![]() | Dictatorship has been listed as one of the
Social sciences and society good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: December 27, 2022. ( Reviewed version). |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Dictatorship article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is currently the subject of an educational assignment. |
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Johnzl.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 19:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Dictatorship in no way implies "authoritarian" OR "totalitarian". Dictatorships are merely governments led by one person, not following the herity of monarchal rulers. There are Benevolent and Totatalitarian Dictatorships, but "Dictatorship" should never be used to show suppression of rights.
Somebody should redact the human rights article!
Removed this:
Ironically, several dictatorships include the word democratic in their official names, such as Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of Vietnam and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
The irony is a lot more complex than this reader realizes.
Democratic should be included in dictator page since it is an example of how dictators attempt to hide the fact that only the dictatorial leader of the country will lead the country even though there are 'democratic' elections.
The average citizen would be intimidated into voting 'for' the dictator for fear of imprisionment, torture, or death. See Iraq for a good example.
Other dictatorships allow multiple parties on the ballot all of which are hand picked by the dictator to nominate the dictator as leader.
Other methods include fradulent counting of votes and other election rigging.
The conception of the term "democratic" under Communist regimes refers to more than just voting. It's viewed more in a class or an socio-economic sense than political.
That part about communits regimes gravitating to socio-economic equality would be a welcome addition to the general info on North Korea, Soviet Union, Cuba and other communist countries past and present.
This is about the system of government, not the person running it. That information belongs in dictator. Some of the text needs to be removed so we dont repeat ourselves. -- Jia ng 23:46, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I have moved the following from the article. I don't see much relevance, nor can I verify the authenticy of the quote - google find exactly two hits which are wikipedia mirrors. As I side-note: similar quotes were inserted into Computer science and Afterlife and reverted as nonsense. andy 07:30, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
This article is more likely an essay. It has not the objectivity and clarity of an encyclopedic article.
I think that definition need to more concise and it should be only one definition for the concept. Special particularities could be moved on chapter "Style".
"In the 20th century, the term dictatorship has come to mean a form of government in which absolute power is concentrated in the hands of a dictator and sometimes his supporters" - It is exactly the political system of the Middle Age, only that the dictator called himself/herself in some other ways. Hitler wanted for his "Reich" to last for 1,000 years, as the Dark Age lasted in Europe. The term of dictatorship re-appears in the 20th century, the concept and the model is far more old. Speaking of "style", it seems there are so many styles of dictatorship.
I am not sure that I understand what is the difference beetween "type" and "style".
These initials chapters should have a higher degree of abstractisation. And then, the concretisation:
Based on the "types" and "styles" of dictatorship, I think the history of dictatorship will be more clear, complete and objective. This is the place for examples, and I suppose it could be a very good example of collaborative work in order to complete this history.
Or rather the article should refer only on the "modern" dictatorship. In its actual form, the article "Dictatorship" is contradictory with the article about "Napoleon Bonaparte". -- Vasile 15:32, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
The old dictatorship page wasn't that good. The re-write done by 172 I think does improve things overall. However, I'm not sure about removing all the links to various examples of dictatorship. Really the whole idea of "dictatorship" is so nebulous. As the US Supreme Court said in regards to porn, its a definite "know it when I see it" type of thing. So having all the examples is useful.
The lists by Wallechinsky certainly aren't "oringinal research." Are you suggesting that the regimes cited are *not* correctly categorized? If so, I'd like to see some citations to defend that position.
Merge because it's a fork. Santa Sangre 22:52, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
no, why should we do that? 62.179.207.247 19:10, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
I think that dictators should be seperate. In the dictators section you can have historic dictators, in dictatorship just have the history of this form of government. Just like the pages for the other types of governments.
As with over govermental pages the position, in my opinion should be left seperate.
I've removed this:
It doesn't seem enough to justify a section called "19th century". I'm not sure if this section is needed either. At the moment the article deals with Roman dictators and 20th century. If we add an overview of dictatorship throughout history, we might as well refer to History since some form of dictatorship has always been the rule much more than the exception. I don't think it would be valuable. Someone should outline a structure for this article, something to start from. And the most important thing on a page like this is the linking to other pages such as absolute monarchy, Chinese Emperors, and so on. Not just a link in "See also" but some description. On the whole I think the best thing for this page would be to restart from scratch. Piet 12:17, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Stub articles were merged in per WikiProject Integration. Cwolfsheep 20:35, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
This article requires a section concerning present day dictatorships in the world. We should be able to ensure political neutrality if it is made clear that the named countries are effectively dictatorships as the result of the actions of the current rulers who incorporated the principles of dictatorship and autocracy within their style of rule, and thus not neccesairly due to the imposed systems of these nations. 80.201.97.60 11:13, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
China and Saudi Arabia aren't dictatorships? Yeah, tell that to this guy. Also, the "former dicatorship" crap is useless, seeing as every country in the world before the 19th century was a dictarship. -- The monkeyhate 20:52, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Some political theories and government bodies have used the term "dictatorship" in other senses, such as the communist-socialist "dictatorship of the proletariat," referring to a government in control of a specific and not necessarily small or oligarchic group of people. In Chinese constitution, the term "democratic dictatorship of the proletariat" is used, meaning a democratic government in hands of the proletarians. Some other political theories call the exclusive democracy of Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome, even modern democracies that exclude women/slaves as dictatorships of special groups. Although this form of government is not necessarily or is no longer practiced, it is an extremely influential concept that is not included in the article. 71.222.152.8 15:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Please see here for debate, thanks. Tazmaniacs 15:34, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
USA is hyprocrite, she always put blame on China, Pakistan and Burma for lack of democracy, but why never blame Mikheil Saakashvili for his dictatorship over George .
(USA supports pro-American dictator Mikheil Saakashvili via Rose Revolution.) 203.218.176.220 04:54, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
I think that this article, as well as the other ones I mentioned, fail to answer a question of mine that I think many others have: What is the technical difference between a monarchy, a dictatorship, and despotism. Aren't monarchy and despotism simply another word for dictatorship? Fusion7 ( talk) 19:03, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
No, monarchy and despotism is not another word for dictatorship. Stalin and Hitler are dictators, but not monarchs. British Queen is not a dictator, but monarch. Monarchs, typically inherit position by hereditary ascension and use system of aristocratic titles. Napoleon was both monarch (self-proclaimed Emperor) and dictator. "Despot" is a more general word and may also carry meaning of economical oppression. Chelentano ( talk) 04:47, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
The very first line of this article states that dictatorship is a form of autocratic government. This is self-evident that the two articles refer to the same idea. I think they should be merged. Dust429 ( talk) 13:56, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Not sure this is the best place for this comment [my first ever post to Wikipedia--forgive me if I commit any faux pas], but regarding the following passage in the third paragraph of the article: "In this sense, dictatorship (government without people's consent) is a contrast to democracy (government whose power comes from people) and totalitarianism (government controls every aspect of people's life) opposes pluralism (government allows multiple lifestyles and opinions). Though the definitions of the terms differ, they are related in reality as most of the dictatorship states tend to show totalitarian characteristics. When governments' power does not come from the people, their power is not limited and tend to expand their scope of power to control every aspect of people's life."
I disagree with the "...totalitarianism...opposes pluralism {government allows multiple lifestyles and opinions)." I think it would be more correct to describe totalitarianism as opposing not a governmental form that allows such and such, but rather a system with minimal governmental control over anything. Is this Libertarianism--I don't know, I'm not a political scientist. The article should say something like, "...and totalitarianism (government controls every aspect of people's life) opposes ________ (minimal governmental control; people control every aspect of their lives)" —Preceding unsigned comment added by UncleGee ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, forgot to sign--told you I was new to this! UncleGee ( talk) 15:40, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
The article lacks etymology.
Only provides recent, modern tense of the word; being generally synonymous with despotism, brutal autocracies and tyranny.
The term had a different tense, for example, in the 19th century, and the era of writers such as Karl Marx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.49.14.20 ( talk) 02:21, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Could someone explain to me (with references please) why is Lenin listed here? Was he ever a dictator? For example, here dictatorship of Lenin is described as a myth. Perhaps, the dictatorship of proletariat may have caused this confusion. I understand he was one of leaders of the revolution, a founder of a state, and a charismatic person. But then a number of American presidents may qualify as dictators. ( Igny ( talk) 05:54, 5 October 2008 (UTC))
( 194.80.32.9 ( 194.80.32.9) 19:21, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Many people confuse Lenin with Stalin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.104.204.241 ( talk) 15:49, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
( 194.80.32.9 ( 194.80.32.9) 03:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Recently this article was subject to vandalism. Between others, Chiang Kai-shek— China 1928-1931, 1943-1949, was added. I removed it not because I particullarly like the guy, but because such claim should be first sustained in this discussion, to colectively determine if he matches the criterion to be included in the list. Whoever thinks he should/shouldn't be in the list please present your reasons and sources here. Thanks! Alchaemist ( talk) 03:27, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
This article, specially its "Dictators List", is subject to a constant level of anonymous IP vandalism. Whenever somebody doesn't like a politician, president, whatever... they just add trash here. And the definition of somebody as "dictator" is really tempting. Personally I think, this article should be semi-protected, so only autoconfirmed accounts can edit it. I'd like to know if there is consensus on this. Regards! Alchaemist ( talk) 17:20, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Removed Kuwait and Bahrain.
Why would somebody put the Khalifa and AL-Sabah in this list. I will delete them because it is just simply not true. Also other people on this list get them out of here like King Abdhullah of Saudi Arabia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.105.67.58 ( talk) 17:51, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Regarding what was stated by 208.105.67.58 in the previous section, Abdullah of Saudi Arabia is a king in a monarchy, his power was inherited under monarchal rules, and finally I guess that most of Saudi Arabia supports monarchy after all. So I consider that he should be removed as well. He might be totalitarian, absolutist, whatever, but I think he's not a dictator in the strict sense. If you think the opposite, please elaborate here to support your statement. Regards! Alchaemist ( talk) 23:33, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Former Russian President Vladimir Putin was elected by people, served 2 terms or 8 years and left his position of president, according to Constitution. Yes, he is now a Prime Minister and still has huge influence, but I don't think he is a dictator in the strict sense. I believe, he must be removed from the list. Chelentano ( talk) 04:27, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
The image File:Saddam Hussein on his throne.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --19:02, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
There are almost no citations for the article. Anyone able to find some? Gordonlighter ( talk) 19:33, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Dictatorship.html
has the exact text for one of the opening paragraphs. Who copied who? If it's copied from the Princeton page, we can cite that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.98.254.43 ( talk) 14:53, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
I've added God into the "fiction" section of dictatorships, in almost all religious context god meets the requirements of the definition of "dictator" or at best "autocrat". Any ones personal opinions aside, it should be included as a valid example, well known to many.
What about this man? Belarus has been called "the last true remaining dictatorship in the heart of Europe" by former and current European and American leaders.-- DaleMartinWatson ( talk) 17:12, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
I can find no mention in the article about the largest group of authoritarian regimes the last 20 years, namely those that are self-described as "democracies", which celebrate contested elections, but where the playing-field is so tilted, and/or the voting is so rigged, that the outcome always and without exception is the re-election of the same person. Examples can be found in the 2012 book "The Dictator's Learning Curve" and include Belarus, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and more. -- Dr Ulf Erlingsson ( talk) 23:56, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
I deleted the section named history, as it only contained a quotation from a selfpublished book, which even if it hadn't been selfpublished, would have qualified as WP:UNDUE, considering that it was not a monograph on dictatorship, but apparently some kind of theological treatise. -- Saddhiyama ( talk) 18:16, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Dictatorship. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 23:54, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Dictatorship. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:08, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Dictatorship. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 13:51, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Hitler and Mussolini were dictators, according to this article and to many authorities. So I restored this deletion. [2] The mere fact that there and other dictators were originally elected democratically doesn't mean that they never became dictators. Mobi Ditch ( talk) 01:09, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
According to the article Dictator, a dictator is to refer to a ruler who has no limited power, therefore Hitler was a Dictator. Not necessarily a person being democratically elected means that he is not a dictator, since he had no limits when making decisions such as concentration camps for Jews, blacks, communists, etc. It did not have a government with a defined period of time, the Nazi Dictatorship ended because of the death or flight of Hitler, but not because it had a time limit. With Mussolini the same could be said, he was democratically elected, but later he made concentration camps where communists were captured, one when he is president of a nation has limitations, and They had no limits in their decisions after being elected. By the way Mussolini replaced the ruler of that time because he decided to leave power, so the arrival to power of the Italian dictator was not very democratic. -- Germanico5468504 ( talk) 21:52, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
The fact that nothing is mentioned about how imperialist powers have a hand in installing dictators in semi-colonial/semi-feudal states is just saddening. It's objective fact that countries like the UK, France, and (especially) the US had a hand in installing and supporting sympathetic dictators like the Shah of Iran, Augusto Pinochet, Ferdinand Marcos, Fulgencio Batista, Suharto, and so on. The article should at least acknowledge that there is a relationship between Western imperialist powers and dictatorships in less economically advanced societies. NyanThousand ( talk) 14:36, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
We need a third theory in defining states, the terms "Republic" and "Monarchy" aren't enough though. I believe we should start changing the "Forms of Government.svg" image and subsequent articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.141.88.36 ( talk) 17:32, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
Why there is no information about left-wing socialist dictators?
I second this It goes into extensive detail about right wing dictatorships but ignores all dictatorships that are communist or socialist such as China, The Soviet Union, Cuba, Cambodia, Vietnam, Many across Africa and South America and Even North Korea It is difficult to feel that this lack of inclusion is in good faith TheFinalMigration ( talk) 08:27, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
This section includes several dictatorships which only lasted a few years. Portugal had an authoritarian right-wing dictatorship for over 40 years, so I think it should be on the list.
Here, I've WP:BOLDly removed the assertion in wikivoice saying, "In most dictatorships, the country's constitution promises its citizens inalienable rights and fair elections." from the lead paragraph. The wording has changed a few times, but that seems to have been added without support by user:Anonymous good guy (now blocked) in this August 13, 2021 edit. That assertion may or may not have merit and may or may not have due weight for inclusion in this article but, if it is to appear in the article, it needs support and needs supported elaboration outside of the lead section.Please discuss here if you disagree. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 12:24, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
The first line of the article mentions "based" policies, I believe this is a result of what some would call trolling left unnoticed, but I still hold some doubt as it could refer to something I am unaware of? In which case I would ask someone to add a reference to what based could refer to. Weebfourg ( talk) 14:54, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
The definitions given are nearly identical, and many polisci sources use the terms interchangeably (eg. Ezrow & Frantz 2011,
Dukalskis 2021, or
[3]). I searched Google Scholar for dictatorship vs. authoritarianism
to see if some sources recognize and explain a difference, but instead I found more sources that use the terms interchangeably. If these articles are kept separate there needs to be explanation of differentiation between them. (
t ·
c)
buidhe 00:10, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
References
Moxy-
15:15, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Pretty different and really against this merge as both of pages adds much value to the encyclopedia. As the editor noted already "the two are different, and although every dictatorship is authoritarian, not all authoritarian regimes are dictatorships." That is nicely said and true, so that is it. 109.93.38.135 ( talk) 23:38, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
We say "Political scientist Barbara Geddes describes three types of dictatorship" with no preface to put context on how or why we mention her taxonomy. I'm no political scientist, who is Geddes? If she is prominent in her field, maybe we should establish that, or else, we could mention several classifications and then expand on Geddes'. Forich ( talk) 03:22, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
She probably knows what she is talking about https://polisci.ucla.edu/person/barbara-geddes/ Polygnotus ( talk) 02:30, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Grnrchst ( talk · contribs) 12:17, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
Ok, I'm going to take this review on. I just want to preface this by saying how happy I am to see this article nominated, given how
vital the subject is to our collective understanding of the world. On first glance, it appears to meet the criteria for a GA rating. Stand by for further comments, as I'll be reviewing this section-by-section. --
Grnrchst (
talk) 12:17, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 12:36, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 12:42, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 13:10, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 13:25, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 14:14, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
This is probably the section that I have the biggest issue with. It reads less like a historical overview of the rise of different forms of dictatorship throughout history, than a prosified list of dictatorships that have formed. I honestly think that this section needs a complete rewrite, in order to keep it focused.
This whole section appears to be the one that will present the biggest blocker to GA status, as it fails criterion 1 (Well-written) and 3 (Broad in its coverage). If you want me to put this review on hold until this section can be rewritten, or if you feel you can pull off rewriting this, then let me know. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 15:16, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 15:20, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 15:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 15:38, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
I see another user has added a lengthy "Examples" section that is just a long list of countries and their leaders. Clearly the sources they provided were unreliable, but without them you're just left with original research which sometimes violates BLP policy. I would strongly suggest removing this in its entirety. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 13:48, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 15:43, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
@ Thebiguglyalien: For the most part, I think this article is excellent and it largely meets the criteria for GA, with the suggested improvements. It really is just the History section that is bringing it down for me, which is a shame, as I think it clearly stands apart in quality from the rest of the article. If you want me to put this review on hold, until the history section can be rewritten, then let me know and I'll do so. Once the problems with that section are rectified, and other comments here have been taken on board, I'll be more than happy to pass this. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 15:48, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
From the off, this is clearly far better-written and more informative than the previous version. Excellent work rewriting this so quickly!
Anyways, this is much better than the previous iteration by a long way. This has gone from failing criteria 1 and 3 to passing both. With the above notes addressed, I would be more than happy to pass this review. Tremendous work @ Thebiguglyalien: I hope you're proud of this! -- Grnrchst ( talk) 09:44, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
@ Thebiguglyalien: Since you are the creator... Would it be possible to have a section on the term's etymology?
Alas, this article is written from a liberal perspective, but it should say that there are other perspectives as well... For instance, Marxism believes all state formations are class dictatorships by their very nature. The Chinese Communist Party consistently refers to the liberal capitalist West as ruled by dictators. -- TheUzbek ( talk) 12:05, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
what does it means if a country is a dictatorship 41.115.34.218 ( talk) 20:11, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
![]() | Dictatorship has been listed as one of the
Social sciences and society good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: December 27, 2022. ( Reviewed version). |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Dictatorship article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is currently the subject of an educational assignment. |
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Johnzl.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 19:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Dictatorship in no way implies "authoritarian" OR "totalitarian". Dictatorships are merely governments led by one person, not following the herity of monarchal rulers. There are Benevolent and Totatalitarian Dictatorships, but "Dictatorship" should never be used to show suppression of rights.
Somebody should redact the human rights article!
Removed this:
Ironically, several dictatorships include the word democratic in their official names, such as Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of Vietnam and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
The irony is a lot more complex than this reader realizes.
Democratic should be included in dictator page since it is an example of how dictators attempt to hide the fact that only the dictatorial leader of the country will lead the country even though there are 'democratic' elections.
The average citizen would be intimidated into voting 'for' the dictator for fear of imprisionment, torture, or death. See Iraq for a good example.
Other dictatorships allow multiple parties on the ballot all of which are hand picked by the dictator to nominate the dictator as leader.
Other methods include fradulent counting of votes and other election rigging.
The conception of the term "democratic" under Communist regimes refers to more than just voting. It's viewed more in a class or an socio-economic sense than political.
That part about communits regimes gravitating to socio-economic equality would be a welcome addition to the general info on North Korea, Soviet Union, Cuba and other communist countries past and present.
This is about the system of government, not the person running it. That information belongs in dictator. Some of the text needs to be removed so we dont repeat ourselves. -- Jia ng 23:46, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I have moved the following from the article. I don't see much relevance, nor can I verify the authenticy of the quote - google find exactly two hits which are wikipedia mirrors. As I side-note: similar quotes were inserted into Computer science and Afterlife and reverted as nonsense. andy 07:30, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
This article is more likely an essay. It has not the objectivity and clarity of an encyclopedic article.
I think that definition need to more concise and it should be only one definition for the concept. Special particularities could be moved on chapter "Style".
"In the 20th century, the term dictatorship has come to mean a form of government in which absolute power is concentrated in the hands of a dictator and sometimes his supporters" - It is exactly the political system of the Middle Age, only that the dictator called himself/herself in some other ways. Hitler wanted for his "Reich" to last for 1,000 years, as the Dark Age lasted in Europe. The term of dictatorship re-appears in the 20th century, the concept and the model is far more old. Speaking of "style", it seems there are so many styles of dictatorship.
I am not sure that I understand what is the difference beetween "type" and "style".
These initials chapters should have a higher degree of abstractisation. And then, the concretisation:
Based on the "types" and "styles" of dictatorship, I think the history of dictatorship will be more clear, complete and objective. This is the place for examples, and I suppose it could be a very good example of collaborative work in order to complete this history.
Or rather the article should refer only on the "modern" dictatorship. In its actual form, the article "Dictatorship" is contradictory with the article about "Napoleon Bonaparte". -- Vasile 15:32, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
The old dictatorship page wasn't that good. The re-write done by 172 I think does improve things overall. However, I'm not sure about removing all the links to various examples of dictatorship. Really the whole idea of "dictatorship" is so nebulous. As the US Supreme Court said in regards to porn, its a definite "know it when I see it" type of thing. So having all the examples is useful.
The lists by Wallechinsky certainly aren't "oringinal research." Are you suggesting that the regimes cited are *not* correctly categorized? If so, I'd like to see some citations to defend that position.
Merge because it's a fork. Santa Sangre 22:52, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
no, why should we do that? 62.179.207.247 19:10, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
I think that dictators should be seperate. In the dictators section you can have historic dictators, in dictatorship just have the history of this form of government. Just like the pages for the other types of governments.
As with over govermental pages the position, in my opinion should be left seperate.
I've removed this:
It doesn't seem enough to justify a section called "19th century". I'm not sure if this section is needed either. At the moment the article deals with Roman dictators and 20th century. If we add an overview of dictatorship throughout history, we might as well refer to History since some form of dictatorship has always been the rule much more than the exception. I don't think it would be valuable. Someone should outline a structure for this article, something to start from. And the most important thing on a page like this is the linking to other pages such as absolute monarchy, Chinese Emperors, and so on. Not just a link in "See also" but some description. On the whole I think the best thing for this page would be to restart from scratch. Piet 12:17, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Stub articles were merged in per WikiProject Integration. Cwolfsheep 20:35, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
This article requires a section concerning present day dictatorships in the world. We should be able to ensure political neutrality if it is made clear that the named countries are effectively dictatorships as the result of the actions of the current rulers who incorporated the principles of dictatorship and autocracy within their style of rule, and thus not neccesairly due to the imposed systems of these nations. 80.201.97.60 11:13, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
China and Saudi Arabia aren't dictatorships? Yeah, tell that to this guy. Also, the "former dicatorship" crap is useless, seeing as every country in the world before the 19th century was a dictarship. -- The monkeyhate 20:52, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Some political theories and government bodies have used the term "dictatorship" in other senses, such as the communist-socialist "dictatorship of the proletariat," referring to a government in control of a specific and not necessarily small or oligarchic group of people. In Chinese constitution, the term "democratic dictatorship of the proletariat" is used, meaning a democratic government in hands of the proletarians. Some other political theories call the exclusive democracy of Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome, even modern democracies that exclude women/slaves as dictatorships of special groups. Although this form of government is not necessarily or is no longer practiced, it is an extremely influential concept that is not included in the article. 71.222.152.8 15:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Please see here for debate, thanks. Tazmaniacs 15:34, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
USA is hyprocrite, she always put blame on China, Pakistan and Burma for lack of democracy, but why never blame Mikheil Saakashvili for his dictatorship over George .
(USA supports pro-American dictator Mikheil Saakashvili via Rose Revolution.) 203.218.176.220 04:54, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
I think that this article, as well as the other ones I mentioned, fail to answer a question of mine that I think many others have: What is the technical difference between a monarchy, a dictatorship, and despotism. Aren't monarchy and despotism simply another word for dictatorship? Fusion7 ( talk) 19:03, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
No, monarchy and despotism is not another word for dictatorship. Stalin and Hitler are dictators, but not monarchs. British Queen is not a dictator, but monarch. Monarchs, typically inherit position by hereditary ascension and use system of aristocratic titles. Napoleon was both monarch (self-proclaimed Emperor) and dictator. "Despot" is a more general word and may also carry meaning of economical oppression. Chelentano ( talk) 04:47, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
The very first line of this article states that dictatorship is a form of autocratic government. This is self-evident that the two articles refer to the same idea. I think they should be merged. Dust429 ( talk) 13:56, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Not sure this is the best place for this comment [my first ever post to Wikipedia--forgive me if I commit any faux pas], but regarding the following passage in the third paragraph of the article: "In this sense, dictatorship (government without people's consent) is a contrast to democracy (government whose power comes from people) and totalitarianism (government controls every aspect of people's life) opposes pluralism (government allows multiple lifestyles and opinions). Though the definitions of the terms differ, they are related in reality as most of the dictatorship states tend to show totalitarian characteristics. When governments' power does not come from the people, their power is not limited and tend to expand their scope of power to control every aspect of people's life."
I disagree with the "...totalitarianism...opposes pluralism {government allows multiple lifestyles and opinions)." I think it would be more correct to describe totalitarianism as opposing not a governmental form that allows such and such, but rather a system with minimal governmental control over anything. Is this Libertarianism--I don't know, I'm not a political scientist. The article should say something like, "...and totalitarianism (government controls every aspect of people's life) opposes ________ (minimal governmental control; people control every aspect of their lives)" —Preceding unsigned comment added by UncleGee ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, forgot to sign--told you I was new to this! UncleGee ( talk) 15:40, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
The article lacks etymology.
Only provides recent, modern tense of the word; being generally synonymous with despotism, brutal autocracies and tyranny.
The term had a different tense, for example, in the 19th century, and the era of writers such as Karl Marx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.49.14.20 ( talk) 02:21, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Could someone explain to me (with references please) why is Lenin listed here? Was he ever a dictator? For example, here dictatorship of Lenin is described as a myth. Perhaps, the dictatorship of proletariat may have caused this confusion. I understand he was one of leaders of the revolution, a founder of a state, and a charismatic person. But then a number of American presidents may qualify as dictators. ( Igny ( talk) 05:54, 5 October 2008 (UTC))
( 194.80.32.9 ( 194.80.32.9) 19:21, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Many people confuse Lenin with Stalin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.104.204.241 ( talk) 15:49, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
( 194.80.32.9 ( 194.80.32.9) 03:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Recently this article was subject to vandalism. Between others, Chiang Kai-shek— China 1928-1931, 1943-1949, was added. I removed it not because I particullarly like the guy, but because such claim should be first sustained in this discussion, to colectively determine if he matches the criterion to be included in the list. Whoever thinks he should/shouldn't be in the list please present your reasons and sources here. Thanks! Alchaemist ( talk) 03:27, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
This article, specially its "Dictators List", is subject to a constant level of anonymous IP vandalism. Whenever somebody doesn't like a politician, president, whatever... they just add trash here. And the definition of somebody as "dictator" is really tempting. Personally I think, this article should be semi-protected, so only autoconfirmed accounts can edit it. I'd like to know if there is consensus on this. Regards! Alchaemist ( talk) 17:20, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Removed Kuwait and Bahrain.
Why would somebody put the Khalifa and AL-Sabah in this list. I will delete them because it is just simply not true. Also other people on this list get them out of here like King Abdhullah of Saudi Arabia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.105.67.58 ( talk) 17:51, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Regarding what was stated by 208.105.67.58 in the previous section, Abdullah of Saudi Arabia is a king in a monarchy, his power was inherited under monarchal rules, and finally I guess that most of Saudi Arabia supports monarchy after all. So I consider that he should be removed as well. He might be totalitarian, absolutist, whatever, but I think he's not a dictator in the strict sense. If you think the opposite, please elaborate here to support your statement. Regards! Alchaemist ( talk) 23:33, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Former Russian President Vladimir Putin was elected by people, served 2 terms or 8 years and left his position of president, according to Constitution. Yes, he is now a Prime Minister and still has huge influence, but I don't think he is a dictator in the strict sense. I believe, he must be removed from the list. Chelentano ( talk) 04:27, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
The image File:Saddam Hussein on his throne.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --19:02, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
There are almost no citations for the article. Anyone able to find some? Gordonlighter ( talk) 19:33, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Dictatorship.html
has the exact text for one of the opening paragraphs. Who copied who? If it's copied from the Princeton page, we can cite that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.98.254.43 ( talk) 14:53, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
I've added God into the "fiction" section of dictatorships, in almost all religious context god meets the requirements of the definition of "dictator" or at best "autocrat". Any ones personal opinions aside, it should be included as a valid example, well known to many.
What about this man? Belarus has been called "the last true remaining dictatorship in the heart of Europe" by former and current European and American leaders.-- DaleMartinWatson ( talk) 17:12, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
I can find no mention in the article about the largest group of authoritarian regimes the last 20 years, namely those that are self-described as "democracies", which celebrate contested elections, but where the playing-field is so tilted, and/or the voting is so rigged, that the outcome always and without exception is the re-election of the same person. Examples can be found in the 2012 book "The Dictator's Learning Curve" and include Belarus, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and more. -- Dr Ulf Erlingsson ( talk) 23:56, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
I deleted the section named history, as it only contained a quotation from a selfpublished book, which even if it hadn't been selfpublished, would have qualified as WP:UNDUE, considering that it was not a monograph on dictatorship, but apparently some kind of theological treatise. -- Saddhiyama ( talk) 18:16, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Dictatorship. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 23:54, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Dictatorship. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:08, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Dictatorship. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 13:51, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Hitler and Mussolini were dictators, according to this article and to many authorities. So I restored this deletion. [2] The mere fact that there and other dictators were originally elected democratically doesn't mean that they never became dictators. Mobi Ditch ( talk) 01:09, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
According to the article Dictator, a dictator is to refer to a ruler who has no limited power, therefore Hitler was a Dictator. Not necessarily a person being democratically elected means that he is not a dictator, since he had no limits when making decisions such as concentration camps for Jews, blacks, communists, etc. It did not have a government with a defined period of time, the Nazi Dictatorship ended because of the death or flight of Hitler, but not because it had a time limit. With Mussolini the same could be said, he was democratically elected, but later he made concentration camps where communists were captured, one when he is president of a nation has limitations, and They had no limits in their decisions after being elected. By the way Mussolini replaced the ruler of that time because he decided to leave power, so the arrival to power of the Italian dictator was not very democratic. -- Germanico5468504 ( talk) 21:52, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
The fact that nothing is mentioned about how imperialist powers have a hand in installing dictators in semi-colonial/semi-feudal states is just saddening. It's objective fact that countries like the UK, France, and (especially) the US had a hand in installing and supporting sympathetic dictators like the Shah of Iran, Augusto Pinochet, Ferdinand Marcos, Fulgencio Batista, Suharto, and so on. The article should at least acknowledge that there is a relationship between Western imperialist powers and dictatorships in less economically advanced societies. NyanThousand ( talk) 14:36, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
We need a third theory in defining states, the terms "Republic" and "Monarchy" aren't enough though. I believe we should start changing the "Forms of Government.svg" image and subsequent articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.141.88.36 ( talk) 17:32, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
Why there is no information about left-wing socialist dictators?
I second this It goes into extensive detail about right wing dictatorships but ignores all dictatorships that are communist or socialist such as China, The Soviet Union, Cuba, Cambodia, Vietnam, Many across Africa and South America and Even North Korea It is difficult to feel that this lack of inclusion is in good faith TheFinalMigration ( talk) 08:27, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
This section includes several dictatorships which only lasted a few years. Portugal had an authoritarian right-wing dictatorship for over 40 years, so I think it should be on the list.
Here, I've WP:BOLDly removed the assertion in wikivoice saying, "In most dictatorships, the country's constitution promises its citizens inalienable rights and fair elections." from the lead paragraph. The wording has changed a few times, but that seems to have been added without support by user:Anonymous good guy (now blocked) in this August 13, 2021 edit. That assertion may or may not have merit and may or may not have due weight for inclusion in this article but, if it is to appear in the article, it needs support and needs supported elaboration outside of the lead section.Please discuss here if you disagree. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 12:24, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
The first line of the article mentions "based" policies, I believe this is a result of what some would call trolling left unnoticed, but I still hold some doubt as it could refer to something I am unaware of? In which case I would ask someone to add a reference to what based could refer to. Weebfourg ( talk) 14:54, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
The definitions given are nearly identical, and many polisci sources use the terms interchangeably (eg. Ezrow & Frantz 2011,
Dukalskis 2021, or
[3]). I searched Google Scholar for dictatorship vs. authoritarianism
to see if some sources recognize and explain a difference, but instead I found more sources that use the terms interchangeably. If these articles are kept separate there needs to be explanation of differentiation between them. (
t ·
c)
buidhe 00:10, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
References
Moxy-
15:15, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Pretty different and really against this merge as both of pages adds much value to the encyclopedia. As the editor noted already "the two are different, and although every dictatorship is authoritarian, not all authoritarian regimes are dictatorships." That is nicely said and true, so that is it. 109.93.38.135 ( talk) 23:38, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
We say "Political scientist Barbara Geddes describes three types of dictatorship" with no preface to put context on how or why we mention her taxonomy. I'm no political scientist, who is Geddes? If she is prominent in her field, maybe we should establish that, or else, we could mention several classifications and then expand on Geddes'. Forich ( talk) 03:22, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
She probably knows what she is talking about https://polisci.ucla.edu/person/barbara-geddes/ Polygnotus ( talk) 02:30, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Grnrchst ( talk · contribs) 12:17, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
Ok, I'm going to take this review on. I just want to preface this by saying how happy I am to see this article nominated, given how
vital the subject is to our collective understanding of the world. On first glance, it appears to meet the criteria for a GA rating. Stand by for further comments, as I'll be reviewing this section-by-section. --
Grnrchst (
talk) 12:17, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 12:36, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 12:42, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 13:10, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 13:25, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 14:14, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
This is probably the section that I have the biggest issue with. It reads less like a historical overview of the rise of different forms of dictatorship throughout history, than a prosified list of dictatorships that have formed. I honestly think that this section needs a complete rewrite, in order to keep it focused.
This whole section appears to be the one that will present the biggest blocker to GA status, as it fails criterion 1 (Well-written) and 3 (Broad in its coverage). If you want me to put this review on hold until this section can be rewritten, or if you feel you can pull off rewriting this, then let me know. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 15:16, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 15:20, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 15:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 15:38, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
I see another user has added a lengthy "Examples" section that is just a long list of countries and their leaders. Clearly the sources they provided were unreliable, but without them you're just left with original research which sometimes violates BLP policy. I would strongly suggest removing this in its entirety. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 13:48, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
-- Grnrchst ( talk) 15:43, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
@ Thebiguglyalien: For the most part, I think this article is excellent and it largely meets the criteria for GA, with the suggested improvements. It really is just the History section that is bringing it down for me, which is a shame, as I think it clearly stands apart in quality from the rest of the article. If you want me to put this review on hold, until the history section can be rewritten, then let me know and I'll do so. Once the problems with that section are rectified, and other comments here have been taken on board, I'll be more than happy to pass this. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 15:48, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
From the off, this is clearly far better-written and more informative than the previous version. Excellent work rewriting this so quickly!
Anyways, this is much better than the previous iteration by a long way. This has gone from failing criteria 1 and 3 to passing both. With the above notes addressed, I would be more than happy to pass this review. Tremendous work @ Thebiguglyalien: I hope you're proud of this! -- Grnrchst ( talk) 09:44, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
@ Thebiguglyalien: Since you are the creator... Would it be possible to have a section on the term's etymology?
Alas, this article is written from a liberal perspective, but it should say that there are other perspectives as well... For instance, Marxism believes all state formations are class dictatorships by their very nature. The Chinese Communist Party consistently refers to the liberal capitalist West as ruled by dictators. -- TheUzbek ( talk) 12:05, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
what does it means if a country is a dictatorship 41.115.34.218 ( talk) 20:11, 24 April 2024 (UTC)