Would any of you support a liberal dictatorship like that of Napoleon and Atataturk and various East Asian nations?

[Andyh2299]

Would you? If it is to bring stability out of the chaos?

 

[MamboDervish]

Would you? If it is to bring stability out of the chaos?

Please explain why you think it would bring stability out of chaos.

 

[Andyh2299]

Please explain why you think it would bring stability out of chaos.

Who's the biggest threat to country? Corrupt oligarchs for profit. If they can be killed(which I'm not advocating for, for you mods) or imprisoned now without any process blocking it wasting precious time while they throw money around, it will all be over.

 

[The flaming lib]

Who's the biggest threat to country?

Corrupt and self righteous politicians who are influenced by to much wealth(payola) and power or who’s personal pet ideas take America to areas that may not be in her best interest

 

[Andyh2299]

Corrupt and self righteous politicians who are influenced by to much wealth(payola) and power or who’s personal pet ideas take America to areas that may not be in her best interest

Name a realistic way to get rid of them

 

[ambinonapronon]

Would you? If it is to bring stability out of the chaos?

Red Caesar?

 

[ambinonapronon]

Name a realistic way to get rid of them

Tactical nukes.

 

[ambinonapronon]

I’m on a list!

 

[Captain Adverse]

Would you? If it is to bring stability out of the chaos?

In a word? NO!

I don't support any form of dictatorship, be it Liberal, Fascist, Communist, whatever. I like the idea of a Federal Republic of United States.

Still, I am already tired of the current "Oligarchy" claiming to be a Democracy. We are supposed to be a Republic of semi-independent States, yet typically we are electing people at the behest of those wealthy elites who control the Media, buy the politicians, and then tell them how to spend our taxes.

What we need are term limits, a balanced budget requirement, and a Congress that never passes another "Omnibus Bill" again. Just clear single-issue legislation anyone can read and understand.

 

[Loulit01]

Absolutely not. Unless I could be the benevolent dictator. I'd do a great job. First thing, I'd put Trump in charge of the President's Council on Physical Fitness and Sports.

 

[Sweden]

Would you? If it is to bring stability out of the chaos?

A kind dictator could, in exteme cases, be an improvement on a cruel dictator. Think North Korea.

 

[Andyh2299]

A kind dictator could, in exteme cases, be an improvement on a cruel dictator. Think North Korea.

Kim is kind?

 

[rjay]

A kind dictator could, in exteme cases, be an improvement on a cruel dictator. Think North Korea.

I don't see a thumbs down. Where is the dislike button?

Think, North Korea? Geesh.

 

[Andyh2299]

In a word? NO!

I don't support any form of dictatorship, be it Liberal, Fascist, Communist, whatever. I like the idea of a Federal Republic of United States.

Still, I am already tired of the current "Oligarchy" claiming to be a Democracy. We are supposed to be a Republic of semi-independent States, yet typically we are electing people at the behest of those wealthy elites who control the Media, buy the politicians, and then tell them how to spend our taxes.

What we need are term limits, a balanced budget requirement, and a Congress that never passes another "Omnibus Bill" again. Just clear single-issue legislation anyone can read and understand.

What term limits are you looking at?

 

[joluoto]

No.

And there is no such thing as a liberal Dictatorship. Oxymoron. Ataturk was a modernist and a nationalist, but not a liberal. Napoleon III was a Bonapartist, which was a modernist spin on monarchism. But modernism and liberalism are not the same things. Liberalism tend to embrace modernism, but Fascism also embraced some aspects of modernism, so definitely not the same thing.

 

[Slartibartfast]

I wouldn't support any dictatorship.

 

[Andyh2299]

No.

And there is no such thing as a liberal Dictatorship. Oxymoron. Ataturk was a modernist and a nationalist, but not a liberal. Napoleon III was a Bonapartist, which was a modernist spin on monarchism. But modernism and liberalism are not the same things. Liberalism tend to embrace modernism, but Fascism also embraced some aspects of modernism, so definitely not the same thing.

The Napoleonic code isn't liberal? Many of the ideals were instead to correct the old French monarchy.

 

[Craig234]

Would you? If it is to bring stability out of the chaos?

The "chaos" is caused by too much concentrated wealth and power. That would make the problem even worse. Equality tends to bring stability. Stability as tyranny isn't nice.

 

[Craig234]

The Napoleonic code isn't liberal? Many of the ideals were instead to correct the old French monarchy.

That's conflating the relative meaning of the word liberal in very different times.

 

[Captain Adverse]

In a word? NO!

I don't support any form of dictatorship, be it Liberal, Fascist, Communist, whatever. I like the idea of a Federal Republic of United States.

Still, I am already tired of the current "Oligarchy" claiming to be a Democracy. We are supposed to be a Republic of semi-independent States, yet typically we are electing people at the behest of those wealthy elites who control the Media, buy the politicians, and then tell them how to spend our taxes.

What we need are term limits, a balanced budget requirement, and a Congress that never passes another "Omnibus Bill" again. Just clear single-issue legislation anyone can read and understand.

The 22nd Amendment limited the President to 2 four-year terms.

I'd suggest Senator's be limited to 2 six-year terms, and Congressmen to 6 two-year terms.

Thus, if someone wants to make a "career" out of elected service, and he/she could run for all three offices, then the maximum time of service would be 32 years (12 in the house, 12 in the Senate, 8 as President).

That may seem like a lot of consecutive time but remember that currently there are 435 seats for Congressmen, 100 for Senators, and only 1 for President.

I'd like to point out that we've had individuals who've served over 40 years in the House alone:

Members With 40 Years or More House Service | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives

Last Updated January 3, 2025Since Congress convened in 1789, 33 Members have served 40 years or longer in the House of Representatives. In cases in which a Member's tenure is not consecutive, service dates are provided in the footnotes. This list does not include Members who served 40 years or...

history.house.gov

Members with combined services even longer:

List of members of the United States Congress by longevity of service - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Loulit01]

The 22nd Amendment limited the President to 2 four-year terms.

I'd suggest Senator's be limited to 2 six-year terms, and Congressmen to 6 two-year terms.

Thus, if someone wants to make a "career" out of elected service, and he/she could run for all three offices, then the maximum time of service would be 32 years (12 in the house, 12 in the Senate, 8 as President).

That may seem like a lot of consecutive time but remember that currently there are 435 seats for Congressmen, 100 for Senators, and only 1 for President.

I'd like to point out that we've had individuals who've served over 40 years in the House alone:

Members With 40 Years or More House Service | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives

Last Updated January 3, 2025Since Congress convened in 1789, 33 Members have served 40 years or longer in the House of Representatives. In cases in which a Member's tenure is not consecutive, service dates are provided in the footnotes. This list does not include Members who served 40 years or...

history.house.gov

Members with combined services even longer:

List of members of the United States Congress by longevity of service - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Amen, brother,

Down with the gerontocracy!

 

[Craig234]

Term limits, one of the most misguided ideas we have. They're a cure worse than the disease, a wrong fix to the problem of corrupted elections.

 

[Loulit01]

Term limits, one of the most misguided ideas we have. They're a cure worse than the disease, a wrong fix to the problem of corrupted elections.

 

[Craig234]

Terrible argument.

 

[Loulit01]

Term limits, one of the most misguided ideas we have. They're a cure worse than the disease, a wrong fix to the problem of corrupted elections.