Yes, hypocrisy is for neurotypicals. That's why those people will be tattooed with - ah, damn, you got me

Only one way to find out

Maybe if I had a few years to reorganise myself, and that's a big maybe. I've never much cared for money, power, and I'm empathetic to a fault, but being in different environments causes people to change.

The biggest challenge would be staying in touch with the population. You would need a good team of people that represent the interests of human existence and happiness. At that point it's sounding closer to a democracy anyway.

From there, there's obvious moves. Find the biggest sources of misery and damage, reform or just straight up tear it out and start again. You'd need to move moderately slow, moving quickly destabilizes people too much and that is often not worth the cost. Raise social safety nets, try to turn the system from working to survive into one where working to get nice shit.

I feel like I might bankrupt whichever system I'm put in charge of though. Economics was never my strong suit, and I probably would start ignoring economic realities in favour of human existence.

I would establish a socialist polity, then abdicate.

would I have to stay a dictator? because I'd be instilling a democracy ASAP

The benevolent, uncorrupt, good thing for dictators to do is to abdicate.

Absolutley. No more questions!

For a couple months, maybe. Anyone who says yes absolutely is someone who shouldn't be trusted with power.

Yes. But I'd probably be killed by someone who will

Sure. Would I last long before getting killed or overthrown? No.

It is inevitable that an opposition would form against you. You either let the movement continue to gain traction and risk unseating you or you use your power in a corrupt manner to silence them.

No.

Not because I’m evil, but because I am empathetic and someone evil would absolutely figure out a way to use that to manipulate me.

I would be completely stressed out, like people would wanna kill me and stuff for being a dictator, so I'd just renounce, run away and get a new identity (not sure how one "gets" a new identity though). Also, managing a country by myself? Too hard, what orders am I even meant to give?

I know I can cause I'd really rather not be a dictator. I take responsibility for EVERYONE all the fuckong time trying to care for that many and feeling the pain and guilt if I fail even one will fuck me up and I'd rather just not do it. Only in extreme times like rn would I even consider it but I'll probably off my self when the reign ends cause I let some kid die because I didn't get healthcare to them fast enough. I'm a softie.

I could be benevolent and part of the population would be still against me (slumlords, libertarians, nazis).

After some attempts to kill me I doubt I couldn’t become aggressive against the population who wronged me.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

They often get killed faster than the evil ones.

Well, I've managed to win every election legitimately in Tropico 5 so far while making sure there's plenty of housing, education, jobs, food, and healthcare.

So guess so.

This is explained in the "the rules for rulers" video from cgpgrey, which condenses the book "the dictators handbook".

Yep.

I actually want to see these cultures change.

I could BE a benevolent dictator, I could never BECOME a benevolent dictator. The process of getting there would exclude me, because I would reject the power structure needed to form the dictatorship in the first place.

Yea! I can't get corrupted or turn evil if I already start out corrupt and evil!

Oh goodness no. I pray I never come into any real political power.

For fun I've already run the numbers on how many adult humans will fit into the cargo holds of a decommissioned Panamax bulker.

No I would be killed by a subordinate who wouldn't be.

if I were magically made dictator somehow, no I don't think so. but I'm not cutthroat enough to become a dictator in the first place.

Yes because I will immediately work on making a sustainable democracy, eventually having checks and balances

With my dictatorial powers .... my first action would be to seize and outlaw extreme wealth. No one would be allowed to own more than $1 million.

All the money collected would be used for government and providing a Universal Basic Income for everyone.

And I'd get a designer to make me a big fancy hat.

I would rock that shit, literally my dream job, practical problem solver with infinite power.

No. Although "turning evil" isn't what happens to those guys, exactly.

Dictators, in the sense of one man rule, don't actually exist. What an autocracy does have is a first among equals in a system where everyone is "looking over their shoulder". Even if someone who genuinely wants to make life great for the people takes power, there's severe limits to how they can do that.

Gorbachev is a great example of this. He was an idealistic person, and thought it would be good if the USSR switched to real democracy. Pretty immediately there were multiple coups until he was out of power, because anybody remotely high up the hierarchy had too many skeletons in their closet to allow that.

In the end, a dictator only gets to choose what kind of nightmarish dictatorship they want.

how dare you question my benevolence. to the pits with you.

Relevant CGP Grey.

From the point of view of "can you hold power and not let your heart of hearts be corrupted?" - Yeah, sure, why not? The problem is that as soon as you have a significant amount of power, someone else is going to want it. Probably someone with fewer scrupals. So you will quickly be forced into utilitarian thinking - you must do whatever is necessary to maintain your position of power, lest you be usurped by someone worse. And what is necessary to maintain power, to a common person, is often corruption, violence, and austerity for the people.

yes. I think a lot of people can. the thing is, the people who can won't be the runs running for office

I wouldn't be fucking kids and sending goon squads after minorities and into cities to harass my political opponents if that is what you are asking.

The 'not evil' bar is currently riding on the same high speed train the Republicans put their goalposts on.

It's really difficult. Not because you will turn evil of your own free will, but because you will have to do terrible things to maintain stability and to keep yourself from being usurped by spies. If you became dictator of any country, you would immediately start to get attacked from many sides by both spies and also revolutionaries who think of themselves as the good guy. In order to do anything it takes time. This is the only way to win the people over. Becoming a dictator is no doubt going to lead to massive economic decline in the near term unless you become a right wing dictator who has favor with the business and merchant classes. If you try to actually become a benevolent dictator and actually free the people, most of the people you would think were your allies would also blame you for everything that is wrong and turn against you, the business class would fund propaganda against you. The internationalists would fund your opposition to gain back their foreign claims to your industry and minerals.

People will feel as if they have every right to criticize you in every way, if you don't oppress them, but if you do, you will rightfully be called a tyrant. If you find your own propaganda you will be called a tyrant, but the people you think would be your allies, will not understand that there is propaganda on the other side.

It's very difficult indeed. Within a few years of taking power you would immediately have to deal with a torrent of spies, foreign media, coups, and whatever else. This is why only right wing governments only ever last more then a few years in history.

Vladimir Lenin is a great example of this, he genuinely saw himself as being benevolent. He was a real communist. He wanted to help the people. Yet he quickly realized once he obtained power that he did not have the support of the majority of the country. He pleaded and appealed to them, he tried to "educate" them on what was needed to achieve communism, mainly just time and their trust. Yet even his first election if he were to have one, he would lose, because already he had become associated with the status quo. The mainstream oppressors of the common people. So he became a tyrant, as all dictators do. Communism gets traded for national socialism and fascism with red paint by the time Lenin is dead. All in an effort to just keep power for a little bit so he could see his communist vision come true. Unfortunately as soon as the bosliviks started to oppress the people they lost the little bit of credibility they had. Just another tyrant, another right wing power obsessed state.

Nope. And I wouldn't even try. I'm going full evil tyrant, day one.

Hael No!

I'd end up making a dystopic country/nation where people are suffering while I get the brightest scientists to work on genetically modifying the human body so I could become closer to looking like my fursona.

That, and having people on the far left and far right being thrown into prison.

Just normal every day things from someone who's a little paranoid.

I'd be too much of a lazy dictator to do anything truly evil.