A ruler with total power over a country, typically one who has obtained control by force, is called a dictator. A person, alone can not obtain control by force, they have a team, a team from inside or a team from outside that country, a team motivated by financial gains or a team motivated by the patriotism or other ideology.
A dictator is a person that dictates instead of consulting with his team, one of the reasons they dictate could be that they monopolize most of the financial opportunities in that country. They may dictate in order to create unpredictability also.
Some times dictators may have to dictate because their team can not see the vision he has for that country, a vision that may be great if that “dictator” really loves his country.
I did not come accross yet the term that would describe a ruler that loves his country as much as they want to rule it up until he manages to take it out of the mud of debt, then create a bright future, then help its neighbors to secure a strong defense in a coalition, then create international opportunities, then get rid of all external influences…all these things take decades for a country to get its dignity and independence. I did not come a cross such a term that describes a strong, dedicated ruler. In western literature and media there are only rulers (ordinary rulers), the ones that come and go, and “dictators”, that are dictators because they are (re)elected in more than 2 terms, according to the “democracy rules”.
So there is the democratic model where nobody can be elected more than 2 terms, yet as I stated previously it needs decades for a ruler to rule the country out of debt, remove all the external influences in order to make an independent foreign and create the strong opportunity for the legacy to continue. Which one would you chose? If you are a Western”democracy” model adept, for you everyone that rules more than 2 terms is a dictator. The patriotism. though, is not measured in 2 teems and nothing else.
I, as one who lived under a “dictator” and also under “democratic” rulers, I would chose to believe that the “democratic model to not allow a ruler to rule more than 2 terms” is a false claim that pretends that tries to give opportunity to other rulers.
The “no more than 2 terms” rule purpose is to not give a nation the chance to get a dedicated ruler that might start the process of taking the country out of debt, to eliminating external influences and making an independent and owned way internationally.
I know who Nicolae Ceausescu was (rated on media as dictator), I lived under his regime and he was nothing like Hitler. He made Romania strong and powerful, like a little China, he wanted to parnter with Gadaffi and other countries like BRICS try to get together today and help all the countries in the 3rd world. But he dared too much and was killed.
Muammar Gadaffi (labelled as dictator) did not start a world war like Hitler, his people lived a lot better when he was alive, and I remember in the 80′ there were Romanian workers going in Libya to work in construction being paid very well. When he managed to reduce the influence of foreign “investors” in his country he wanted to make an African league to help all the African countries to get out of poverty throwing out foreign “investors”, but he dared too much, hence he was killed.
Bashar Al-Assad (rated as dictator) is definitely not a dictator, he does what ever he can for his country pillaged by foreign “investors” and war-mongers. I just can not see, what of him would remind one about Hitler as dictator.
Today rulers that love their country and want to do something for their people do not even become presidents to be restricted to only “2 elected terms” they become prime ministers so they can stay in power as long as it needs to save their country, to guide their country to make their country great again: Narendra Modi (Indian PM), Victor Orban (Hungarian PM), Robert Fico (Slovakian PM) and many others.
Today another 2 big “dictators”, one that worked hard for 25 years to take his country out of the debt and foreign liberalism destructive pressure (Vladimir Putin) and another one that leads a country that is miraculously great again (Xi Jimjping), are trying to do what Nicolae Ceausescu and Gadaffi and Sadam Hussein tried to do and were killed, helping other unfortunate countries to build their own great future.
Are they really dictators? Did Hitler help other countries to get out of debt and become self-sufficient?
Will they succeed or will they be killed and their body shamefully exposed in public like it happened with Gadaffi, or judged and killed in the Christmas Day like Ceausescu, or humiliated to have to hide like a rat as Sadam Hussein had to, just because they loved their country and wanted to help other as well?
So dictator in the Western World view is a ruler that, by hook or by crook, fights risking his own life to eliminate foreign intrusive involvement and most of all escapes the financial colonialism. The less grip these financial colonizers have on one of these brave rulers, the more vilified and devilised and authoritarian these rulers are painted in the Western Main Stream Media.
I’ve seen the democratic world, and I have seen what the democratic world calls out as undemocratic and I know which regime is democratic and which is not, I can smell propaganda from miles away, and here in this website I try to expose what it is, not some “say” might be, not any smokes and mirrors.
My agenda is the neutrality, unmasking of the double standards the strategic ambiguity of the Media.