 |
| Botswana women flaunting to be chosen by the King as concubines |
All moral lessons of the ancient East or West always say that dictatorial regimes of any kind are bad, and so sooner or later be put down by the people .There are available evidence to prove this rule-like argument in various cases of collapses of obsolete states which were outdated throughout the history of mankind, most recently the cases of Saddam Hussein of Iraq, Mubarak of Egypt and Libya's Qaddafi. But there is another fact that many institutional dictatorships seem remaining in power for very long even with respect and admiration from the people of their own country . That was the case of the kingdom states like Bhutan, Nepal on top of the Himalaya or Botswana deep inside the southern Africa continent as well as in modern political institutional states where poverty always clinging to people like Zimbabwe and North Korea. Those who witnessed North Korean people bitterly lamenting the death of "great leader" Kim Jong-Il recently may not believe it's real tears. But whether real or fake crying, this spectacle is a common behavior in the community of the dictatorial states. It shows the dictatorship still exists even longer than some non-dictatorial institutions.
 |
| Korean people crying in grief for Kim Jon Il |
So, it is not necessary that any dictators would have to be spilled by rising mass . And this shows quite clearly in the case of Saddam Husein and Qaddafi during their rule as well as the cases of present North Korea, Iran, etc ..., where the dictatorship is still supported by people because of some political, religious reasons or simply due to conceal information. Actually most of the kingdom regimes dominated by hereditary or dictatorial regimes do not encounter strong resistance from the population, and even enjoy more cult and admiration by people than what the heads of democratic countries receive from their people.
Outsiders are often easily conclude that it is due to the suppression and conceal information. This conclusion is not wrong, but only partly true, because people are always dominated by mental confusion, they are hidden under the guise of morality, beliefs and interests; man's faith is different, sometimes contradictory. Even totalitarian concept itself is not necessarily understood the same way by different people; the concept of dictatorship or democracy is relative; democracy in one country might not exactly what other countries want; and dictatorships sometimes proved necessary in certain circumstances . These constitute factors for the fertile ground for totalitarian dictatorships to be born and survive. They exist in many different forms, maybe publicly, openly, even declared; sometimes disguised in cosmetic faces or political or religious mysticism. The whole point of them is the cult of personal entrenchment and corruption despite the benefit of the people. To survive they often use propaganda tricks and hypocrisy associated with the suppression tactics.
Trend to use external intervention to overthrow tyranny and its consequences
Looking back we can see most cases collapse of the recent dictators in the Middle East and North Africa e are thankful to the large-scale intervention of foreign troops. It is a overt, even gross intervention one country or a group of countries. Given the realization that is it is the the price dictators have to pay, but objectively speaking, most cases of military intervention from outside in recent years have led to long devastating wars, and the main victims are the people in countries under intervention .
Maybe its is now still early for the world to sit back and seriously thinks about the questions mentioned above. The immediate cause can be seen from the result of globalization trends that have changing the whole international landscape by opening up linkages with isolated kingdoms or backward regions.It is the boom of information technology that has created the direct effects helping people to communicate quickly and enhancing trans-national knowledge on a global scale by means of Internet that can never be blocked by borders or political regimes . In other words, dividing walls of information between the nations has been totally broken down. That is the basis for rapid linkages of formation between individuals and political groups from within a national dictatorship with the outside world and creating circumstances for outside forces to come in and support. Such way of interference seems to find reasons and are welcomed simply because it can quickly demolish a dictatorship. That's what was going on when the U.S. and UN approved measures using war to overthrow dictatorship regimes of sovereign nations as we saw recently in the Middle East and North Africa. Given knowledge that dictatorship is evil and should be removed as soon as possible, and prior to the consolidation of their hold on, external intervention is needed. But every thing has at least two sides of it. Firstly, we must reaffirm the basic principles of international law that every military intervention from outside into the internal affairs of a sovereign state is illegal. Recent experience has shown clearly enough bad effects for the intervened countries where only fighting interest groups might benefited somehow while the vast majority of people are victimized suffering incalculable consequences. In this regard, we should also reiterate that the principle of "Revolution is the cause of the masses" is always true. External intervention can only be acceptable with a genuine call of the mass of a country . In other words, no matter of bad or good, early or late, success or failure, let the peoples to decide their destiny. But unfortunately, it is a vague concept easily confuse between the real mass movement and the interest group or racial or religious groups deliberately taking advantage of external intervention. Any intervention on the basis of such "confusion" must end up in failure to do away with the dictatorship root but only just replace one dictators by another or cause a civil war and povarage, even at risk of losing independence and sovereignty of the intervened states. This risk is shown quite clearly in the case of Iraq after Saddam Hussein, Libya after Qaddafi and both Egypt and Afghanistan as well as other countries during the process of the so-called "color revolution".
In summary, totalitarian, undemocratic and dictatorship of any forms must be removed to pave the way for people to a prosperity and happiness. But how to demolish them without heavy consequences for the country and people is another problem that requires our modern world to think about. This is a lesson to all totalitarian states. The most relevant lesson is that they could fall into unrest and civil war, even loss of independence. Not only the common people but mainly those dictators who must be aware of this. They should know that today people have better access to understanding and enlightenment about their legitimate rights to the insurgents; and insurgent may call for external intervention, like it or not. Therefore, the less bad solution for them is to change or transfer of power when it is not too late. /.
Outsiders are often easily conclude that it is due to the suppression and conceal information. This conclusion is not wrong, but only partly true, because people are always dominated by mental confusion, they are hidden under the guise of morality, beliefs and interests; man's faith is different, sometimes contradictory. Even totalitarian concept itself is not necessarily understood the same way by different people; the concept of dictatorship or democracy is relative; democracy in one country might not exactly what other countries want; and dictatorships sometimes proved necessary in certain circumstances . These constitute factors for the fertile ground for totalitarian dictatorships to be born and survive. They exist in many different forms, maybe publicly, openly, even declared; sometimes disguised in cosmetic faces or political or religious mysticism. The whole point of them is the cult of personal entrenchment and corruption despite the benefit of the people. To survive they often use propaganda tricks and hypocrisy associated with the suppression tactics.
Trend to use external intervention to overthrow tyranny and its consequences
Looking back we can see most cases collapse of the recent dictators in the Middle East and North Africa e are thankful to the large-scale intervention of foreign troops. It is a overt, even gross intervention one country or a group of countries. Given the realization that is it is the the price dictators have to pay, but objectively speaking, most cases of military intervention from outside in recent years have led to long devastating wars, and the main victims are the people in countries under intervention .
Maybe its is now still early for the world to sit back and seriously thinks about the questions mentioned above. The immediate cause can be seen from the result of globalization trends that have changing the whole international landscape by opening up linkages with isolated kingdoms or backward regions.It is the boom of information technology that has created the direct effects helping people to communicate quickly and enhancing trans-national knowledge on a global scale by means of Internet that can never be blocked by borders or political regimes . In other words, dividing walls of information between the nations has been totally broken down. That is the basis for rapid linkages of formation between individuals and political groups from within a national dictatorship with the outside world and creating circumstances for outside forces to come in and support. Such way of interference seems to find reasons and are welcomed simply because it can quickly demolish a dictatorship. That's what was going on when the U.S. and UN approved measures using war to overthrow dictatorship regimes of sovereign nations as we saw recently in the Middle East and North Africa. Given knowledge that dictatorship is evil and should be removed as soon as possible, and prior to the consolidation of their hold on, external intervention is needed. But every thing has at least two sides of it. Firstly, we must reaffirm the basic principles of international law that every military intervention from outside into the internal affairs of a sovereign state is illegal. Recent experience has shown clearly enough bad effects for the intervened countries where only fighting interest groups might benefited somehow while the vast majority of people are victimized suffering incalculable consequences. In this regard, we should also reiterate that the principle of "Revolution is the cause of the masses" is always true. External intervention can only be acceptable with a genuine call of the mass of a country . In other words, no matter of bad or good, early or late, success or failure, let the peoples to decide their destiny. But unfortunately, it is a vague concept easily confuse between the real mass movement and the interest group or racial or religious groups deliberately taking advantage of external intervention. Any intervention on the basis of such "confusion" must end up in failure to do away with the dictatorship root but only just replace one dictators by another or cause a civil war and povarage, even at risk of losing independence and sovereignty of the intervened states. This risk is shown quite clearly in the case of Iraq after Saddam Hussein, Libya after Qaddafi and both Egypt and Afghanistan as well as other countries during the process of the so-called "color revolution".
 |
| The risk of prolonged civil war in Libya |
The women in the picture are not from the REPUBLIC of Botswana, They are from the KINGDOM of Lesotho. Surely a clue to this would have been in the names of the countries. Clearly you have not bothered to verify any of the "facts" in your article.
ReplyDelete