Gautam Mukunda wrote: > >> Replacing one dictator with an other one is not going >> to make the world a better place. > > Of course it could. It's not _optimal_, but it would > certainly be an improvement over the current situation. > If Iraq became something like Syria is today, that would > be _great_. If Syria became like Singapore, similarly, > that would be great. All three of those countries are > ruled by un-elected dictators, but not all dictators > are remotely alike. Saddam Hussein is probably the > worst single ruler in the world today - Kim Jong Il is > probably his only real competition for that dubious > title - and replacing him with almost _anyone_ would > be a vast improvement. Given that this is the Middle > East where, outside of Israel, democracies are not > exactly common, this might well be the best outcome > we are likely to get, actually. > But AFAIK there�s no plan to replace, say, the dictator of Egypt or the dictator of Uganda. Or even the dictator of China or Turkey. The message seems to be that as long as the dictator respects the rules of international capitalism, he can remain "dictating" forever.
Alberto Monteiro
