# Why are today's absolute rulers called 'presidents'? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 21, 2017, 8:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264 "2017-11-21T08:36:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/21 "2017-11-21T15:50:11Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > Robert Mugabe is President? Zimbabwe has been a flawed democracy (supported by the military, troublesome elections) but hey, the president of the USA is a game show host. > > Kim Jong-un is the Chairman of the Workers’ Party of Korea, never heard anyone refer to him as ‘president’. Putin is president and I think pretty much is a good example of what the OP is asking. [Here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President) is what wiki has to say about what the OP is asking: > [@](#): > > Dictatorships > > In dictatorships, the title of president is frequently taken by self-appointed or military-backed leaders. Such is the case in many states: Idi Amin in Uganda, Mobutu Sese Seko in Zaire, Ferdinand Marcos in Philippines and Saddam Hussein in Iraq are some examples. Other presidents in authoritarian states have wielded only symbolic or no power such as Craveiro Lopes in Portugal and Joaquín Balaguer under the “Trujillo Era” of the Dominican Republic. > > President for Life is a title assumed by some dictators to try to ensure that their authority or legitimacy is never questioned. Ironically, most leaders who proclaim themselves President for Life do not in fact successfully serve a life term. On the other hand, presidents like Alexandre Pétion, Rafael Carrera, Josip Broz Tito and François Duvalier died in office. Kim Il-sung was named Eternal President of the Republic after his death. > > In ancient Rome, Lucius Cornelius Sulla appointed himself in 82 BC to an entirely new office, dictator rei publicae constituendae causa (“dictator for the making of laws and for the settling of the constitution”), which was functionally identical to the dictatorate rei gerundae causa (“for the matter to be done,” e.g., a military command against a specific enemy) except that it lacked any set time limit, although Sulla held this office for over two years before he voluntarily abdicated and retired from public life. > > The second well-known incident of a leader extending his term indefinitely was Roman dictator Julius Caesar, who made himself “Perpetual Dictator” (commonly mistranslated as ‘Dictator-for-life’) in 45 BC. His actions would later be mimicked by the French leader Napoleon Bonaparte who was appointed “First Consul for life” in 1802. > > Several presidents have ruled until their death, but they have not proclaimed themselves as President for Life. For instance, Nicolae Ceauşescu of Romania, who ruled until his execution (see Romanian Revolution). I agree that I’ve never heard Kim called President, though wouldn’t be surprised if some news article has that somewhere as it’s easier than his actual title (less words :p). I’ve certainly seen Xi called President in the press, however, and he’s only marginally ‘better’ (for some definitions of that term) than Putin. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/22 "2017-11-21T16:13:04Z")
> [@Latro](#): > > By which you admit that they aren’t true democracies. > . This is entirely a hijack. Look, there are different types of democracies: > **[Types of democracy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy)** > > List of forms of government > Types of democracy refers to the various governance structures that embody the principles of democracy ("rule by the people") in some way. Democracy is frequently applied to governments (ranging from local to global), but may also be applied to other constructs like workplaces, families, community associations, and so forth. > Types of democracy can cluster around values. Some such types, defined as direct democracy (or participatory democracy, or deliberative democrac... Pretty much, other than in a small community, there has\* never\* been a “pure democracy”. Even Athenian democracy had so little of the population you might even call it a Oligarchy, with only 10-20% of the populations voting. Back to the OP: The most powerful man on earth has been the President of the United States for over 100 years, so of course “President” as a title is popular. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/23 "2017-11-21T16:18:40Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > This is entirely a hijack. Why is it a hijack, in a thread that points and says “they are not allowed to call themselves president. They’re not true democracies!”, while we are not living in true democracies ourselves… ---
**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 21, 2017, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/24 "2017-11-21T16:23:37Z")
To get back to the OP, the media calls these people Presidents because that’s what they are. It’s the media’s job to report on reality; not report the way they would like things to be. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/25 "2017-11-21T16:29:15Z")
Lets have a look at the actual titles; Kim is [Chairman of the Workers’ Party of Korea](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chairman_of_the_Workers%27_Party_of_Korea). Before 2016, he was First Secretary of the Workers’ Party of Korea. Erdogan is officially [Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Cumhurbaşkanı](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_Turkey), which is translated into President. Putin is officially [Prezident Rossiiskoi Federatsii ( Президент Российской Федерации)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_Russia), which is Russian for,“President of the Russian Federation”. So, we have one person whose title is not “President” at all, another whose title is translated to President, a third whose actual title is President in his own language. Gaddaffi to take an example; had no formal title for most of his time in power. He was called [الشقيق القائد ومرشد الثورة](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brotherly_Leader_and_Guide_of_the_Revolution), which is Arabic for “_Brotherly Leader and Guide of the Revolution_”. This was an unofficial title, and he never held any official position from the 1970’s onwards. During that time several men served as and were recoguzed as Head of State of Libiya. These were various offices, but interesting in none of the cases was the title “President”, even in translation. ETA: I would disagree with **Little Nemo**. The media often uses “President” to denote a non-Royal Chief of State, but often times thats not necessarily the name of the title. There are “Presidents” who are not Heads of State, like [Spanish](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Minister_of_Spain) (often called PM in English) and [Iranian Presidents](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_Iran) (whose official title in Persian is **not** an equivalent to “President”. Media rarely reports reality. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/26 "2017-11-21T16:31:36Z")
The connotations of different titles have changed significantly over the course of history, and so what rulers call themselves, and what others have called them, have also changed. Originally, for instance, “dictator” referred to a perfectly legitimate and highly limited title for an elected official in the Roman Republic: Ordinarily they invested executive power in a pair of consuls who ruled together for a year, but in times of war or other crisis, the two consuls were replaced by a single dictator who ruled for only six months, and could not serve consecutive terms. It was only when Julius declared himself “dictator for life” that it started to be problematic. Meanwhile, in the same era, no Roman ruler would ever call himself “Rex” (usually translated “king”), even after the Republic turned into the de-facto hereditary monarchy of the Empire, because to the Romans, the word “rex” had much the same connotations that “dictator” does for us. Likewise, in the 1940s, Hitler chose to call himself “Fuhër” (translated “Leader”), because that was a neutral term that didn’t have all of the negative baggage of “dictator” or even “kaiser”. Now, of course, nobody would ever call themselves that, because of the baggage from Hitler. Right now, “President” is the popular title, but who knows? Maybe a century from now, that word will be associated with the current crop of autocratic jerks, and everyone will want to call themselves something else, and it will be regarded as a historical curiosity that the legitimate American rulers used to be called that too. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/27 "2017-11-21T16:35:09Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Kim is Chairman of the Workers’ Party of Korea. Before 2016, he was First Secretary of the Workers’ Party of Korea. His granddaddy, however (I assume you mean the current Kim) was given the title of 'Eternal President of the Republic '. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/28 "2017-11-21T18:20:52Z")
Heck, the OP even begins from a misconception about the definition of a republic itself – it does not require the existence of free democratic rule or of maximum democracy. > [@RickJay](#): > > I think you’re reading things into the word “President” that are not actually there. > > “President” does not mean “the freely elected head of a democratic nation.” In political terms that it usually means is “the head of state of a republic.” The democratic health of said republic does not change the fact that its head of state is customarily called a President. It can also mean, of course, the top executive of a business or a major division of a business, the head of a college or university, or a few other things, most of which DON’T imply being elected. And therein lies a similar semantic element: the word “president” in the basic level means “who presides”, in the same manner as changing just one letter, “resident” means “who resides”. That only freely elected ones are “real” presidents and only free democracies are “real” republics is an ideological/philosophical posture. Whether the language is to bend to fit it is up to the users of the language. ---
**Author:** ![Evan\_Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b487fb/32.png) [@Evan\_Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evan_Drake)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/29 "2017-11-21T18:56:18Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > > [@Evan Drake](#): > > > > Most people. And you unless you’ve recently directly suggested some policy to government they then implemented. > > 17 million voters did and they will be looking forward to 11pm on Friday 29 March 2019. No, **you** individually as a person. Countries are necessarily run by their permanent institutions, with only some input from politicians, elected or not. They are not going to change any policy because one inhabitant suggests it. And that’s the essence of powerlessness. And face it, the results won’t be good if a libertarian ‘_I can do what I like on my own property, including storing nuclear waste_’ fellow; or a rabid religious ( including atheist ) nut, or a ‘_Me wuvs evvybody_’ liberal is able to turn the ship of state on a hair. . ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/30 "2017-11-21T19:10:55Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > Heck, the OP even begins from a misconception about the definition of a republic itself – it does not require the existence of free democratic rule or of maximum democracy. The OP also misstates the nature of a monarchy, as there can be a wide variation in the powers of monarchs in different systems. I live in a monarchy. The citizens here have the collective power to choose our own government through democratic elections. Her Majesty reigns but does not rule. She appoints the government the people select at the ballot box. ---
**Author:** ![cochrane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cochrane/32/10441_2.png) [@cochrane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cochrane)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/31 "2017-11-21T19:23:10Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > He IS the President of Zimbabwe. The clue is that the MILITARY were trying to oust him. Not any longer. He’s just resigned. > **[Robert Mugabe resigns after 37 years as Zimbabwe’s leader | CNN](https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/11/21/africa/robert-mugabe-resigns-zimbabwe-president)** > > Robert Mugabe resigned as Zimbabwe’s President on Tuesday after 37 years of autocratic rule, finally succumbing to the pressure of a military takeover and the humiliation of impeachment. ---
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/32 "2017-11-21T20:43:15Z")
> [@Evan\_Drake](#): > > No, **you** individually as a person. Well, I know it’s not the answer you might expect but yes, through a campaign and petition I have changed policy - albeit at local Gov level at a London borough council. But I’m active in the constituency, know most of the south London Labour MPs and yes, the grassroots contribute directly to party policy - what do you think Momentum and 38 Degrees and the rest do? > **[Home - 38 Degrees](https://home.38degrees.org.uk/)** > > 38 Degrees is a movement of more than two million people across the UK – from farmers in Aberdeenshire, to nurses in Cornwall – who come together to campaign for a fairer, more respectful and sustainable country. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/33 "2017-11-21T21:08:56Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > But I’m active in the constituency, know most of the south London Labour MPs and yes, the grassroots contribute directly to party policy I will concur that, for most western european countries it holds true that, _at a local level_, public opinion can indeed often influence political decision making. Also that party programmes and principles are adhered to more often and can have a clear effect on the city. On the other hand, there are also plenty of examples where popular protests and referendi have been crassly ignored by city councils. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/34 "2017-11-21T21:41:32Z")
The fact is liberal democracy has become the de-facto form of government in the last 50 years (and for all its faults, that is one of the ways the lot of your average human being has improved in that time). In the 1800s or even as late as the early 1900s a newly minted dictator would call themselves a king, as monarch was the de-facto form of government at the time. If you suggest that the rise liberal democracy isn’t a good thing, I’d suggest spending time in a dictatorship or talking to someone who has (and wasn’t part of the elite close to the regime) ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Tildrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e95f7d/32.png) [@Tom\_Tildrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Tildrum)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/35 "2017-11-21T22:13:10Z")
Didn’t Qaddafi generally still go by his old title of “Colonel”? I seem to recall that the junta leaders in Greece in the 1970s did the same thing. It’s amusing in its way, implying that the ruler is somehow not even a top commanding officer. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/36 "2017-11-21T22:16:53Z")
> [@Tom\_Tildrum](#): > > Didn’t Qaddafi generally still go by his old title of “Colonel”? Apparently his official title was “Brotherly Leader and Guide of the Revolution of Libya”. ---
**Author:** ![APB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e8cbc/32.png) [@APB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/APB)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/37 "2017-11-21T22:23:15Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > The OP also misstates the nature of a monarchy, as there can be a wide variation in the powers of monarchs in different systems. Yes, which means that the OP can be turned on its head. The powers of Louis XIV were very different to, say, those of the kings of Poland. (That’s still true even if one recognises that many historians would dispute whether Louis XIV was ever actually ‘absolute’.) Those of the current king of the Belgians are also very different to those of the king of Thailand. Yet all of them get called ‘king’. The common denominator is simply that this was what they themselves and their subjects call them. To take the extreme example, one can recognise that in some meaningful sense, Bokassa really was the emperor of the Central African Empire, even while thinking that his adoption of the title was completely absurd. Exactly the same principle applies to presidents etc. One can think that in some cases the use of such titles is equally absurd, but it still usually simpler just to use the titles they use for themselves. ---
**Author:** ![gatorslap](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gatorslap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gatorslap)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/38 "2017-11-21T23:34:27Z")
The term “president” does not in any way imply democracy. I don’t know why some people are under the impression that it does. Monarchy is hereditary. ---
**Author:** ![Malden\_Capell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/malden_capell/32/5274_2.png) [@Malden\_Capell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malden_Capell)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/39 "2017-11-21T23:41:26Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > This seems _quite opposite_ to reality, IMO. France’s laws are very people-friendly. UK is Brexiting because 51% of the electorate clicked that box **against the wishes of most of the elite**. Highly debatable. > [@](#): > > It is true that a country’s hoi polloi often accepts the political policies of well-informed leaders. Except with Brexit. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2017, 11:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264/40 "2017-11-22T11:01:20Z")
> [@gatorslap](#): > > The term “president” does not in any way imply democracy. I don’t know why some people are under the impression that it does. Monarchy is hereditary. It is usually hereditary now: the German Emperor, or the Goth Kings of Toledo, were elected among a very specific group of people. In the case of the German Emperor, the electors were all regnants of at least one other domain. And a monarch may not be a king; prince is the most common other option but again that’s current practice. The Princes of Monaco and the Grand Dukes of Luxembourg are hereditary monarchs; the Princes of Andorra are chosen by the RCC (Bishop of Seo de Urgell) or elected by the French (President of France). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-todays-absolute-rulers-called-presidents/802264.md?page=3)