Which would you rather have, be honest

[12th Doctor]

A man walks up to you and says that he can grant you a wish, but he gets to choose what exactly your choice will be.  At first you don't believe him, but after he resurrects you bucket of KFC into a living chicken, right before your eyes, you come to believe his claim.

He promised that the question will not be one that is a no win situation.  Finally, you agree to the whole thing.

And so he asks you...

"If you had the choice between being the ruler of a dictatorship, where you will would be followed (to a point) or live in a free Democratic country, which would you choose?"

You ask him if he can elaborate for you.  He agrees.

The nation where you are a ruler will be prosperous, so long as you rule it well.  In the fields of government, law and foriegn policy, you will have total control (there might be some corruption from others, but nothing that will detract from your power too badly).  There will be people who don't like you.  They might even plot against your life, but you'll have that in every government.  You don't have total control over your people, either.  You might make laws that force them to behave as you wish, you might be able to pick up anyone and take them to bed, you might be able to have anyone killed, but you won't be able to control peoples minds and the more you act out, the more people might come to dislike you.  You can be over thrown if people don't like you, but, at least to start out with, the military favors you a lot.  If you rule well and in a benevolent manner, the peopel might come to love you and your children and their children might go on to be supreme rulers, which the same problems and temptations you would face, but also the same benefits for them and the people if they did the right things.

Of course, the democratic country is like any other democratic country it has problems and the government is often slow to act or misacts.  You would have total economic freedom and the same social freedoms that are enjoyed in Democratic states as would your children and their children and so on.  You might even become a politican or a powerful leader in this country, but things will never be exactly as you want them.  This is democracy after all.  This democracy could also crumble at anytime if its leaders do not do the right things.  Our system is a fragile one, after all.

What do you choose?

P.S.  You can't cop out of this.  Once you have the power, you can never give it up unless you are removed.  No creating a Senate, no "Constitutional Monarchy".

[12th Doctor]

I'd choose to be a Dictator then I would make my country a Democracy or a Consitutional Monarchy. It is that simple.

Read the new disclaimer.

[12th Doctor]

To answer those who obviously didn't read the begining thoroughly, you are the ruler in the dictatorship, that is the point.

[12th Doctor]

Make myself Emperor Harry of course

What is it with all of these old school references lately? 

[12th Doctor]

A man walks up to you and says that he can grant you a wish, but he gets to choose what exactly your choice will be.  At first you don't believe him, but after he resurrects you bucket of KFC into a living chicken, right before your eyes, you come to believe his claim.

He promised that the question will not be one that is a no win situation.  Finally, you agree to the whole thing.

And so he asks you...

"If you had the choice between being the ruler of a dictatorship, where you will would be followed (to a point) or live in a free Democratic country, which would you choose?"

You ask him if he can elaborate for you.  He agrees.

The nation where you are a ruler will be prosperous, so long as you rule it well.  In the fields of government, law and foriegn policy, you will have total control (there might be some corruption from others, but nothing that will detract from your power too badly).  There will be people who don't like you.  They might even plot against your life, but you'll have that in every government.  You don't have total control over your people, either.  You might make laws that force them to behave as you wish, you might be able to pick up anyone and take them to bed, you might be able to have anyone killed, but you won't be able to control peoples minds and the more you act out, the more people might come to dislike you.  You can be over thrown if people don't like you, but, at least to start out with, the military favors you a lot.  If you rule well and in a benevolent manner, the peopel might come to love you and your children and their children might go on to be supreme rulers, which the same problems and temptations you would face, but also the same benefits for them and the people if they did the right things.

Of course, the democratic country is like any other democratic country it has problems and the government is often slow to act or misacts.  You would have total economic freedom and the same social freedoms that are enjoyed in Democratic states as would your children and their children and so on.  You might even become a politican or a powerful leader in this country, but things will never be exactly as you want them.  This is democracy after all.  This democracy could also crumble at anytime if its leaders do not do the right things.  Our system is a fragile one, after all.

What do you choose?

P.S.  You can't cop out of this.  Once you have the power, you can never give it up unless you are removed.  No creating a Senate, no "Constitutional Monarchy".

So this is why you're Republican. Both options practically mean the same thing for members of that party.

What?  I'm sorry, I guess that I assumed a certain level of intellegence in the question.  What this question is really about is whether or not you would trust youself to be a benevolent ruler with supreme power or even if you think such a thing is possible.  I'm sorry that I did not simply state the question in such a manner, but I figured that a vast majority of people on this forum would understand that and just asking that question would not have been much fun. 

Not only that, but both of my discriptions are perfectly legit.  And I did not compare them at all.  In fact, I made a point of the fact that both systems have pitfalls.  If you don't think that democratic government can have pitfalls, I suggest you take a look at Athens or Germany or even the United States of the 1820's (Andrew Jackson, "our fearless dictator", anyone?).  Why are you so offended that I point out those pitfalls?  Esspecially since you were against the Iraq War and have made anti-Bush comments?  Don't you see that as being a negative?  We did elect him, after all.

As a dictator, you can have what you want, so long as you are either benevolent or deceptive enough.  In many of our legends and movies we see "great kings".  In real life, the examples are not so great.  My question was basically asking whether or not you think you could fit the mold of a great leader, or if you know you would turn bad.  Once again, the pitfalls, both to yourself and others are obvious and I mentioned them.

So what is your problem, exactly?

P.S. I voted for democracy, BTW.