• NutWrench@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    edit-2
    29 days ago

    Depends on whether the dictatorship is competent or incompetent. Businesses need years of lead time to negotiate deals, build factories, make a profit. But they can’t make plans for the future with a government that is run by idiots. That’s a guaranteed money-loser.

  • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    27 days ago

    I don’t think our method of internal government would matter as much to the world as the foreign policies of the individual leader. For reference on that see 2016-2020.

  • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    29 days ago

    If the US became an international bad actor the first crisis to resolve would likely be the outsized environmental impact America has. I’m pretty sure the rest of the world could sanction America into oblivion due to how unnecessary American exports are but it’d put China in an unrivaled power position.

    It’d really fucking suck but that may be where we’re headed.

          • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            29 days ago

            I’m not - my original comment wasn’t talking about whether the US was acting in a morally correct manner but rather if it was seen as a reliable mediator. It is certainly not the most trusted nation in the world but it is highly trusted. Becoming a despotism would break a lot of that trust as “being a democracy” is highly valued internationally and, traditionally, America is essentially the judge of who is and isn’t a democracy (or has control of the organizations that do).

            BRICS is in a really interesting place right now because China continues to prop up Russia and India and South Africa are intent on reinforcing good will with China. They have a real tangible power internationally but Russia is still an extreme pariah. I was disappointed that they didn’t adopt an alternative trade currency as that’d provide (imo) a lot more global stability in the long run - but that may still come together. Also in my opinion if China either dropped support of Russia or supported a coup/revolution to depose Putin it’s likely they’d rapidly overtake the USA in the few western spheres the US still politically dominates - I’m not a political strategist but I absolutely can’t comprehend why China is spending so much potential reinforcing a highly unpredictable government like Putins but that may just be down to personality quirks of Xi.

            • davel@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              29 days ago

              Russia is still an extreme pariah

              Russia is still an extreme pariah only if you get your information from imperial core media. Russia just hosted the BRICS summit a few weeks ago, and everyone showed up. The Global South generally doesn’t have issue with Russia, and unlike the imperial core, they aren’t sanctioning it.

              Also in my opinion if China either dropped support of Russia or supported a coup/revolution to depose Putin

              I have no reason to think China has any interest in deposing Putin. I think you’re just making things up in our head. You may be projecting imperialist thinking onto ant-imperialist China.

              a highly unpredictable government like Putins

              The Russian government is not unpredictable. Where are you even getting this from? And neither is Putin an unhinged dictator with limitless powers. He’s quite rational, and he’s about as answerable to the Russian bourgeoisie as Biden is to the American bourgeoisie.

              that may just be down to personality quirks of Xi.

              This sounds like great man theory, which liberals often subscribe to, but Marxists don’t.

  • cymbal_king@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    28 days ago

    Depends on your demographics a bit. Dictatorships like to scapegoat ethnic minorities or other out groups (see Pinochet’s, Mao’s, Pol Pot’s, etc extermination of scientists and educators) for society’s problems. These groups of people tend to experience much greater intensity of oppression under dictatorships than already present in the US. This tends to change culture on a fundamental level because most people actively try to fit in with the in group to avoid becoming a target themselves.

    While present to some degree in our current system, another core characteristic of dictatorships is that self enrichment for those in power is the primary driving factor for decision making. Dictators don’t need to pay lip service to making decisions for the greater good. You see this especially prominently in dictatorships in developing countries with valuable resources… The dictators and their close friends take all of the wealth from resource extraction for themselves and everyone else lives in extreme poverty. Yes we have wealth inequality already, but it would be accelerated even more. You could see even highly skilled professionals having a hard time making ends meet (or in jail for being too smart and having “ideas”), and even more homelessness, potentially even wide scale famine.

    In terms of geopolitics… Our relationship with allies would become about how the relationship personally benefits those in power.

  • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    28 days ago

    Not much change in the big US agendas: Wars to protect and expand oil use, and now tech monopoly to control colonial democracies.

    Democracy is significantly easier to create an Israel first or US first rulership in the world. It just takes a little bit of money. Media is desperate to ally with oligarchy/zionism, and an even tinier bit of money achieves that. CIA can JFK any politician that doesn’t accept their money, and NGOs to foment insurrection “for liberal democratic values” are simply NGOs to foment US sponsored war and destabilization of their lives.

    The only possible change would be a military coup of the US that disrupts “Israel first” rule, and oligarchist/corporatist warmongering meant to diminish Americans and other humans. Less democracy doesn’t mean less corruption and subjugation. Georgia successfully resisted a suicidal path earlier this year, to the dismay of “US approved democracy” demonic forces.

    People are too dumb with too little concern to inform/care about making the right democratic choices. They pick one of the heroes their media tells them to pick, and rely on empty promises made by the heroes.