fall when the walls start closing in.
Many have come and gone during our history on this planet. Many more will rise and fall.
See Plato’s five regimes.
The US is a democracy (for now), and has backed multiple coups in other countries. Nicaragua is probably the classic example, but there are many, many more. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change
I feel like the US is more of a Hybrid Regime
Between what? Democracy and oligarchy? Yeah, I guess. Most of those terms are often used pretty loosely…
The US has never been a democracy, we’ve never been a particularly equitable representative republic either and our government was designed this way on purpose
Guess it depends on how you define the term. The US certainly fits the minimalist representative definition. I don’t think equity is inherently part of the definition… Obviously I think it should be, but that’s more of a value overlaid on the organisational system, I think…
Literally all communication depends on how you define the terms you use, that’s the whole point of having fixed definitions for words, and the US absolutely does not fit any reasonable definition of a democracy
Sure it does
Wrong
Autocratic countries have a small number of leaders, often one.
The goal of said leader isn’t really to grow and bring wealth and prosperity, but to never lose power.
So overall, the economics of the country would plateau, cause why risk allowing wealth to grow and fall into your opponents’ hands?
Hence why countries like Russia and North Korea rarely innovate, but just take what’s available to further entrench their country’s position.
So the only way autocracy can prevail is by brining down anything superior to it, much like what Russia is doing to the US.
“countries” are invisible lines draw on a map by someone. Propaganda and lies are a tool used by people to persuade others, free speech and freedom are a natural condition upon which humanity can evolve and prosper.
The problem isn’t that autocracies are better or that they win. The problem is specifically the democracy in the U.S, which is fucked because of ignorant/lazy population and greedy corrupt politicians.
