Tooting Carmen's list of relatively benign dictators

[Sebastianus Rex]

It would not be quite such an issue had Frau Merkel not decided to shut down its nuclear reactors. But let us not go off-topic. If we were to substitute Castro for King Hussein of Jordan on my original list, what would you think?

I would prefer Getúlio Vargas, Bukele or Vladimir Putin. Not technically dictators but borderline so.

[Sebastianus Rex]

Sugar and rum, much like before?

Before there was also coffee, tobacco products, fruits etc but it's completely unproductive now.

[Tooting Carmen]

I would prefer Getúlio Vargas, Bukele or Vladimir Putin. Not technically dictators but borderline so.

Vargas was not that different to Peron (and from what I can tell, his effects have been less profound long-term). Bukele has managed to pacify El Salvador to some extent, but mostly by exceeding even the US itself in having the world's largest prison population per capita, with the attendant loss of any semblance of rule of law and fair justice. Putin is just a former KGB agent who wants to recreate the "good old days", even if he won't admit as much.

Anyway, is there anyone on the list who you agree with me about?

[Sebastianus Rex]

Vargas was not that different to Peron (and from what I can tell, his effects have been less profound long-term). Bukele has managed to pacify El Salvador to some extent, but mostly by exceeding even the US itself in having the world's largest prison population per capita, with the attendant loss of any semblance of rule of law and fair justice. Putin is just a former KGB agent who wants to recreate the "good old days", even if he won't admit as much.

Anyway, is there anyone on the list who you agree with me about?

Vargas the father of the modern Brazilian state, prior to him it was a very fragile construction with no real effective institutions, his impact was much greater than of Peron's since Brazil is much more relevant than Argentina.

Since El Salvador had the highest gang criminality per capita it's only natural that now it has the highest prison population. Or do you think you can turn brutal gangbangers into model citizens just by decree ? He protected his population using arguably dictatorial powers, that's exactly why I propose him for the list of this specific thread of "relatively benign dictators".

Vladimir Putin took a completely collapsed Russia, on the brink of extiction as we know it, into super power status again, increasing dramatically the living standards of the population, reconstructing thousands of churches and cathedrals and making a decisive contribution to reshape the global geopolitical alignenents. We are talking probably of the biggest political genius of this century. To reduce him to "just a former KGB agent who wants to recreate the good old days" is worthy of an editorial piece of The Sun.

[Tooting Carmen]

Vargas the father of the modern Brazilian state, prior to him it was a very fragile construction with no real effective institutions, his impact was much greater than of Peron's since Brazil is much more relevant than Argentina.

Only by virtue of its much larger population and area. Despite its (relative) decline compared to a century ago, Argentina still outperforms Brazil on most socioeconomic indicators. Moreover, from what I have studied, Vargas' economic reforms were less radical and profound than Peron's.

Since El Salvador had the highest gang criminality per capita it's only natural that now it has the highest prison population. Or do you think you can turn brutal gangbangers into model citizens just by decree ? He protected his population using arguably dictatorial powers, that's exactly why I propose him for the list of this specific thread of "relatively benign dictators".

Improving the godforsaken country's security has been a good thing, of course. But imprisoning anyone who creates even the slightest bit of suspicion of being a gang-member attacks the basic tenets of justice and liberty. Still, I suppose I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, though his worship of bitcoin and other market libertarian fantasies leaves a bad taste in my mouth too. All the same, as Thomas Sowell said, "there are no benefits, only trade-offs", so we shall see.

Vladimir Putin took a completely collapsed Russia, on the brink of fracturing, into super power status again, increasing dramatically the living standards of the population, reconstructing thousands of churches and cathedrals and making a decisive contribution to reshape the global geopolitical alignments. We are talking probably of the biggest political genius of this century. To reduce him to "just a former KGB agent who wants to recreate the good old days" is worthy of an editorial piece of The Sun.

True, he has rebuilt the Russian economy after the disastrous days of the 90's, and that is to his massive credit. But there is nothing inevitable and necessary about his authoritarianism and militarism. In fact, were it not for his actions and threats, IMHO we could have seriously considered disbanding or drastically cutting back on NATO; at the very least, it certainly would not have expanded into the Baltic states, Scandinavia and possibly in the future Ukraine itself like it has done.

[Sebastianus Rex]

Only by virtue of its much larger population and area. Despite its (relative) decline compared to a century ago, Argentina still outperforms Brazil on most socioeconomic indicators. Moreover, from what I have studied, Vargas' economic reforms were less radical and profound than Peron's.



Improving the godforsaken country's security has been a good thing, of course. But imprisoning anyone who creates even the slightest bit of suspicion of being a gang-member attacks the basic tenets of justice and liberty. Still, I suppose I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, though his worship of bitcoin and other market libertarian fantasies leaves a bad taste in my mouth too. All the same, as Thomas Sowell said, "there are no benefits, only trade-offs", so we shall see.



True, he has rebuilt the Russian economy after the disastrous days of the 90's, and that is to his massive credit. But there is nothing inevitable and necessary about his authoritarianism and militarism. In fact, were it not for his actions and threats, IMHO we could have seriously considered disbanding or drastically cutting back on NATO; at the very least, it certainly would not have expanded into the Baltic states, Scandinavia and possibly in the future Ukraine itself like it has done.

You focus too much on the economy which is a common mistake of the anglo-saxonic "classic liberal" line of thought, to analyse everything under a materialistic perspective. There are much more meaningful and profound ideologic principles to build or reshape a nation/state.

The main achievements of the Vargas regime was on the institutional level, creation and organization of the Federal State structures, not economic.

Bukele understood that a country with no safety was a country with no future, it would become a narco failed state sooner or later. Also not economic motivations.

Putin's project for Russia goes even much deeper, it is civilizational and in complete rupture with the "westernization" of Russia. Also not moved by economic goals.

After the extinction of the USSR, NATO redefined itself and became an agressive alliance, with expansionist objectives to dominate Eurasia. Just need to check NATO's record after the early 90's. The lack of analytical dept I see from the british media and users is surprising, it seems brits are far more brainwashed by Atlantist propaganda than Americans and most Europeans.

[Andullero]

You focus too much on the economy which is a common mistake of the anglo-saxonic "classic liberal" line of thought, to analyse everything under a materialistic perspective. There are much more meaningful and profound ideologic principles to build or reshape a nation/state.

The main achievements of the Vargas regime was on the institutional level, creation and organization of the Federal State structures, not economic.

Bukele understood that a country with no safety was a country with no future, it would become a narco failed state sooner or later. Also not economic motivations.

Putin's project for Russia goes even much deeper, it is civilizational and in complete rupture with the "westernization" of Russia. Also not moved by economic goals.

After the extinction of the USSR, NATO redefined itself and became an agressive alliance, with expansionist objectives to dominate Eurasia. Just need to check NATO's record after the early 90's. The lack of analytical dept I see from the british media and users is surprising, it seems brits are far more brainwashed by Atlantist propaganda than Americans and most Europeans.

Reminds me of this meme of the 2010's:

[Tooting Carmen]

You focus too much on the economy which is a common mistake of the anglo-saxonic "classic liberal" line of thought, to analyse everything under a materialistic perspective. There are much more meaningful and profound ideologic principles to build or reshape a nation/state.

The main achievements of the Vargas regime was on the institutional level, creation and organization of the Federal State structures, not economic.

The economy is important, but of course it is certainly not the be all and end all. All the same, however much you, I or others ridicule Argentina for its periodic economic crises, the fact remains it still surpasses Brazil (and many other countries in Latin America and elsewhere) when it comes to healthcare, education and even (believe it or not) salaries.

Bukele understood that a country with no safety was a country with no future, it would become a narco failed state sooner or later. Also not economic motivations.

Granted, but I am just sceptical that turning his country into a giant prison is really such a sustainable way of going about things. And his libertarian economic ideas are indeed important, because they show that his approach is overwhelmingly based on security and coercion, rather than proper investment in public services, infrastructure and welfare.

Putin's project for Russia goes even much deeper, it is civilizational and in complete rupture with the "westernization" of Russia. Also not moved by economic goals.

After the extinction of the USSR, NATO redefined itself and became an agressive alliance, with expansionist objectives to dominate Eurasia. Just need to check NATO's record after the early 90's. The lack of analytical dept I see from the british media and users is surprising, it seems brits are far more brainwashed by Atlantist propaganda than Americans and most Europeans.

I am perfectly aware of NATO's misdeeds and broken promises regarding Russia, and I have talked about them myself both on this forum and elsewhere. And I am certainly no fan of US imperialism in the slightest - surely that must be bloody obvious. Nevertheless, rightly or wrongly, the former Soviet bloc countries and even Scandinavian countries do fear Russia and don't have fond memories of being under its rule, so NATO has provided them with a security blanket, however opportunistically and recklessly.

What's more, is there not something at least a little dissonant about how you praise Russia for wanting to de-Westernise itself, yet you have (conditionally) praised Western European imperialism across the Global South? I am sure you would at best laugh and at worst actively hate an African or Asian leader who wanted to eliminate Western influences in their country's culture and politics.

As it happens, it is mostly over the economy that you have attacked the Castro regime, yet you criticise me for focusing on the economy too much when looking at other leaders. Despite my recantation, I still maintain that his regime was arguably necessary and even successful in its early years. Even leaving aside the notable improvements in healthcare, education, science and sport, the even more crucial point was that his regime dismantled both the semi-Apartheid system and the US-dominated Mafia/neocolonial economic structures and associated decadence of the Batista regime.

[Tooting Carmen]

Reminds me of this meme of the 2010's:

Julius Evola was so batshit crazy and extreme Mussolini disowned and denounced him.

[Andullero]

Julius Evola was so batshit crazy and extreme Mussolini disowned and denounced him.

He wasn't wrong at denouncing the continous decline of the western world post-1789 and you know it.