Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Neither me. There is no such thing as a "benevolent" despot. Adult citizens are not children who need a "Big Papa" (or Big Brother) to discipline them.
No, there is no such thing as a benevolent despot. I think about the freedoms I have. I don't want some "Big Papa" trying to "discipline" me.
There is something else I've thought about. The movie City of God. That movie is set in the years during the military dictatorship. The violence, the crime that frequently took place in that film. I have to consider that if this is based on real life, then it tells me that having "Big Papa" to "discipline" people isn't the solution.
No, there is no such thing as a benevolent despot. I think about the freedoms I have. I don't want some "Big Papa" trying to "discipline" me.
There is something else I've thought about. The movie City of God. That movie is set in the years during the military dictatorship. The violence, the crime that frequently took place in that film. I have to consider that if this is based on real life, then it tells me that having "Big Papa" to "discipline" people isn't the solution.
The military dictatorship in Brazil started in 1964. By 1963 there was virtually no organized crime in Brazil, nothing that could even compare to the years of Al Capone in Chicago, or the New York mafia... By 1979, after 15 years of military dictatorship, there was already a drug cartel controlling a few favelas in Rio. That same drug cartel today is a huge criminal organization that is widespread all over the country. It was born and started to spread during the military dictatorship. It's a "child" of the military dictatorship.
The military dictatorship in Brazil started in 1964. By 1963 there was virtually no organized crime in Brazil, nothing that could even compare to the years of Al Capone in Chicago, or the New York mafia... By 1979, after 15 years of military dictatorship, there was already a drug cartel controlling a few favelas in Rio. That same drug cartel today is a huge criminal organization that is widespread all over the country. It was born and started to spread during the military dictatorship. It's a "child" of the military dictatorship.
Similar situation in Guatemala. The US had been a strong supporter of the different Guatemala presidents and military men, but the carter administration stopped giving military aid during the dictatorship of Lucas Garcia. Main reason being was the blatant human rights abuses an atrocities being commited by the dictatorship. This back fired though, as the Lucas Garcia regime looked for help elsewhere (south Korea, Taiwan, Isreal etc etc) and the human rights abuses got worse. It is also during the this time crooked military officials became involved in the drug trade. Guatemala became an important stop on the drug route for the Cali Cartel during the 80s and 90s. The amount of military men, both low and high ranking that have been arrested for drugs in Guatemala is insane.
Here's an older article that speaks about it.
Quote:
THE IGNOMINIOUS end of cocaine baron Pablo Escobar obscured the fact that his Medellin cartel had long since been eclipsed by another network of cocaine traffickers based in the Colombian city of Cali. The Cali cartel, led by the Rodriguez Orejuela family, is now said to control up to 85 percent of the world trade in the illicit drug. Two reasons for Cali's success are clear: It has a reputation for eschewing violence and for distributing its profits widely. A third less-often noted reason is that the cartel has established operations in Guatemala, a new safe haven for large cocaine shipments headed north.
The military dictatorship in Brazil started in 1964. By 1963 there was virtually no organized crime in Brazil, nothing that could even compare to the years of Al Capone in Chicago, or the New York mafia... By 1979, after 15 years of military dictatorship, there was already a drug cartel controlling a few favelas in Rio. That same drug cartel today is a huge criminal organization that is widespread all over the country. It was born and started to spread during the military dictatorship. It's a "child" of the military dictatorship.
The military created it or its creation was simply a coincidence?
Countries like Mexico have seen drug cartels form and expand while not being in a dictatorship, military or not. Things are now worse in Mexico regarding its drug cartels while a dictatorship is nowhere in sight.
In fact, the USA never had a dictatorship and yet you mention Al Capone, the New York mafia… certainly these criminal organizations were either born in or continue to exist in democratic USA.
No, there is no such thing as a benevolent despot.
Emiratis will probably not agree, though technically they are ruled by a royal family. The UAE is ruled by an iron rule by someone Emiratis can’t elect, speak bad about, etc. Yet, before oil was discovered and modern Emiratis lived a poor man’s life roaming around in camels, the royal family decided it will share the newly found wealth with the Emiratis, who are the original Arabs of the UAE region and then were basically the only ones living there. Today, the best thing that csn happen to someone is being born as an Emirati citizen (from my understanding, Emirati citizenship is granted mostly by blood, so most Emirati citizens today descend from the indigenous people of the UAE.) From craddle to grave Emiratis have their life resolved by their government. All live in beautiful houses with marble floors, nice cars, etc. The level of standards of living of the Emiratis is unlike what most Brazilians (and Latin Americans, even most Americans and Canadians) live today. The neighborhoods they live in look and are nothing like favelas, no random shootings, etc. Health care of the best in the world. Keep in mind Emiratis don’t live in a democracy and don’t have a full free speech, but you don’t see them emigrating in large numbers outside of the UAE or trying to get in illegally in some other country. The best place for an Emirati is the UAE. Nowhere else will life be easier than there. There is no such thing as an Emirati living in poverty, begging in the streets, commiting street crimes, etc.
That isn’t by coincidence. If the UAE royal family wanted, they could had decided to keep the country’s weslth to themselves and their friends. They decided all Emiratis should share the good luck of the UAE. That the UAE isn’t a democracy, doesn’t have full free speech, etc was not an impediment for that.
Emiratis will probably not agree, though technically they are ruled by a royal family. The UAE is ruled by an iron rule by someone Emiratis can’t elect, speak bad about, etc. Yet, before oil was discovered and modern Emiratis lived a poor man’s life roaming around in camels, the royal family decided it will share the newly found wealth with the Emiratis, who are the original Arabs of the UAE region and then were basically the only ones living there. Today, the best thing that csn happen to someone is being born as an Emirati citizen (from my understanding, Emirati citizenship is granted mostly by blood, so most Emirati citizens today descend from the indigenous people of the UAE.) From craddle to grave Emiratis have their life resolved by their government. All live in beautiful houses with marble floors, nice cars, etc. The level of standards of living of the Emiratis is unlike what most Brazilians (and Latin Americans, even most Americans and Canadians) live today. The neighborhoods they live in look and are nothing like favelas, no random shootings, etc. Health care of the best in the world. Keep in mind Emiratis don’t live in a democracy and don’t have a full free speech, but you don’t see them emigrating in large numbers outside of the UAE or trying to get in illegally in some other country. The best place for an Emirati is the UAE. Nowhere else will life be easier than there. There is no such thing as an Emirati living in poverty, begging in the streets, commiting street crimes, etc.
That isn’t by coincidence. If the UAE royal family wanted, they could had decided to keep the country’s weslth to themselves and their friends. They decided all Emiratis should share the good luck of the UAE. That the UAE isn’t a democracy, doesn’t have full free speech, etc was not an impediment for that.
Not a strong argument for dictatorships. The UAE has barely a million citizens that it is obligated to take care off. To provide a decent standard of living for a million people when oil brings in $300 billion each year isnt a huge accomplishment. The oil masks the fact that the royals have been busy keeping the rest of the money for themselves instead of doing the real government work of investing in the people and empowering them to be actual contributors to the country as a whole. The vast majority of Emirati citizens do not do actual productive work, instead working cushy but ultimately useless government jobs that dont serve much actual purpose. In other words, the royals bribe the locals to keep quiet.
A much more realistic situation is Saudi Arabia. Like the UAE, it has a royal family and survives on oil, but with a much larger population, it's harder to keep the living standards up. Saudi income levels have been steadily declining for decades. The people live under an iron hand which in addition to shutting down freedom of speech also stifles free thought, new ideas and innovation. Similar stories occur in Kuwait, Oman and the other Gulf states.
For now, the royal families of all these countries will get by because the oil money is still rolling in. But the day of reckoning will eventually come when the oil money isnt there and people will ask why the royals get to keep billions of dollars and suppress everyone. That day will make the Arab Spring look like a picnic.
Not a strong argument for dictatorships. The UAE has barely a million citizens that it is obligated to take care off. To provide a decent standard of living for a million people when oil brings in $300 billion each year isnt a huge accomplishment.
The royal family wasn’t obligated to make sure the weslth reached all Emiratis. In fact, the UAE has been criticized for its treatment of Indians/Pakistanis which nowadays at leasf in Dubai makes up most of the population. The percentage of the oil wealth doesn’t reaches them as it does to the Emiratis. Certainly, it would have to be a lesser percentage for the Emiratis compared to what they get now if a greater percentage of such wealth was to reach the Indians/Pakistanis. The point is that the royal family decided Emiratis would be the choosen ones in the UAE. Hence the current situation there. While some could (and do) criticize the current situation, I’m not too critical because the Emiratis are the indigenous people of the UAE area. I think they should be the ones benefitting the most from what produces their indigenous land. In the Americas the indigenous population isn’t the choosen one in their own indigenous lands. Now, in many countries in the Americas the original indigenous people don’t exist anymore except from some ancestry that is still present in small quantities always mixed with something else. However, there are countries where the indigenous makes up a sizeable minority, but these indigenous of the Americas aren’t like the indigenous of the UAE, at least not regarding the wealth that produces ttheir ancestral land.
Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life
The oil masks the fact that the royals have been busy keeping the rest of the money for themselves instead of doing the real government work of investing in the people and empowering them to be actual contributors to the country as a whole. The vast majority of Emirati citizens do not do actual productive work, instead working cushy but ultimately useless government jobs that dont serve much actual purpose. In other words, the royals bribe the locals to keep quiet.
They don’t get those government jobs by some lottery. Every Emirati citizen is basically guaranteed employment in the government if they want one. Those are some of the best employment positions in the UAE (meaning they have some of the highest salaries) and much of the money comes from what the government gets from certain productions within the UAE such as oil. If the royal family wanted to, Emiratis wouldn’t get preferential treatment when it came to getting government employment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life
A much more realistic situation is Saudi Arabia. Like the UAE, it has a royal family and survives on oil, but with a much larger population, it's harder to keep the living standards up. Saudi income levels have been steadily declining for decades. The people live under an iron hand which in addition to shutting down freedom of speech also stifles free thought, new ideas and innovation. Similar stories occur in Kuwait, Oman and the other Gulf states.
The average person in Saudi Arabia still lives more comfortably than the average person in more democratic and with more free speech Latin America. Even with certwin issues like its ridiculous stance on women (is it still legal for women to drive there?), if the average Haitian was given a chance to live like the average Saudi, I think they would take it without looking back. Just a hunch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life
For now, the royal families of all these countries will get by because the oil money is still rolling in. But the day of reckoning will eventually come when the oil money isnt there and people will ask why the royals get to keep billions of dollars and suppress everyone. That day will make the Arab Spring look like a picnic.
It doesn’t mean the Emiratis are guaranteed to become like the indigenous people of the Americas where in just about every country in their indigenous lands has them in a sort of second place. The Emiratis will most likely still be the choosen people in the Emirates, even if and when there is less wealth to spread around. In the Americas we know the indigenous people aren’t the first ones to pick the fruit from the tree.
That’s the point. The indigenous of the Americas live in much more democratic countries with greater freedom of speech than many of the indigenous people of the Middle East, but they don’t come first. The ones with dictactorial/monarchical regimes and less freedom of speech are the ones in control in many of their countries.
The royal family wasn’t obligated to make sure the weslth reached all Emiratis. In fact, the UAE has been criticized for its treatment of Indians/Pakistanis which nowadays at leasf in Dubai makes up most of the population. The percentage of the oil wealth doesn’t reaches them as it does to the Emiratis. Certainly, it would have to be a lesser percentage for the Emiratis compared to what they get now if a greater percentage of such wealth was to reach the Indians/Pakistanis. The point is that the royal family decided Emiratis would be the choosen ones in the UAE. Hence the current situation there. While some could (and do) criticize the current situation, I’m not too critical because the Emiratis are the indigenous people of the UAE area. I think they should be the ones benefitting the most from what produces their indigenous land. In the Americas the indigenous population isn’t the choosen one in their own indigenous lands. Now, in many countries in the Americas the original indigenous people don’t exist anymore except from some ancestry that is still present in small quantities always mixed with something else. However, there are countries where the indigenous makes up a sizeable minority, but these indigenous of the Americas aren’t like the indigenous of the UAE, at least not regarding the wealth that produces ttheir ancestral land.
They don’t get those government jobs by some lottery. Every Emirati citizen is basically guaranteed employment in the government if they want one. Those are some of the best employment positions in the UAE (meaning they have some of the highest salaries) and much of the money comes from what the government gets from certain productions within the UAE such as oil. If the royal family wanted to, Emiratis wouldn’t get preferential treatment when it came to getting government employment.
The average person in Saudi Arabia still lives more comfortably than the average person in more democratic and with more free speech Latin America. Even with certwin issues like its ridiculous stance on women (is it still legal for women to drive there?), if the average Haitian was given a chance to live like the average Saudi, I think they would take it without looking back. Just a hunch.
It doesn’t mean the Emiratis are guaranteed to become like the indigenous people of the Americas where in just about every country in their indigenous lands has them in a sort of second place. The Emiratis will most likely still be the choosen people in the Emirates, even if and when there is less wealth to spread around. In the Americas we know the indigenous people aren’t the first ones to pick the fruit from the tree.
That’s the point. The indigenous of the Americas live in much more democratic countries with greater freedom of speech than many of the indigenous people of the Middle East, but they don’t come first. The ones with dictactorial/monarchical regimes and less freedom of speech are the ones in control in many of their countries.
Comparing the UAE to Latin America with regards to the treatment of the indigenous people isnt an apples to apples comparison at all. In most of Latin America, the indigenous people were pretty much shoved to the bottom of society by the arrival of the Europeans. The political and business elite are rarely indigenous either. Compare that to the UAE where the royal family are all indigenous. The majority in the country are Indian/Pakistani and it's safe to say that they are the ones at the bottom of the barrel in UAE society. So the royal family would be foolish to favor foreigners over their own people since the foreigners do not share links of tribe, language, culture or religion and thus would have zero reason to be loyal to the royal family. So it's in the royals best interest that in a country in which they are already part of the minority not to make their situation even more risky by alienating the one group that would support them.
The point I was trying to make with regards to the government jobs is that it's little more than a sedative to keep the people distracted from the fact that there are few opportunities to make real money and hence independence from the royals. People who are not dependent on favors from the government are less easy to control and more likely to speak up against actions they dont like. You only have to look at how China, Russia and Saudi Arabia treat their richest citizens who dare cross them. The UAE by providing dummy jobs ensures that no one speaks against them, so it's more out of self interest and survival, NOT out of any genuine desire to improve the lives of their indigenous countrymen.
Finally, it's a pretty low bar you set if you want to say that Saudis live better than the poorest country in the Americas. Haitians would gladly live in just about any country in the a ton of countries, including those far poorer than Saudi Arabia. It's not much to brag about. Indeed, with all the hundreds of billions of dollars Saudi Arabia has earned over the years, I would think the people would have their sights aimed a lot higher than Haiti when evaluating how good their royal family has been.
Comparing the UAE to Latin America with regards to the treatment of the indigenous people isnt an apples to apples comparison at all. In most of Latin America, the indigenous people were pretty much shoved to the bottom of society by the arrival of the Europeans. The political and business elite are rarely indigenous either. Compare that to the UAE where the royal family are all indigenous. The majority in the country are Indian/Pakistani and it's safe to say that they are the ones at the bottom of the barrel in UAE society.
Every society will have groups at the bottom. Without it, there is no society. What isn’t the case everywhere is for the indigenous people to be at the bottom in what essentially has been their land for thousands of years and the UAE is one of those places where the indigenous are king. Quite frankly, that’s how it should be everywhere there are still groups of actual indigenous (not highly mixed with something else), IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life
So the royal family would be foolish to favor foreigners over their own people since the foreigners do not share links of tribe, language, culture or religion and thus would have zero reason to be loyal to the royal family. So it's in the royals best interest that in a country in which they are already part of the minority not to make their situation even more risky by alienating the one group that would support them.
There are examples where the government essentially frooze salary increases on its employees for years. Over a decade would pass by and people in the government wouldn’t see a cent more to what they earned at the beginning of that decade, despite living costs rose year after year. The royal family of the UAE isn’t obligated to favor the indigenous people of the UAE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life
The point I was trying to make with regards to the government jobs is that it's little more than a sedative to keep the people distracted from the fact that there are few opportunities to make real money and hence independence from the royals.
The UAE has actually done quite a job a diversifying its economy and along with that opportunities are inevitable. Who gets those opportunities can and often is influenced by the decisions of the government. There are many countries that have developed on what essentially is state capitalism. Look at Singapore (which has been ruled as a quasi-dictatorship) or South Korea (not a dictatorship, but if it wasn’t for the Korean state its development wouldhad never happened and even its worldwide known brands.) If the local people aren’t capable of developing a place without the guidance of the government, I think it’s foolishness for the government to simply stay with crossed arms and let chancd dictate the level of development that might be achieved. Sometimes this can’t be left to chance. You take the bull by the horns. You’re not asking a place to please develop, you are telling the place it will be developed by X time whether it wants to or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life
People who are not dependent on favors from the government are less easy to control and more likely to speak up against actions they dont like.
You are aware that in most countries the biggest employer is the government, right? And that in most countries, the UAE included, most people aren’t eorking for the government, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life
You only have to look at how China, Russia and Saudi Arabia treat their richest citizens who dare cross them.
Those are very heirarchical societies where respect must be given to the leaders. It has been like that in those places since ever. Now the government has money, but those societies continue to function as the always had.
Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life
The UAE by providing dummy jobs ensures that no one speaks against them, so it's more out of self interest and survival, NOT out of any genuine desire to improve the lives of their indigenous countrymen.
The French Revolution started by the majority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life
Finally, it's a pretty low bar you set if you want to say that Saudis live better than the poorest country in the Americas. Haitians would gladly live in just about any country in the a ton of countries, including those far poorer than Saudi Arabia. It's not much to brag about. Indeed, with all the hundreds of billions of dollars Saudi Arabia has earned over the years, I would think the people would have their sights aimed a lot higher than Haiti when evaluating how good their royal family has been.
Except that Haiti was one of the world’s richest places a few centuries ago. This isn’t the typical story of a dirt poor place that has always been dirt poor. On the other hand, the Saudis have always been dirt poor until the end of the 1930’s when things began to change. The Saudi royal family could had kept most of the new wealth and spread it with its friends while keeping most Saudis in the same poverty they have always been in. Most of them wouldn’t know they are poor living in a rich country.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
