# Are there 20th century examples of dictators who were good leaders and better than elected polticos? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 1, 2013, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807 "2013-11-01T01:15:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/41 "2013-11-01T17:00:54Z")
AIUI, the Turks still have fond memories of [Mustapha Kemal Ataturk](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mustapha_Kemal_Ataturk). He was a vigorous modernizer, which the Turks needed at the time. ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/42 "2013-11-01T17:00:54Z")
> [@GreenElf](#): > > Wasn’t King Hussein of Jordan generally regarded as a good leader? Aren’t many of the unelected European royalty generally regarded well? King Hussein of Jordan is an excellent (and possibly only) example, as well as his successor, King Hassan. Unelected European royalty has no governing authority and are certainly not dictators ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/43 "2013-11-01T18:17:41Z")
What about [Daniel Ortega](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ortega)? As I understand it, he was essentially a dictator of Nicauragua from 1979-1984, at which point he was elected into office in elections described as free-and-fair but disputed by opposition parties, and he gave up power in 1990 when he was voted out of office, and then we reelected into office in 2007. While there were serious human rights abuses under his dictatorship and presidency, they were far milder than the abuses both of his predecessor and the atrocities committed by US-backed forces in his country during his reign; he vastly improved health and literacy among his country’s citizens; and his efficacy is demonstrated by his popularity. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/44 "2013-11-01T18:40:24Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > After the Vietnamese war ended about a million Vietnamese were purged. So Ho Chi Minh is out. 1. The figure of one million Vietnamese purged after the war is absurdly high. The [highest end estimates](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War#Aftermath) are only a third of that. Let’s not forget who the opposition was either, Diem had 12,000 political opponents executed in 1955-57 and didn’t even have the flimsy excuse of having finally won a ten year long war to reunite the country. He was also ‘elected’ in 1955 with 98.2 of the vote; add to that campaigning by opposition parties was prohibited and supporters of Bao Dai were openly attacked by workers of Diem’s brother Nhu. Diem then declared the creation of the Republic of Vietnam with himself as the president and further announced the scheduled election in 1956 to reunify the country that had been agreed upon in the 1954 Geneva Accords was not going to take place. There was every indication that Ho Chi Minh would have won said election in a landslide, in the words of President Eisenhower “I have never talked or corresponded with a person knowledgeable in Indochinese affairs who did not agree that had elections been held as of the time of the fighting, possibly eighty percent of the population would have voted for the Communist Ho Chi Minh as their leader rather than Chief of State Bao Dai. Indeed, the lack of leadership and drive on the part of Bao Dai was a factor in the feeling prevalent among Vietnamese that they had nothing to fight for.” 2. Ho Chi Minh died September 2nd, 1969, so he’s out, but not for the reasons you seem to think. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGauss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/karlgauss/32/3713_2.png) [@KarlGauss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGauss)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/45 "2013-11-01T19:04:25Z")
Seeing this is now in GD, I think I can justify putting another plug in for Tito. As [this Wiki link](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josip_Broz_Tito#Reforms) describes, he introduced a large number of economic, political, and social reforms, something no other ‘Eastern Bloc’ leader could seriously claim. Indeed, the people of Yugoslavia enjoyed much more freedom than their counterparts throughout the Warsaw Pact. Bottom line, life under Tito was peaceful and relatively comfortable (described succinctly [here](http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/yugo-hist2.htm) and [here](http://www.ricksteves.com/plan/destinations/east/yugo.htm)). So, again, I submit Tito as an answer to the OP. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/46 "2013-11-01T20:16:41Z")
> [@chacoguy](#): > > **Ho Chi Minh** has got to come close. > [@Habeed](#): > > Didn’t that guy get half a million or so of his countrymen killed in a war against a world superpower? And won! ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/47 "2013-11-01T20:27:29Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > I am assuming here that Franco’s party lost the Spanish Civil war. Having read histories and analysis’s of that war it’s pretty obvious Spain would have fragmented if the war dragged on. Since the Communist backed Republican party would have won, then, at least in most areas, there would have been Communist Dictatorships. > > The Catalans and Basques would have seceded, at least (they almost did several times) . Aragon & Catalonia may have gone into a state of Anarchy. In fact during the “two black year” immediately preceding the Civil war, the nation was pretty much in anarchy. Technically Spain might have been a democracy but in reality it wasn’t. And what in your opinion would have happened if the generals hadn’t started the civil war to begin with? Because you can’t forget his responsibility in starting this mess (nitpickers : I know he wasn’t the original leader of the coup). I’m not sure why there are so many posters here who are so lenient with Franco. It’s not the first time I notice this. Is considering Franco a benign dictator an American thing? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/48 "2013-11-01T20:28:59Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Franco. Bad as he was the alternative would have been worse. Spain would have split into a half-dozen tiny nations . . . Why? ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/49 "2013-11-01T20:53:22Z")
I find unqualified veneration of “democracy” as the supreme end in itself to be very naive. In my view democracy is not an end to which other things should be sacrificed, it is a means towards other ends like freedom, economic progress, cultural progress, etc. those are true ends in themselves, and “democracy" is purely a tool which helps in achieving those ends under certain circumstances, but not always. This consideration we have these days for democracy as the unqualified end is frankly, stupid, and has led to trying to implement elections in countries and cultures which have no use for them. So, yes, dictators can be good leaders for their countries. Franco. These days the pendulum has swung so far the other way in Spain that it is illegal to defend Franco or his regime. You can go to jail just like you can go to jail for defending terrorists. That’s “democracy” and “freedom of expression” in Spain these days. Things are not good or bad in an absolute sense; they are good or bad in context. Like the old joke: - How’s your wife? - Compared to what? The history of Spain during the entire 19th century is a history of civil wars and unrest. No stability. The second republic (1931) was a disaster. Yes there were elections. So what? There was also a permanent state of civil unrest and the government had no control of the situation. Political killings were common. It was total disorder. The government did nothing while the uncontrolled masses burnt churches and killed priests and nuns. To say such a government is legitimate just because it came out of some election is stupid. The leader of the opposition, Calvo Sotelo, was assassinated by government police. And the military (not Franco) got fed up and revolted. I was not alive then but, frankly, if I was living in that state of quasy civil war I probably would have supported the coup. Later the military rebels chose Franco as leader and generalissimo. During Franco’s dictatorship there was almost 40 years of civil order which is the first thing a society needs to progress. The economic development was astounding and created a middle class which was necessary for social and political stability. When Franco died in 1975 the situation was very tense but there was a successful transition to democracy. So I would say on the whole Franco’s regime was successful. Especially when compared to the disaster that was the Second Republic. Franco was ruthless. Well, yes. The whole of the Spanish people had fallen into barbaric extremism. The different factions of the republican forces were not any better. At that time the Spanish people believed that enemies needed killing. That is what extremism is. Franco’s regime laid the foundation for the welfare state, health care, etc. After Franco died, there was a successful transition to democracy and … after some decades of democracy Spain is again in turmoil. “Democracy” today in Spain is a joke. Yes, you can vote but it won’t do you any good because the game is rigged and the country is run by a bunch of thieves who are stealing al they can. There has never been so much corruption. The country is in ruins. Unemployment is sky high. People are losing their homes, their savings, it is a disaster. But hey, they can vote! And when regimes cannot give people a good economy they give them ideology. So for some years now the Spanish people are presented with laws condemning Franco and his regime while totally ignoring what caused Franco and his regime. Of course nobody who is not insane would propose a return to a Franco-style regime. But for the time he lived Franco was better than the republic which preceded him. And the Spanish people need to gain a lot of political maturity before “democracy” works really well. For now it is just a cover for politicians who are stealing all they can while the people are suffering. And “democracy” is used as the cover for all the stealing and corruption. And you don’t want to question “democracy”! It can land you in jail! ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/50 "2013-11-01T21:00:55Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > I’m not sure why there are so many posters here who are so lenient with Franco. It’s not the first time I notice this. Is considering Franco a benign dictator an American thing? Franco benefits from being compared to other dictators of his era. In comparison to figures like Hitler and Stalin, he looks pretty good. Of course, that’s setting the bar pretty low. Franco may not have been in the worst tier but he was definitely in a bad tier: he can credibly be compared to figures like Chiang or Mussolini. I also don’t give Franco much credit for Spain’s transition to democracy after his death. That was really more Juan Carlos’ idea. Franco chose to restore Juan Carlos because he thought the king would maintain a Franco-style dictatorship. But Juan Carlos, either out of conviction or a recognition of changing reality, worked to restore a democratic system of government after Franco died. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/51 "2013-11-01T21:38:33Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Franco benefits from being compared to other dictators of his era. In comparison to figures like Hitler and Stalin, he looks pretty good. > > Of course, that’s setting the bar pretty low. Franco may not have been in the worst tier but he was definitely in a bad tier: he can credibly be compared to figures like Chiang or Mussolini. The important thing about Franco is, he was not an ideological fascist (though he was supported by fascists, called [Falangists](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falangist) in Spain). I’ve seen him described as “a cop, not an artist.” Fascism is revolutionary and forward-looking. Franco was much more old-fashioned; his notion was to turn back the Spanish clock to the 18th Century so far as possible. And, unlike Hitler and Mussolini, he had no interest in territorial aggression (it just upsets things). But, he was a pretty [oppressive ruler](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Franco#Political_oppression) at home. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/52 "2013-11-01T21:46:22Z")
No, Franco does not need to be compared to other dictators because the title of the thread is “Are there 20th century examples of dictators who were good leaders and better than elected polticos?”. Franco and his regime, when compared with the Second Spanish Republic which preceded them, come out looking pretty good. The problem is that in western cultures these days there is the automatic belief that democracy = good and authoritarian=bad because the so-called democratic countries have repeated it so much. So franco is bad by definition and the republic was good by definition and people are totally ignorant of the reality of Franco’s regime and the republic. The Republic was “democratic” and therefore good. Well, no. It was an unqualifed disaster. It exarcebated social tensionsto the point where… they caused a civil war. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/53 "2013-11-01T21:48:04Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > I find unqualified veneration of “democracy” as the supreme end in itself to be very naive. In my view democracy is not an end to which other things should be sacrificed, it is a means towards other ends like freedom, economic progress, cultural progress, etc. those are true ends in themselves, and “democracy" is purely a tool which helps in achieving those ends under certain circumstances, but not always. > > This consideration we have these days for democracy as the unqualified end is frankly, stupid, and has led to trying to implement elections in countries and cultures which have no use for them. “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” – H. L. Mencken Democracy is not a theory of **good** government, it is a theory of **legitimate** government. It is simply the notion that a state’s sovereignty properly rests with the people collectively, because, well, who else? Either you accept that or you don’t. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/54 "2013-11-01T21:51:16Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > I’m not sure why there are so many posters here who are so lenient with Franco. It’s not the first time I notice this. Is considering Franco a benign dictator an American thing? Anticommunism is an American thing – the U.S. backed a **lot** of anticommunist dictators during the Cold War – and the Spanish Republican government included Communists (and Anarchists). ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/55 "2013-11-01T22:32:41Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > And what in your opinion would have happened if the generals hadn’t started the civil war to begin with? Because you can’t forget his responsibility in starting this mess (nitpickers : I know he wasn’t the original leader of the coup). > > I’m not sure why there are so many posters here who are so lenient with Franco. It’s not the first time I notice this. Is considering Franco a benign dictator an American thing? Who claimed he was a “benign dictator “? He was a rat bastard. Sure, I guess compared to Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini- not so bad. But evil, none-the-less. Just better than the alternative. And altho his party made the first military move in the Civil war, there was a back and forth escalation during the entire “two black years” period where it can’t be said either ‘side” actually ‘started” the civil war. If the generals hadn’t intervened? Chaos and anarchy , with the nation splitting up, several going communist. Hitler invades during WWII. Bad things occur. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/56 "2013-11-01T23:55:27Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > If the generals hadn’t intervened? Chaos and anarchy , with the nation splitting up . . . Why? ---
**Author:** ![cornopean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8c91f0/32.png) [@cornopean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cornopean)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2013, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/57 "2013-11-01T23:55:31Z")
> [@Habeed](#): > > Sometimes, when you read about bad national policies that occur as a result of compromises by politicians and end up being worst of both worlds, you say “if I in charge, …” > > I would imagine that most SD members probably consider themselves to be decent folk with good judgement and the ability to make good decisions. So it’s easy to imagine yourself as dictator, making decisions to improve a country, making all the trains run on time and increasing the material prosperity for everyone. You’d improve all the infrastructure, make sure the workers who do all the actual work get a fair share of the rewards, make financial decisions that don’t involve making the country more in-debt, reform the courts to make rapid and fair decisions, etc etc etc. > > When it comes time to doing things to keep power, you could silence your opponents by making them stay in nice hotels, incommunicado, for a period of time until the unrest dies down. You could equip your legions of doom with tear gas and firehoses like riot police in other countries, they don’t have to machine-gun crowds of dissidents. And so on. > > Has a 20th century dictator ever done this? Made a series of intelligent decisions to improve the country and retained power with the least bad methods available to him? I would suggest Augusto Pinochet? Chile is a very prosperous country today b/c of his reforms and the war he waged on communists. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2013, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/58 "2013-11-02T00:11:20Z")
> [@cornopean](#): > > I would suggest Augusto Pinochet? Chile is a very prosperous country today b/c of his reforms and the war he waged on communists. [At what cost?](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinochet#Suppression_of_opposition) > [@](#): > > Almost immediately after the military’s seizure of power, the junta banned all the leftist parties that had constituted Allende’s UP coalition.[34] All other parties were placed in “indefinite recess” and were later banned outright. The government’s violence was directed not only against dissidents but also against their families and other civilians.[34] > > The Rettig Report concluded 2,279 persons who disappeared during the military government were killed for political reasons or as a result of political violence, and approximately 31,947 tortured according to the later Valech Report, while 1,312 were exiled. The latter were chased all over the world by the intelligence agencies. In Latin America, this was made in the frame of Operation Condor, a cooperation plan between the various intelligence agencies of South American countries, assisted by a United States CIA communication base in Panama. Pinochet believed these operations were necessary in order to “save the country from communism”.[35] In 2011, commission identified an additional 9,800 victims of political repression during Pinochet’s rule. This led to the total number of victims being revised to approximately 40,018, including 3,065 killed.[36] > > Some political scientists have ascribed the relative bloodiness of the coup to the stability of the existing democratic system, which required extreme action to overturn. Some of the most infamous cases of human rights violation occurred during the early period: in October 1973, at least 70 people were killed throughout the country by the Caravan of Death. Charles Horman, a US journalist, “disappeared”, as did Víctor Olea Alegría, a member of the Socialist Party, and many others, in 1973. > > Furthermore, many other important officials of Allende’s government were tracked down by the DINA in the frame of Operation Condor. Thus, General Carlos Prats, Pinochet’s predecessor and army commander under Allende, who had resigned rather than support the moves against Allende’s government, was assassinated in Buenos Aires, Argentina, in 1974. A year later, the murder of 119 opponents abroad was disguised as an internal conflict, the DINA setting up a propaganda campaign to accredit this thesis (Operation Colombo), campaign that received diffusion by the leading newspaper in Chile, El Mercurio. > > Other victims of Condor included, among hundreds of less famous persons, Juan José Torres, the former President of Bolivia, assassinated in Buenos Aires on 2 June 1976; Carmelo Soria, a UN diplomat working for the CEPAL, assassinated in July 1976; Orlando Letelier, a former Chilean ambassador to the United States and minister in Allende’s cabinet, assassinated after his release from internment and exile in Washington, D.C. by a car bomb on 21 September 1976. This led to strained relations with the US and to the extradition of Michael Townley, a US citizen who worked for the DINA and had organized Letelier’s assassination. Other targeted victims, who escaped assassination, included Christian-Democrat Bernardo Leighton, who escaped an assassination attempt in Rome in 1975 by the Italian terrorist Stefano delle Chiaie; Carlos Altamirano, the leader of the Chilean Socialist Party, targeted for murder in 1975 by Pinochet, along with Volodia Teitelboim, member of the Communist Party; Pascal Allende, the nephew of Salvador Allende and president of the MIR, who escaped an assassination attempt in Costa Rica in March 1976; US Congressman Edward Koch, who became aware in 2001 of relations between death threats and his denunciation of Operation Condor, etc. Furthermore, according to current investigations, Eduardo Frei Montalva, the Christian Democrat President of Chile from 1964 to 1970, may have been poisoned in 1982 by toxin produced by DINA biochemist Eugenio Berrios.[37] > > Protests continued, however, during the 1980s, leading to several scandals. In March 1985, the savage murder of three Communist Party members led to the resignation of César Mendoza, head of the Carabineros and member of the junta since its formation. During a 1986 protest against Pinochet, 21 year old American photographer Rodrigo Rojas DeNegri and 18 year old student Carmen Gloria Quintana were burnt alive, with only Carmen surviving. > > In August 1989, Marcelo Barrios Andres, a 21 year-old member of the FPMR (the armed wing of the PCC, created in 1983, which had attempted to assassinate Pinochet on 7 September 1986), was assassinated by a group of military personnel who were supposed to arrest him on orders of Valparaíso’s public prosecutor. However, they simply executed him; this case was included in the Rettig Report.[38] Among the killed and disappeared during the military junta were 440 MIR guerrillas.[39] ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2013, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/59 "2013-11-02T00:32:24Z")
> [@bob\_2](#): > > Queen Vic had very little REAL power - influence certainly, but power always lays in the hands of the people with the money. If having a parliament which votes on taxes disqualfies you from being a dictator, there would be a lot less of them. One of Victoria’s early actions was to keep a Whig prime minister, Melbourne, despite the conservatives having won the election. I don’t know the details of British parliamentary procedure, but I’m pretty sure that if Obama had kept Pelosi on as speaker for few years, even though the GOP had won a majority of the House, most people would think the US was turning into a dictatorship – and we wouldn’t have had the shutdown or sequestration. It’s true that when Victoria struggled with parliament, she didn’t always win. I didn’t say she was an absolute dictator. Of course, she wasn’t a 20th century dictator because, in the 1850’s, she stopped struggling with parliament. Maybe this isn’t a better known because the idea of a woman voluntarily giving up power for the greater good, however wise a decision it was, doesn’t totally fit with a feminist narrative. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2013, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807/60 "2013-11-02T01:53:07Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Why? That’s the way it was headed before the Civil war. I just assume things would have continued. Of course there could have been a miracle. In fact Spain, for most purposes is now split up, the “Autonomous communitie” are almost independent nations. Catalonia is pretty much there. Dudes really need to read some unbiased Spanish history, especially that concerning the “two black years” . [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-20th-century-examples-of-dictators-who-were-good-leaders-and-better-than-elected-polticos/672807.md?page=4)