I have always wondered if the presidents and world leaders who often cling to power for what seems like eternity actually do it out of the love for guidance, corruption or just the love for power itself. By logical deduction, I am forced to connect the dots on the trend of government embezzlements around the world.
Yes I had that much time on my hands.
The numbers do not lie(usually), especially when they are this staggering. The reasoning gets amusing the more you think about it. In Gabon, President Omar Albert-Bernard Bongo has led the country since April 14, 1967 but I am inclined to think that maybe he is till there because he got used to it. Much like any other job, after several decades of being employed by the same company, you wonder if you can do anything else at all. Don’t blame him, that’s perhaps human nature. Then in Libya, not even Ronald Regan could shake Muammar Gaddafi from the office he owned since Sept 1, 1969. Fidel Castro would have easily made it on my list and even the wake of recent events, I cannot help but remember his hard-line stance concerning the United States over the course of recent history. Mind you he “bought’ Cuba in November 1976.
President Ali Abdallah Saleh of Yemen has led his country since July 17, 1978 and in case you ever been to Yemen, you will aprreciate how much progress he has made in the past three decades. Even the president of Maldives, President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom has been in power since Nov 11, 1978 and I know what you are thinking.;- is that a real country? Yes it is a country, a former colony of Britain, an island nation consisting of a group of atolls in the Indian Ocean. The Maldives are located south of India's Lakshadweep islands and south-west of Sri Lanka. If you are still confused, Ill suggest you find an encyclopedia.
Of course there is an even longer list of leaders who seized power and managed to keep for it for decades or many years and not surprising, most of these leaders stashed up ‘wild cash’ before walking out or even dying in office. Suharto made $15-35billion in profits in Indonesia, Ferdinand Marcos made $5-10billion in the Philippines, Mobutu Sese Seko stashed up $5billion in Congo and Sani Abacha saved $2-5billionn in his personal account courtesy of Nigeria. Even J-C Duvalier managed to land $300-800million from Haiti, and just in case you are wondering, no wonder Haiti is not exactly paradise. I must have been either naïve or stupid, but I always believed that only presidents of rich and powerful countries could amass tons of cash but on second thought, maybe I should seriously consider running for president in a small island in the Mediterranean Ocean, afterall the United Nations will be fighting terrorist in Iraq to investigate how much of my national budget benefits my country. For example, if Pavlo Lazarenko could bank $114-200milion in Ukraine, there is something seriously wrong with the picture. Last February, Gnassingbe Eyadema of Togo died after being in power for 38 solid years and maybe it was the fact that Togo was fascinated by their royal family, that’s why they allowed Faure Gnassingbe to take over his father’s ‘throne’; maybe for 38 more years. The scary part is, if you really think that in all these leadership drama’s the United Nations and the powerful Western nations didn’t know, think again. Fast forward to the present;-President Hugo Chavez has confirmed that he will try to change the law to extend the time limit a leader can stay in office. Surprise! In Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe has been in power for 27 years and just in case you think only the ‘developing countries’ can pull this stunt, wait a minute.
In Russia, there have been calls for a change to the constitution to allow President Vladimir Putin to stand for a third term in office next year. Of course if you live in America, you are quick to dismiss the possibilities of this allure for power; but perhaps we do it slightly differently. We actually keep it in the family somehow, through our sons and spouses or even our neighbors; but one day if all else fail, only Heaven knows what will be next. So the next time you vote, think about it because you may very well be electing a president indefinitely.
Just another thought.
49 comments:
Thats really funny. I always wondered da same thing? What the hell do they be thinking
power can be Addictive. once in and used to power its hard to give it up.is it imaginable that some of the democratic elected leaders would like to stay in power and not always have to think in terms of what helps and not hurt their re-election?
Are you serious? Can you imagine another term with Bush in the White House
Idiots should be restricted to two terms
Why are dictators dictators? if you want to understand anyone put on their shoes. Fascism actively believed in dictatorship. But most others, Stalin to Mugabe to Pinochet to Pol Pot, were/are ideologues who dedicated much of their lives to their belief system. When they finally reach power and, from their point of view, start doing some good in the world, they are reluctant, even terrified, to let it go and enjoy a nice retirement to local cricket games and milking the lucrative lecture circuit.
I was in Cuba last year and the people are happy and content without being subjected to America.
Hugo Chavez was democratically elected, time and time again but you wouldn't think it from most of the comments here! Here's the deal - the Venezuelan people will have the final say, via yet another referendum, on whether the constitution is amended and whether he will continue in office. As for Chavez's so-called "banning the opposition": RCTV, despite its mandate to be balanced, incited rebellion (April 2002). How long would the US government tolerate such dissent? 5 years? Or 5 minutes?
Calling them "leaders" might have something to do with it. Do we really belive that out of almost 300 million people George Bush rises above one and all intellectually to "lead us" from here to there? I don't think so. And this is true for Brown, Chavez etc. We put these people in there temporarily to "mind the store" while the rest of us go about the business that matters. When they begin to smell, and with time they all will, we must throw them out. We are in charge not these bozos.
Please remember the adage of, "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Having said that, do you think for a second that Shrub (Bush Jr.) wouldn't change things if he could to stay in power forever? Personally, I am glad that the leader of my country must step down after 10 years total in office. That means he can be elected twice and then must step down. I like that idea. The rest of the world should come up with a system that works for them.
Sara, If the people are so happy and content - then why has nearly 10% of the entire Cuban population risked their lives and family's lives in order to sneak into the US? With nearly 10% trying to get to America - I imagine there would be a much higher percentage of Cubans that would love to try but don't want the risk.
Good article dude.
1950s: democratically elected socialist government in Iran overthrown with US assistance, right-wing dictator installed.
1970s: democratically elected socialist government in Chile overthrown with US assistance, right-wing dictator installed. No elections for 20 years, thousands murdered or 'disappeared'.
1980s: US funds and trains right-wing Contra rebels in Nicaragua, who oppose democratically elected socialist government. Tens of thousands killed. So much for the 'defender of democracy'.
In recent elections former US president Jimmy Carter was among the foreign observers present in Venezuela, and stated that there were no signs of corruption or voting inaccuracies.
Whats up with that
Having a mandate from the people is all well and good but you should begin to worry when a leader begins to "fiddle" with electoral systems. Next step, more executive powers being given to the Leader, usually due to a domestic crisis, more police powers, a clampdown on "seditious" organisations and individuals.
The world should watch Mr. Chavez's next actions very carefully.
The UK has no limits to the number of terms the premier can serve, why does it make Venezuela a dictatorship for "considering" the same.
Chavez has won several elections under the watchful eye of independent judges, why is he called a dictator?
The US has installed and supported several dictators and organised coups against many democracies over the years all over the world, what makes Americans think they have any credibility when talking about bringing democracy to the world?
Good grief, there is no single American who has less credibility than jimmy carter. Even his recounting of being attacked by a flying killer-rabbit while he was President pales in comparison to his recent senile and often racist lunacies.
Dictators set themselves up as saviors of the people. But ask people who know. Here in the USA we have tens of thousands of Cuban refugees who are now free to speak. The stories they tell us of Castro are horrific. While he sits in his palace, dressed in military garb, eating filet mignon and foie gras, drinking Dom Pérignon, his people are cooking and eating their pets. Entire villages share a bar of soap at one communal shower. Revolution is his term limit.
Now Chavez has called our president the devil, he should stay in power indefinitely to reflect western liberals undying love for him.
Democracy is absolutely the most important factor in this debate. Unfortunately the US cannot claim to support true democracy around the world, only democracy which it can control and benefit from. Just look at the the track record of the US - right-wing dictators installed in Chile, Nicaragua, Egypt, Iran, and all these replaced DEMOCRATICALLY elected socialist goverments. Hardly makes the US a bastion of democracy does it? Even their own elections are rigged!
"Notice the leaders who push for (or force) unlimited terms: Hugo Chavez, Robert Mugabe, Fidel Castro, and maybe Putin. These are guys who rail against western-style capitalism, but who are about one thing - pure, unfettered power.
Does anyone know an honest person who does not feel sorry for the citizens of the countries where these men rule?
Steve Blanchard, Topsfield, United States"
Are you including Bush with his attempt to change the 22nd Amendment in that list...?
I think it is VITAL the west should be consistent in its foreign policy towards tyrants and when it can use the courts to punish atrocities.
Three classes of treatment.
Firstly the Mugabes and Kim Jong-ils that the west roundly condemn as disasters and does make some effort to control.
Secondly Gaddafis, the Castros, the Chinese etc that are mildly rebuked occasionally but in the main tolerated.
Finally cases like the Saudis whose regimes are positively encouraged and abuses ignored.
What about:
George Bush Sr: 1988 - 1992
Bill Clinton: 1992 - 2000
George Bush Jr: 2000-2008
Hilary Clinton?!: 2008 - 2012 (at least)
Possibly 24 years of 2 families running the most powerful country in the world?!
Sorry for the minor leftist lapse, but I had to throw that out there.
Daaaan I didnt even loo at it like that. . These 2 dfamiles have ruled our asses forever. . .daaanG. . please vote Obama, Edwards, somebody else. . whoever. . just not Hillary. Even vvote for the Mexiacan dude who jumped the fence in arizona
To put the question (Rein of Power) in conventional terms, first Chavez don't intimidate smaller nations with weapon of mass destruction, he is not stealing their energy resource or loot it's cities, he doesn't believe in what the Bush/Blair administrations did or is doing to the Mideast, he helps the poor in a rich country where only the rich (and warmongers) counts the most, and you classify him as power hungry?
What is the difference between a right wing dictator from left wing dictator?
Even without term limits, governments can choose to dump their leaders if they become stale. The Blair Brown example. But then if you have term limits as in the US then you have the leaders simply giving up in the second term as there is no incentive to achieve anything. The grab for power will always occur - I suspect Putin will not go quietly, but seems to happen in countries with uneducated or jingoistic masses. Bring standards up in the world to have less of this occuring.
it is entirely hypocritical of the US and its people to criticise the likes of Chavez. They vilified Castro because he booted out Battista and told the US where to get off - no more fun in the sun for the elite and Mafia types. I suspect their venom toward Cuba created the problems they face. How much misery have they supported and suffering caused.
"Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has confirmed that he will try to change the law to allow him to remain in power indefinitely."
False! They are seeking to end term limits, that's all. Even the UK does not have term limits. There is nothing extraordinary about it. If they do not vote for him next time, he will not be in power. They are having a referendum on the issue as well, which you have conveniently omitted to mention. Your words are deliberately misleading.
Dictators: in no particular order the likes of Mobutu Noriega Pinochet Abacha, Amin,Hussain, Marcos, Batista, Duvalier, Somoza, Ul Haq, Franco. Not a complete list of modern dictators but ALL were supported by various US governments. So those US posters who berate Chavez, whom Venezuelans chose and mostly support, should hang their heads in shame as it is hypocritcal of them considering their history don't just listen to your biased media think for yourselves. But then he isn't a dictator they prefer.
I don't know why rightists are so sure that the left is supporting Chavez or Mugabe or Putin, they are all dictators hiding behind socialism, only anarchists can support these men. They are greedy for power, that's all. And no, Blair and Bush are not better. That's why it's important to have a limited number of mandate.
Oh about Cuba, Sure they are, Sara. That explains why almost a million of them risked life and limb, crossing shark-infested waters on makeshift rafts, to subject themselves to America.
Dictators exist quite simply because the people they rule let them. For generations, we have been unable to govern our own lives as individuals and communities, so we surrender our freedom to others to babysit us. In places like Russia and Latin America, the tradition of strong-arm leaders has the people believing that a dictator is necessary. By contrast, with the mining co-ops in Bolivia and worker-run factories in Argentina, we are witnessing the birth of a truly free society.
The poor who support Chavez will wake-up one day & find out what many other poor people from other countries who allowed someone like Chavez to take complete control of their government, country & lives have found out the hard way: the wealth taken from the successful people will not be re-distributed to them, the successful people will leave the country and the poor will still be poor content in their shared misery provided by their "fearless leader".
We've all heard this hogwash before; brutal dictators who set themselves up as saviors of the people. Ask people who know. Here in the USA we have many Cuban refugees who are now free to speak. The stories they tell us of Castro are horrific. While he sits in his palace, dressed in military garb, eating filet mignon and foie gras, his people are cooking and eating their pets. Entire villages share a bar of soap at the one communal shower. Only his death or revolution would end his term.
Do you really think Americans will sit back and let one guy rule for 10 years?? Youve got to be kidding me
In politics there seems to be an immutable law that, sooner or later, even the best lapse into incompetence and stagnation. For this reason, if for no other, it is a very good idea to throw them out at regular intervals.
Those who cling to power have usually long passed the threshold of incompetence (Mugabe) and moved into the realms of evil
Chavez is heading that way rapidly. But the liberal left will be blind to his faults simply because he opposes the USA - who do throw out their leaders.
Dictators exist quite simply because the people they rule let them. For generations, we have been unable to govern our own lives as individuals and communities, so we surrender our freedom to others to babysit us. In places like Russia and Latin America, the tradition of strong-arm leaders has the people believing that a dictator is necessary. By contrast, with the mining co-ops in Bolivia and worker-run factories in Argentina, we are witnessing the birth of a truly free society.
The poor who support Chavez will wake-up one day & find out what many other poor people from other countries who allowed someone like Chavez to take complete control of their government, country & lives have found out the hard way: the wealth taken from the successful people will not be re-distributed to them, the successful people will leave the country and the poor will still be poor content in their shared misery provided by their "fearless leader".
We've all heard this hogwash before; brutal dictators who set themselves up as saviors of the people. Ask people who know. Here in the USA we have many Cuban refugees who are now free to speak. The stories they tell us of Castro are horrific. While he sits in his palace, dressed in military garb, eating filet mignon and foie gras, his people are cooking and eating their pets. Entire villages share a bar of soap at the one communal shower. Only his death or revolution would end his term.
Power is the most addictive drug there is. Once one has it they can't image not having it anymore and will do whatever it takes to keep it (Chavez, Castro, Kim, etc.)
In politics there seems to be an immutable law that, sooner or later, even the best lapse into incompetence and stagnation. For this reason, if for no other, it is a very good idea to throw them out at regular intervals.
Those who cling to power have usually long passed the threshold of incompetence (Mugabe) and moved into the realms of evil
Chavez is heading that way rapidly. But the liberal left will be blind to his faults simply because he opposes the USA - who do throw out their leaders.
About Putin,
Steps to becoming a leader forever:
1. Limit the Freedom of the Press, Check!
2. Focus your constituents rage on a third party. Check!
3. Nationalize Energy and Utility systems. Check!
4. Murder, intimidate opposing political party leaders. Check!
5. "Legally"change constitution to become forever leader. Check!
6. Create, maintain secret police. Check!
Seems to me he has already gone through the modern day dictator/socialist playbook.
Now that Muammar Gaddafi (in office since 1969) signs record arms deals with UK and France nobody dares to call him dictator and terrorist any more. President Hosni Mubarak rules since 1981, yet nobody laments democracy in Egypt as far as it poses no threat to Israel and US interests in the Middle East. And of course president Omar Bongo who recently celebrated 40 years in power in Gabon will remain an exemplary democrat while he delivers oil to the West and keeps a French military base.
There are some countries where democracy does not work e.g. Iraq however much the rest of the world wants it to happen. Other governments are supported by their armies which mean that it is basically impossible to overthrow the govt. Terrorism at elections threaten many people around the world and free speech is not a reality. Others reign by terror. Re Russia if Putin were able to stay as long as he wanted then this could possibly herald the return of full blown Communism maybe?
It is important to make a distinction between a military dictatorship that rules by force, and an amendment to a Constitution that allows the people in a free and democratic society to elect their leaders as many times as they wish to do so. Chavez's rhetoric is childish and distasteful, but if a majority of the Venezuelan people like his domestic policies and want to re-elect him, that's their business.
Once in power, people like to stay in control. Maggie and Tony Blair both would have wanted to stay as PM as long as they could, neither wanted to go.
But we can get rid of them. Some by force. Amin was evicted by Tanzania, Pol Pot by Vietnam. Castro would have gone ages ago if the USA didn't maintain its embargo. Have they never read Aseop's fable about the sun and the wind and the traveller?
Fortunately GOD puts term Limits on them.
The human ego has been with us for a very long time. In the case of people like Chavez the ego is "out of control." He believes that he alone knows what is best for his Country. Napoleon III did the exact same thing 150 years ago. He knew what was best for France and decided that democracy was too risky. I expect that many Venezuelans will support Chavez for now until they wake up and realize that they are living in a Police State and have given up all their rights and freedoms.
Call it watever you want to but Chavez is nothing but a dictator, and a bad one at it
'Capitalism' and the US have produced Castro, to some extent. So he doesn't share the podium with Hitler or Stalin in my mind. Besides.. Most of the world loves him.
Some dictators survive intellectual scrutiny better than some elected presidents....
perplexing isn't it!
Look no further than the USA. The Clintons are the epitome of the object of your question. Not content to have been in power for 8 years, Bill and Hillary have concocted a plan whereby, she gets elected and he gets to run the country again. If anyone who is foolish enough to vote for her, thinks that she and not Bill will be running things, I have a home in the Flood Plane to sell you. Of course I think she and Obama will be long gone by the time elections roll around. Too much exposure for both
William Pitt the Younger was PM of the UK for 36 years, till his death. It was under his able leadership that Britain rose to Greatness.
Post a Comment