Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

You have
President
Monarch
Dictator
Emperor
Communist
Etc

Which one does the ruler have the most power? Which one does the ruler have the least power?

Originally posted by HumbleServant
You have
President
Monarch
Dictator
Emperor
Communist
Etc

Which one does the ruler have the most power? Which one does the ruler have the least power? Pharaoh living God on Earth.

Yea I forgot Pharaoh

Originally posted by HumbleServant
Yea I forgot Pharaoh Any leader who is worshipped as a diety or speaks as a conduit to a very religious culture is always going to be boss of bosses.

Honestly depends more on the context than anything. Many dictators still call themselves 'President' for example, and after then it depends on how strongly they exert their will, spread their influence, tighten their grip and, possibly most importantly, retain their power.

Stalin or Mao are probably the two most powerful figures in modern politics. Doesn't really matter what you term them, they were both autocrats who retained power until their natural deaths, and their respective influences are still felt today.

On the other hand, Hitler and Mussolini were powerful, but they both ****ed up by pissing off foreign powers (and in Mussolini's case his own people) and their reigns were curtailed very suddenly due to this.


edit: Also not to forget the Kim dynasty, especially Kim Il-sung. You don't need a flashy title to be a ruthless and effective autocrat.

Originally posted by Scribble
Honestly depends more on the context than anything. Many dictators still call themselves 'President' for example, and after then it depends on how strongly they exert their will, spread their influence, tighten their grip and, possibly most importantly, retain their power.

Stalin or Mao are probably the two most powerful figures in modern politics. Doesn't really matter what you term them, they were both autocrats who retained power until their natural deaths, and their respective influences are still felt today.

On the other hand, Hitler and Mussolini were powerful, but they both ****ed up by pissing off foreign powers (and in Mussolini's case his own people) and their reigns were curtailed very suddenly due to this.


edit: Also not to forget the Kim dynasty, especially Kim Il-sung. You don't need a flashy title to be a ruthless and effective autocrat. Good post thanks . What do you think would happen if the next US president was a autocrat?

Yeah building the pyramids the tLlest buildings for almost 5000 years or getting people to commit hari kari by screaming tora tora tora takes religio and living gods

Originally posted by HumbleServant
Good post thanks . What do you think would happen if the next US president was a autocrat? I'm not sure how they'd do that. It would probably cause major schisms in the state system and the country would possibly just straight-up fall apart (and into civil war). The US is fairly well-designed so as to avoid easy domination by a president.


That isn't to say it isn't controlled by other extra-governmental forces that essentially govern autocratically, but state-by-state (and on the small scale) there's still a lot of self-governance.


That being said, I'm not American and I'm not that well-versed in the intricacies of their system, so perhaps I'm wrong.

Originally posted by HumbleServant
You have
President
Monarch
Dictator
Emperor
Communist
Etc

Which one does the ruler have the most power? Which one does the ruler have the least power?

Of the six you listed, from most to least:

-Monarch, Emperor, these are essentially the same. Kings and such where often seen as given their rule by a divine power and therefore infallible. eg In 2006 the Sultan of Brunei made himself infallible, whatever he does is right and legal in his country.

-Dictator

-Communist, though many Communist regimes are really dictatorships. eg Castro, Mao. Even Xi is dictator-lite, he gives himself power with little checks and balances.

-President. In the sense of a democracy where they have a set term and they're held in check by other governing bodies like our Congress.

-Etc.

Originally posted by Robtard
Of the six you listed, from most to least:

-Monarch, Emperor, these are essentially the same. Kings and such where often seen as given their rule by a divine power and therefore infallible. eg In 2006 the Sultan of Brunei made himself infallible, whatever he does is right and legal in his country.

-Dictator

-Communist, though many Communist regimes are really dictatorships. eg Castro, Mao. Even Xi is dictator-lite, he gives himself power with little checks and balances.

-President. In the sense of a democracy where they have a set term and they're held in check by other governing bodies like our Congress.

-Etc. Thanks, good post

Yeah building the pyramids the tallest buildings for almost 5000 years or getting people to commit hari kari by screaming tora tora tora takes religion and living gods

Originally posted by Scribble
Honestly depends more on the context than anything. Many dictators still call themselves 'President' for example, and after then it depends on how strongly they exert their will, spread their influence, tighten their grip and, possibly most importantly, retain their power.

Stalin or Mao are probably the two most powerful figures in modern politics. Doesn't really matter what you term them, they were both autocrats who retained power until their natural deaths, and their respective influences are still felt today.

On the other hand, Hitler and Mussolini were powerful, but they both ****ed up by pissing off foreign powers (and in Mussolini's case his own people) and their reigns were curtailed very suddenly due to this.


edit: Also not to forget the Kim dynasty, especially Kim Il-sung. You don't need a flashy title to be a ruthless and effective autocrat.

Damn you know you're geopolitics

Monarchies, outside of the total monarch, had alot more checks and balances in terms of long term fiscal strategy.

Modern communist, fascist, and democratic leaders are all comparable in power - the deciding factor is the size of the country and it's resources.

America is big and could achieve relative autarky, not that that's a good thing, but I don't think Russia or china could.

A dictator/fascist is going to have more absolute power over their people than a democratically elected president like we have in the US, the size/resources of the countries being equalized.

Originally posted by Robtard
A dictator/fascist is going to have more absolute power over their people than a democratically elected president like we have in the US, the size/resources of the countries being equalized. Bingo Absolutely, that's why your democratically elected 45th President did his best to become a dictator.

He really wanted to be like his buddies Kim and Rodrigo, but he failed.

Originally posted by Robtard
He really wanted to be like his buddies Kim and Rodrigo, but he failed. And most of all Daddy Putin

The answer is obviously Il Duche

Originally posted by Robtard
He really wanted to be like his buddies Kim and Rodrigo, but he failed. Trump was inspired by Andrew Jackson, but for all the wrong reasons.

Originally posted by Robtard
A dictator/fascist is going to have more absolute power over their people than a democratically elected president like we have in the US, the size/resources of the countries being equalized.

A dictator, as with a democratically leader, doesn't have power over the people, the people gladly hand it over.

20th century leaders were disproportionately powerful because the turbulently dynamic geopolitics precipitating ww1 and extending through until present day.
Add to this fact the emerging info tech at the time, allowing for mass propagandizing.

What did I fail to address ?

My point

Originally posted by Robtard
My point

Your point was dictators have more power, I was denying that point of contention and saying why.

Woodrow Wilson created the federal reserve and thus socialized money, took america to war, created countries, and tried to force america into the mold of whatever he thought utopia was... Sounds fascistic to me and there's way more dictatorial presidents than him.

Kind of a waste of time to not deal with the content of my response, but it's a standard npc move so I get it.