This entry was posted on Sunday, January 31st, 2010 at 8:48 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
I am reading Dambisa Moyo’s book, Dead Aid, in which she writes: “In a perfect world, what poor countries at the lowest rungs of economic development need is not a multi-party democracy, but in fact a decisive benevolent dictator to push through the reforms required to get the economy moving.”
She may be right. But how to make it work?
2 Responses to “Dead Aid and Democracy”
Leave a Reply
web design by Datadial Ltd.
February 2nd, 2010 at 11:06 pm
Problem is that 99% of the time the “benevolent dictator” turns less than advertised and you end up with death squads, chalets on Lake Geneva, children of ministers driving around in Bentleys, and a further suffering population.
It’s not just the “benevolent dictator” that’s at question — it’s everyone else in the system, from the military to the civil service. Even with the most benevolent dictator, greedy civil servants could cripple the goodwill of any dictator with massive corruption; on the same hand, a “too generous” dictator could be taken down by jealous generals or restless colonels.
A “benevolent dictatorship” only works with everyone is on-board for the betterment of the country. This is why, IMHO, it can only work with an overriding factor that transcends society, such as nationalism. Of course there is plenty of danger of overindulgence in nationalism, as we’ve seen in the past.
If you look at Estonia in the 1930s, where there was a so-called “benevolent dictatorship” under Konstantin Päts, it worked rather well. Despite the lack of true democracy, the crackdowns were mild compared to the rest of Europe. Plus, the “guided democracy” that they installed helped the country to develop its economy after the Great Depression to a point where their economic development was in the same range as Finland and other Nordic countries.
Of course Stalin and Hitler put an end to all that. Who knows how well that “benevolent dictatorship” would have turned out if external factors (WWII and occupations) did not disrupt it. Would it have collapsed or transitioned successfully?
Good question tho…
February 3rd, 2010 at 12:38 am
I think that is the key — Lee Kuan Yew Vs Saddam Hussein. As yet, we have not been intelligent enough to distinguish between the different shades of dictatorship.