Who will be the next great dictator?

[flintlock]

We all know that historically, in times of great turmoil like we are having now, men like Hitler, Napoleon, Mao, and Augustus tend to rise to power. They tend to be ruthless and cruel, but also quite effective at bringing about order out of the chaos. Who is out there posed to be the next dictator? Who are the leading candidates? I can't think of a soul. Of course those guys came out of nowhere also.

[jtabeb]

Re: Who will be the next great dictator?

We all know that historically, in times of great turmoil like we are having now, men like Hitler, Napoleon, Mao, and Augustus tend to rise to power. They tend to be ruthless and cruel, but also quite effective at bringing about order out of the chaos. Who is out there posed to be the next dictator? Who are the leading candidates? I can't think of a soul. Of course those guys came out of nowhere also.

Strictly a guess. An evangelical that is a radical nationalist (patriot) OR a liberal socialist. But my hunch is the former because I think that there will be a significant backlash against the perceived liberalism of the obama administration ( I say perceived, because so they haven't done much that's progressive, that's for sure, more of BUSH 3 so far on the economic front).

Not trying to offend, but go read the "handmaidens tail" by margrette attwood for a primer on the subject. Typically religion goes hand in hand with totalitarianism.

BTW Atheism is a religion if you did not know. (In case you were going to bring up communism or any totalitarian system that uses the non-existance of god as a key tenet in it's propaganda). Atheism is the BELIEF that there is no higher being. The reason I can classify it as a religion is because the burden of proof for proving God exists or that God does not exist is EXACTLY the same, hence, belief in the non-existence of a God is just as much a religion as belief IN God.

Only the Agnostics can really be classified as not having a "belief" system and hence do not ascribe to A religion. The same CAN NOT be said for Christians, Jews, Muslims, and Atheiests.

So elect an Agnostic if you want to steer clear of a potential dictator.

[johnw106]

Re: Who will be the next great dictator?

I am a Christian so take what I say with that in mind. I do not adhere to any main stream denomination. I read the Hebrew Bible for myself.

I watch for the false prophet. This is the man who will be the spiritual guru or leader who will appeal to the common people. This is the man with the silver tongue. This is the man who will rally the people and get them to support the political leader who will appear. The political leader is refered to as the Beast in scripture, but in reality it is the false prophet who will weild the true power.

I do not think it will be Christianity or Islam that this false one will preach. Perhaps some type of new movement based on the push for "green" energy and the global warming/climate change rhetoric we see? So until this false prophet appears I do not look for a end of the world scenario to play out. But it isnt looking good. My greatest fear is some nut coming to power in a country like Korea or Pakistan. If someone starts tossing nukes it will not be pretty.

[jtabeb]

Re: Who will be the next great dictator?

I am a Christian so take what I say with that in mind. I do not adhere to any main stream denomination. I read the Hebrew Bible for myself.

I watch for the false prophet. This is the man who will be the spiritual guru or leader who will appeal to the common people. This is the man with the silver tongue. This is the man who will rally the people and get them to support the political leader who will appear. The political leader is refered to as the Beast in scripture, but in reality it is the false prophet who will weild the true power.

I do not think it will be Christianity or Islam that this false one will preach. Perhaps some type of new movement based on the push for "green" energy and the global warming/climate change rhetoric we see? So until this false prophet appears I do not look for a end of the world scenario to play out. But it isnt looking good. My greatest fear is some nut coming to power in a country like Korea or Pakistan. If someone starts tossing nukes it will not be pretty.

As a believer in God that is the tough question right? Hoping that we are not one of the misled. That's my biggest fear because the big "three" monotheistic religions all say that the VAST MAJORITY of the people will be mislead.

[Jay]

Re: Who will be the next great dictator?

I'm pretty sure it will be RickBishop.

[santafe2]

Re: Who will be the next great dictator?

I'm pretty sure it will be RickBishop.

RB is going to have to come at us with robotic precision in high-definition and theater wide if he wants to beat our own stuff at a chance to take us down. Should we become weak enough to be dictated to, I'm tossing a coin; heads is technology and tails is an old fashioned virus. As awful as a virus is, here's the beauty of playing virus hardball - it's most likely a do-over for the survivors. The other choice is science fiction but evolution moves forward.

[mesyn191]

Re: Who will be the next great dictator?

BTW Atheism is a religion if you did not know.

Beliefs are not necessarily religions, it after all has none of the trappings of religion (myths, prayer, gods/beings, etc.).

[Chris]

Re: Who will be the next great dictator?

Hilary Clinton

[Munger]

Re: Who will be the next great dictator?

BTW Atheism is a religion if you did not know. (In case you were going to bring up communism or any totalitarian system that uses the non-existance of god as a key tenet in it's propaganda). Atheism is the BELIEF that there is no higher being. The reason I can classify it as a religion is because the burden of proof for proving God exists or that God does not exist is EXACTLY the same, hence, belief in the non-existence of a God is just as much a religion as belief IN God.

I disagree. You should also consider that the statements "I do not believe god exists" and "I believe god does not exist" are both atheistic.

Only the Agnostics can really be classified as not having a "belief" system and hence do not ascribe to A religion. The same CAN NOT be said for Christians, Jews, Muslims, and Atheiests.

So elect an Agnostic if you want to steer clear of a potential dictator.

I think most atheists consider themselves agnostics if you really want to get down to it; while it is true that one cannot be 100% sure, it is pretty easy to get to about 99.9% with the main religions.

[we_are_toast]

Re: Who will be the next great dictator?

Atheism is the BELIEF that there is no higher being. The reason I can classify it as a religion is because the burden of proof for proving God exists or that God does not exist is EXACTLY the same, hence, belief in the non-existence of a God is just as much a religion as belief IN God.

Of Course, the burden of proof is not equal.


Last night I built a rocketship and went to Mars to have my supper.

Since the burden of proof for proving I went to Mars or that I did not go to Mars is EXACTLY the same, it makes you as crazy as I am.

"because of human fallibility, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" Carl Sagan

[due_indigence]

Re: Who will be the next great dictator?

The real dictatorship is institutional IMF-FED-World Bank-Money Center Banks. The personality(s) around which the cult will be arranged is something of a prurient biographical detail. They have the ability to make Donald Duck walk on water. With his faux-inclusiveness-veneer, Obama is a compelling candidate, especially since the second-leg of the disintegration will occur on his watch.

Here's my futurist take worth exactly what you pay for it....

We are reaching finitudes on numerous fronts: Peak Oil, 40% of the world's copper consumed, etc. It is a banker-fostered Ponzi myth that capitalism must be attended by growth. Or maybe it isn't. The whole modern capitalist era, going back 400 years, has been banker-fueled. Whether for good or ill, the rapidity of moderinization owes itself to the usuruous dynamic of banker-led capitalism. Maybe it needs to now politely wither away? Usury was a centuries-old sin across all Judeo-Christian traditions. Gordon Gekko only took it off the list in 1989.

First and foremost, growth is required to generate sufficient income to service a growing debt. Old regime debt must be repudiated. The amount of debt has so overshot the world's ability to pay, that the bankers' epic greed may yet be our way out. The numbers are absurdly large --unserviceable by any practical measure of the world's ability to labor beneath them. This may be GOOD news, although it is currently (and predictably) being couched as bad news, the end of the modern economy as we know it. Certainly it's a convenient ploy to lash the health of the banking sector to the future of civilization. But is it true or cunning hyperbole?

But first, Obama/Geithner are not the transformationel team that will make this happen. They are lapdogs to the banking class, more of the same. This System cannot heal itself. The solutions are exogenous to this System. The elite will not dismantle itself. Nor should we underestimate the willingness of an elite to grind 95% of population into Les Miserables deprivation.

Institutionalized usury conducted the world through the the Age of Exploration, mercantilism, the Industrial Revolution, the Information Age. Maybe I lack for imagination, but it seems the growth frontiers are not as boundless as before. Again I may lack for imagination here. There is alt energy clearly. I suppose my greatest fear is that the banking interests will enslave us to their crazy legacy debt before we can embark on these new frontiers with the full-force of human ingenuity. Are we going to invent new sources of clean energy or are we going to spend a century servicing the excesses of CDS'?

We're either going to get a revolution or a Soma-conducted dystopia (or is it a dystopia to 'us' and a utopia to 'them'?). I believe significant social unrest will arrive no later than 2010 in the US as the Depression kicks in. Frankly there will be a race betwen chaos and the efficacies of modern technologies to suppress dissent. They have the technology and the drugs today to have us enjoy our oppression rather nicely ala The Matrix. Viewed in this context, the early prototypes, blunt-force Mussolini-Franco fascism, were crude test-beds, interrupted works-in-pogress.

Look at Leni Riefenstahls's 'Triumph of the Will', with 1934-era media techniques; hardly a unevocative piece of work. Imagine a similar experience with the full-force of today's multimedia simulacra --and maybe some designer drugs tossed in for good measure. Such a thoroughly-modern spectacle would roll over the majority of the population. They will be tired anyway.

I view the Internet as the Underground Railroad. Thank God we have it. Let's see how long we can keep it. You can learn (or is it unlearn?) more on the Internet from fourms such as itulip in a couple of months than you do from years of school and network documentaries. Already we are seeing early efforts to meter it. And cheap Wifi is being suppressed around the United States because no one can make money from it.

[BigBagel]

Re: Who will be the next great dictator?

It will be Barney Frank.

[goadam1]

Re: Who will be the next great dictator?

We are nearing peak everything. But who knows what black swans good or bad await. A virus kills 200 million. A new energy is created. Did you really see the internet coming? In the end we will move away from economies based on infinite growth but when and at what price.

That said: I am up for the job.

[jtabeb]

Re: Who will be the next great dictator?

Of Course, the burden of proof is not equal.


Last night I built a rocketship and went to Mars to have my supper.

Since the burden of proof for proving I went to Mars or that I did not go to Mars is EXACTLY the same, it makes you as crazy as I am.

"because of human fallibility, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" Carl Sagan

The burden is always biased towards the affirmative based on the Axiom of Ackem's razor. We require a higher burden of proof to challange the status quo. In you example you could show me a Mars rock to prove you went and I could show you NORAD radar data showing you didn't go, so each of us could prove our point if we could produce the evidence.

In the case of GOD, I litterally would have to know everything about everything to prove or disprove his existance, so the burden of proof is the same because there is no accepted status quo. (In your example the status quo is to assume that you do not have the intelletual and manufacturing expertise neccessary to support your claim that you went to mars).

[jtabeb]

Re: Who will be the next great dictator?

I disagree. You should also consider that the statements "I do not believe god exists" and "I believe god does not exist" are both atheistic.



I think most atheists consider themselves agnostics if you really want to get down to it; while it is true that one cannot be 100% sure, it is pretty easy to get to about 99.9% with the main religions.

You can't mix definitions like that and say they are the same, unless you are colloquilaizing the argument.

The two statements above are NOT the same

One negates god, the other negates the belief in god THEREFORE the one that negates god would be athesitic the one that negates belief would be agnostic.

Just like 1 - 1 = 0 is not the same as 1 - (-)1 = 2. A result of 0 and a result of 2, are not the same result.