Autocracy

Oxford Dictionary: (noun) a system of government by one person with absolute power.

In the English language, this type of community is called, “autocracy”, where one person has absolute power.?Though, John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, first Baron Acton (1834–1902) was not the first to mention the proverbial, “Absolute power corrupt absolutely.”?He was the most recent icon that corresponded in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887.?Throughout the history of humanity, there was usually a male Alpha ruling the community.?Occasionally, a female Alpha rose to power.?Once in the history of humanity, the community was ruled by consensus and representation, the Greek, the origin of democracy.?The Roman tried the same and was fine until those representatives decided to do exactly what democracy was designed to prevent by impeaching Julius Caesar with lots of daggers.?Violence begets violence.?The Roman became an empire ruled by one man, and the rest is history.?Until two hundred forty-seven years ago, roughly, that another democracy was bone.?This time it has other siblings, republic, socialism, and communism; all are the systems that are ruled by representation and community cooperation.

Let’s recall some of the leaders in the past.?Alexander the great was only interested in conquering kingdoms.?The history recorded lots of his victories of war campaigns, his defeat, and his death, but not much of his governing the empire.?His empire split into pieces and was ruled by his generals.?Genghis Khan savagely conquered the largest of land in human history, but nothing about ruling his empire.?However, The Mongol Empire created more established trade routes.?The utilizing of “pony express”, an established messaging service that set up and maintained relay posts for the soldiers to rest and exchange horses to deliver the messages.?The first recorded postal service in human history.?These posts became a new settlement that reinforced the establishment of trade routes, the Silk Road.?However, understand that these benefits are not for Genghis Khan to create a prosperous empire, but to continue his conquest.

In 1215, the British Empire, the king, and the royal family were forced to sign and seal Magna Carta by the leading men in England to prevent the abuse of power.?There are two out of 63 clauses, that are still valid according to the UK parliament and are the basis of laws for the British and the American government.?(I have not investigated the other countries' constitutions, nonetheless.)?They are clauses 39 and 40, which said:

“No free man shall be seized, imprisoned, dispossessed, outlawed, exiled, or ruined in any way, nor in any way proceeded against, except by the lawful judgment of his peers and the law of the land.

“To no one, will we sell, to no one will we deny or delay right or justice.”

Nonetheless, during King George’s rule, the American colonists were taxed and forced to obey the law that did not favor them until the Revolutionary in 1775.

France revolted and created its own democracy but was usurped by Napoleon Bonaparte, and again, the rest is history.?The continent embroidered in the war until the second defeat of Napoleon would peace and prosperity to France until World War I and II.?(Ok, I skipped quite a bit of history there, but…)?In Europe, where the monarchy still exists is governed by elected representatives.

We all know too well who the leaders are from 1933 to 1953, authoritarian like Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Benito Mussolini, and Hideki Tojo.?Hitler led Germany to WWII massacre millions of Jews and prisoners of war.?Stalin murdered anyone whom he considered a threat.?And, again, the rest is history.

Saddam Hussein usurped the power by leading military forces into the parliament and selected the oppositions outside to be shot.?He tried to seize the rich oil field from Iran, in which both sides deployed their biological and chemical attack against each other indiscriminately, 500,000 civilian casualties on both sides.?Later, he sent the Iraqi armed forces to invade Kuwait for the same reason as his invasion of Iran.?In 2003, I, personally, witness how the people were suffered.?The Iraqi civilians welcome us, gave us bottles of water and food showing their gratitude.?Until later did they despise us, when the American politicians failed to understand the Iraqi’s cultures and what it meant to give someone freedom.?The first and foremost of that is the right to choose the existence of self, how the individual will exist.?We did that to our family and friends; a country is just a superposition of an individual, in my humble opinion.?

Shall we mention Muhammad Ghaddafi??Let’s not.

A leader like Hitler promised a utopia, he incited the populous to rise from sub position to self-pride, the prosperity was short-lived.?There were no checks and balances; therefore, the morality of the country is only inside of one man’s head.?This means the actions, logic, and reasoning of a country are governed by one amygdala, one hippocampus, and one hypothalamus vs frontal lobe.?This article started with the historical figure from Alexander the Great, up til now I have seen no instances of long-term prosperity when a nation is led by one man alone.?On the other hand, it is much harder when one man cannot declare war on a country when he is one of the many.?We are doing that in statistics and the scientific method, in machine learning and neural networking, where one cell or node cannot dictate the outcome without the various input of others.

With the current event, Putin is amassing troops along Ukraine’s border.?Xi Jinping, a permanent President of China, and his colonialism plan in Africa.?Many Chinese officials and merchants are jumping in the same wagon with him, like how the German people were caught up in feverish pitch of the promise of prosperity by Hitler.?I am wary of the future that has occurred quite often in the past.

Let’s hypothesize that Xi Jinping can lead everyone to prosperity for China.?The Chinese people are used to this emperor-like leader.?What would happen when he died who will rule China and what is his morality??What will he do with this power he inherited??Vladimir Lenin certainly did not lead the revolution to have Stalin ruled the way he did.?I believed Lenin died too early.?The state of affairs in Russia was not quite settled and left a person as cruel as Hitler in charge.?I do not believe that Lenin would leave the government for only one person to have absolute authority.

Let’s recall that the First President of the United States, George Washington could have consolidated the power and continued to accept nomination for the third term, and the longer he stayed in the office the more power he will have.?The most important precedent that Washington set the tone for the presidency in America is when the President must cede the power given by the people.?Fun fact, when I navigate with a compass inland navigation in the Army, I would constantly switch hands holding a compass every hundred meters to be within twenty-five meters of the point where I must be.?I believe there is a valid similarity here.

Putin led Russia out of bankruptcy and economic depression.?Russia for the most part enjoys life, producing many quality movies that are not communist propaganda.?The quality of entertainment can be used to measure the level of prosperity of a nation, in my humble opinion.?I may iterate on this analysis in the future.?Putin’s policy so far is working and was a correct one, but amassing troops along the Ukraine border, annexing Crimea, threatened NATO with ultimatums, a list of demands.?Who will counter his method??Who will offer diversity to this solution??Have we not learnt anything from the past??How many times will we have to learn that only one way of thinking is not always correct??In clinical psychology, the psychologist will try to encourage the patient with anger management problems to view things from a positive or neutral perspective.?My question is what if the US and NATO failed to try Putin’s hat, and vice versa, and lose temper, what will happen??If Putin moves in on Ukraine, and US and EU failed to act like Britain and France when Hitler reoccupied the Rhineland and annexed Austria, took Czechoslovakia.?If the US and the EU learnt the lesson of the past, they must act.?They would have no choice but to act to prevent escalation into their territory and interest.?US/EU and Russia must understand that things change either better or worse, and for the better, they must compromise. I also believe that there must be checks and balances to the power the leader welds and the length of time to he can weld it.?…?I wonder, has Putin Nuclear launch codes on hand???