Bad Dictator - Good Dictator

When the world's superpower, which champions the dollar and "free markets," needs to tighten its global influence, it requires "strongmen" in strategic regions who will be "reasonable" towards the interests of Washington and its partners on Wall Street.

But when these ruthless figures develop a different vision—one that prioritizes national sovereignty and the well-being of their own people, for instance, through social welfare policies—the global hegemon and its media lapdogs suddenly become "concerned" about democracy, free speech, and human rights in those "barbaric" societies. They claim these nations are in desperate need of "Western values" like freedom and equality. It is at this precise moment that the useful distinction between a "good dictator" and a "bad dictator" emerges.

Land of the Free

Just 200 years ago—a blink of an eye in human history—Alexis de Tocqueville observed in "Democracy in America" that the United States was a country whose "government follows the will of its people." This reputation, which held for at least a century and a half, earned the nation the nickname "the Land of the Free."

However, since the 1980s—the era of global neoliberalism—and with the rise of a powerful capitalist class that became more "aware" of the "proper place" of the working class, the notion of "the people" whose will the government follows has undergone some subtle shifts. Today, "the people" effectively refers to members of the billionaire class who can pay for their status as citizens and, consequently, impose their significant priorities over the "trivial" interests of the general populace.

Now, any form of dissent arising from this «populace» that displeases the economic powers will inevitably be met by riot squads equipped with military-grade weaponry. These brave and well-paid officers are always ready to teach the "citizens" of the "Land of the Free" a sharp lesson in free speech and human rights.

POV - Culture

In the contemporary, synthesized dialect of "gamers," POV (point of view) refers to a game played from the player's perspective—whether in a "first-person" or "third-person" view. In the United States alone, 71% of people under 18 (both boys and girls) play video games for 1.5 to 2 hours daily.*

Given that "kill the adversary" games are the dominant category in the nation of preemptive wars and national security as a tool for social control, we can understand the fascination with killing and punishing the dangerous enemy. This is a fascination actively cultivated among future Marines or members of other "special forces" deployed around the world, or within the "homeland," to "protect" human rights and guarantee democracy.

*The Common Sense Census: Media Use by Tweens and Teens, 2021

Enjoy ¡or Else!

After World War II, the primary beneficiary of all that destruction suddenly found itself in possession of half the planet's wealth.* This ushered in an era of "democratizing" the rest of the world based on the ideology of the free market—a modern take on classical liberalism that provided an unquestionable justification for exporting the products of mass consumer culture on a global scale.

And for those backward and foolish regimes that failed to grasp the advantages of this global enterprise, there were always other, tariff-free export products to persuade them. These latter goods, of course, being delivered by a convenient bomber or something of the sort.

*Chomsky, N. (2003) p. 80. Hegemony or survival: America's quest for global dominance. Macmillan.

Promoting Democracy

Liberal democracy is a cornerstone of modern Western market civilization. The other apostolic paradigm of global neoliberalism is capitalism.

However, since the will of the majority and the inherent inequalities of pure capitalism are fundamentally at odds, the billionaire class—with help from their lackeys in government—has invented a new kind of democracy. A democracy without citizens.

And when the regime of a less enlightened nation dares to resist this liberal and modern concept, renegades and terrorists spontaneously emerge, requiring immediate extermination. After all, no one is permitted to refuse the "promotion" of market democracy, as prescribed by these oligarchic humanists.