Welcome to The Few Good Men

Thanks for visiting our club and having a look around, there is a lot to see. Why not consider becoming a member?
Register

The psychology of regimes

Concord

Concord

FGM Major
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Apr 20, 2014
Messages
3,952
Reaction score
3,971
Location
Western Australia
Starting this thread to examine and discuss aspects of authoritarian regimes now and throughout history.
How they operate and how they think.

It is fascinating to me how these come about, how they are sustained by propaganda, oppression and bureaucracy...and how they fall. And they always do.

Can you imagine how things might look to an authoritarian leader?
Does the human brain and ego start to view people in a disconnected way?
Do they start to get a messianic personality complex where they see a certain way forward as some kind of personal vision that needs to be achieved at any cost?
Often it might be just plain old greed for power, like the mindset of a mafia or cartel boss.

There is no doubt that regimes are supported by like minded individuals and sycophants.
Eventually a system of government seems to almost take on a life of its own. It gains momentum. Although it eventually falls apart.
Ironically, even those loyal to the regime often get gobbled up by the very system they supported.

For many citizens, they must at least appear to be a fervent supporter even if they are not, in order to survive and not become a target of the system.

I can only imagine how frightening it must be for people who get caught up in the machine and treated roughly by a vast, heartless system.
 
There are so many despotic regimes to examine, but the one that I am examining at the moment is the CCP in China.
For a while (early 2000's) it seemed to me that China might be making some progress in finding a balance between state run communism and a more relaxed, liberal stance.
In 2018 they changed the constitution to remove the two term limit on the presidency. Things have been in a sharp decline ever since.

I found these videos interesting.
An American video blogger who had been living in China for 10 years, married a Chinese woman and had a child.
His videos were all positive, showing the grass roots of the culture and the people (I enjoy watching videos about other countries and getting insights into the lives of the people who live there).

But then - typical paranoia of authoritarian regimes - the government raised alarms about a foreigner making unauthorized videos and his life turned upside down.


 
Another one from China. No recourse against the police.
Creepy and evil as hell that people who speak out around the world get targeted.

 
Interesting subject, just noticed the thread.

Personally I'm happy to live in a reasonable functioning representative democracy, as the least worst form of government known to mankind :)

However, there are big differences between authoritarian regimes. For example, compare China to Singapore or Morocco to Uganda under Idi Amin. I think all regimes conceptually start with an 'elite' (there will always be an elite, or rather in any vacuum an elite will form naturally). At some times looking from the interests of a nation state, a more authoritarian regime might be more 'favorable' compared to the alternative; often being civil war or rather several groups fighting for dominance.

Also, power 'corrupts' so even an elite who came into power with good intentions might well change into an elite with intentions to stay in power, whatever the cost. All those who benefit from the regime, will have an interest into it staying in power. I guess the psychology will often be that any opposing forces / opposition, are viewed as 'rebels' / terrorists who threaten the national stability and will lead the country into chaos (whether that's true or not, or even to be known at all).
Often, such a situation is not as black and white for people living under the regime. Take for example Egypt; Mubarak was quite the authoritarian and that's why he had to leave, but history showed what happened to Morsi; one can question how good his regime would have been for a lot of Egyptians. However, Sisi (another authoritarian who basically took over from Mubarak, I'd say) is now firmly in control from what I know and there's plenty representative democracies that seem to be happier with Sisi compared to Morsi.
Another example is Saddam. While he was a mass murderer, one can question whether the ousting of Saddam and the current form of government (albeit more democratic, less authoritarian) has improved the lives of the average Iraqi.

Fortunately indeed in the end all authoritarian regimes will succumb because of their own actions. I think that the larger the 'middle class' in a society, the larger the chance that people won't tolerate the authoritarian regime any longer. Repression can delay it for a long time, but in the end 'the people' will always win. :)
 
Last edited:
@Lethaface
A good thing that time always eventually consumes regimes. Every. Single. One. :)

@mTk
My intention was to examine the workings of authoritarian states, both from a psychological and historical perspective, and I thought FGM would be a perfect place to do it.
It was not so much politics I was focused on, but more about the thinking behind oppressive techniques and how people seek to escape them.
But I see how the thread might be potentially wrenched off the rails by a jingoistic minority, so I will abandon the project. Shame. It's an interesting, if dark, subject.

@Meat Grinder
Who you callin' Jackass, Assclown? :devilish:
 
People just cannot wield power over the long term without using that power to benefit themselves.

This leaves other people feeling like victims. Victims are very dangerous. Often, the threshold for claiming victim status is actually very low.

That, in a nutshell, is why there is no such thing as a long term "benevolent dictatorship." Power abuse and claims of victim status.

Democracy, messy as it is, allows a mechanism for regime change that does not involve violent overthrow.
 
There seems to be a cycle, Tyranny, Theocracy, Democracy, Anarchy back to Tyranny. We are lucky to have a reasonable life in which we could participate in the democratic process. It was the Cycle of the West Tyranny of the Roman Empire followed by its successor the Theocracy of the Roman Church, The Protest Movement culminated in Liberal thinking and Democracy, I think we see the first signs of Anarchy. Also, there have been periods of regression.
 
@Nemesis
That does seem to be the case. We watch leaders try and keep themselves in power.
Either by the brute force of the state, or by getting their constitutional rules changed to allow them to stay in power for an unlimited length of time (a lifetime). Usually both.
It's happened throughout history (monarchies for example) and is happening presently in more than one place.

Regime governments fear their populous. They need them as labour, but fear that they may rise up against them.
The leaders who abuse their power seem to be addicted to it. There may be generous amounts of sadism and psychopathy involved (more than likely).
Sycophantic followers may be unable to untangle themselves from a web of corruption that got them there, and go along out of fear and greed.
Look at the motley crew of buffoons that were in Hitler's inner circle.

Although it may be hard to organize and coordinate a population's greater numbers against an oppressive government, it has happened many times in the past.
The French revolution comes to mind. It usually happens when the majority of citizens are so hard done by or so incensed that it is spontaneous.
With modern times, the failure is what happens after the uprising. Look at the Arab Spring. Right back into the same mess.


@ChuckDyke
I had never noticed that before! Twenty years ago I would have thought that in this millennium we were finally set on the path of reason and wisdom, with the world connected by the internet.
But my doubts have grown over the following years. If anything we've seen an increase in regimes and dictatorships all over the world. Many come to mind.
We've seen populations try and fight for their lives, but it often seems like a losing fight. Syria, Hong Kong, Palestine and Myanmar come to mind, but there have been many more.

Most people just want to live their lives in peace, with some basics like food, clean water, clean air and shelter. Access to education, medical services and justice.
Is the lure of power so great that leaders are willing to kill and torture their fellow citizens? Apparently so.

I read somewhere that it is estimated that up to 10% of the human race suffers from psychopathy to varying degrees. Cold and highly manipulative, lacking any empathy or conscience. Like a serial killer. Disturbing.
But what about the rank and file? The police and military. The bureaucrats and the local politicians. Go along to get along? Too dumb to see where they are headed? Fear for their own lives and prosperity?

It is incomprehensible to me. Some of the cruelest treatment of citizens can come from their own people.
Like the Jewish police recruited by the Nazis to keep prisoners in line. They were both a tool and victim of the Holocaust at the same time!


Well I hope that we don't repeat the pattern of anarchy / tyranny / theocracy. None of them sound good to me.
Hoping that there's enough balanced, smart and wise people in the world to push fate in a different direction.
Having knowledge of current events around the world, learning about how these things operate, and talking about it, might help us do that.
 
Last edited:
Concord said:
@Nemesis
That does seem to be the case. We watch leaders try and keep themselves in power.
Either by the brute force of the state, or by getting their constitutional rules changed to allow them to stay in power for an unlimited length of time (a lifetime). Usually both.
It's happened throughout history (monarchies for example) and is happening presently in more than one place.

Regime governments fear their populous. They need them as labour, but fear that they may rise up against them.
The leaders who abuse their power seem to be addicted to it. There may be generous servings of sadism and psychopathy involved (more than likely).
Sycophantic followers may be unable to untangle themselves from a web of corruption that got them there, and go along out of fear and greed.
Look at the motley crew of buffoons that were in Hitler's inner circle.

Although it may be hard to organize and coordinate a population's greater numbers against an oppressive government, it has happened many times in the past.
The French revolution comes to mind. It usually happens when the majority of citizens are so hard done by or so incensed that it is spontaneous.
With modern times, the failure is what happens after the uprising. Look at the Arab Spring. Right back into the same mess.


@ChuckDyke
I had never noticed that before! Twenty years ago I would have thought that in this millennium we were finally set on the path of reason and wisdom, with the world connected by the internet.
But my doubts have grown over the following years. If anything we've seen an increase in regimes and dictatorships all over the world. Many come to mind.
We've seen populations try and fight for their lives, but it often seems like a losing fight. Syria, Hong Kong, Palestine and Myanmar come to mind, but there have been many more.

Most people just want to live their lives in peace, with some basics like food, clean water, clean air and shelter. Access to education, medical services and justice.
Is the lure of power so great that leaders are willing to kill and torture their fellow citizens? Apparently so.

I read somewhere that it is estimated that up to 10% of the human race suffers from psychopathy to varying degrees. Cold and highly manipulative, lacking any empathy or conscience. Like a serial killer. Disturbing.
But what about the rank and file? The police and military. The bureaucrats and the local politicians. Go along to get along? Too dumb to see where they are headed?

It is incomprehensible to me. Some of the cruelest treatment of citizens can come from their own people.
Like the Jewish police recruited by the Nazis to keep prisoners in line. They were both a tool and victim of the Holocaust at the same time!


Well I hope that we don't repeat the pattern of anarchy / tyranny / theocracy. None of them sound good to me.
Hoping that there's enough balanced, smart and wise people in the world to push fate in a different direction.
Having knowledge of current events around the world, learning about how these things work, and talking about it might help us do that.
Click to expand...
Look at the rabble storming the White House, Theocratic Regimes in the Middle East, Tyranny in North Korea. Populism is a step towards anarchy. A dictator can't afford to be proven wrong. All the strongmen like Nasser, Khadhafi, Shah of Iran all these countries turn towards theocracy. Once they relax back to democracy. Saw it in Europe, Communism collapsed all these countries are more religious than Western Europe especially Poland. It is not my idea by the way. Plato used different wordings. Rule by the aristocracy is tyranny as is Oligarchy the rue by the super-wealthy
 
I didn't know about Plato's thinking on the subject! Interesting.
Speaking about Plato, I also stumbled across this clip - and no, I don't do all my research on Youtube. :D
Provided some nice overviews and insights - utopia vs dystopia. People are too dynamic to be stuffed into one doctrine perhaps.

 
They were ahead in their thinking. Words like comedy and tragedy all came from Greek. it is 10:45 in our part of the world. I am going to sleep.
 
Sitting here with my coffee, I stumbled across this insightful video.
Rings true to me, but also cynical. Even democracies are not immune.
I think the ideas are based on the 2011 book The Dictator’s Handbook: Why Bad Behavior is Almost Always Good Politics.

 
The keyword is freedom. For a religious fanatic, a Theocracy is a freedom. For a society, democracy is at best a sensible compromise. For the conspiracy theorist, Anarchy seems to be the solution. Tyranny usually raises its head after Anarchy ruled for a while. Starts usually with martial law.
 
Good insights. Democracy seems to be the most humane to the most people, but it still has its obvious flaws, according the the video I posted.
It may need refining. Limited resources may be a factor, with everyone clamouring for financial help. How much wealth is currently wasted?
Maybe a better system would depend upon raising the education and wisdom of everyone. Which means the development takes time.

I wonder what an enlightened government 500 years from now would look like (if we survive as a species that long).
 
Concord said:
Good insights. Democracy seems to be the most humane to the most people, but it still has its obvious flaws, according the the video I posted.
It may need refining. Limited resources may be a factor, with everyone clamouring for financial help. How much wealth is currently wasted?
Maybe a better system would depend upon raising the education and wisdom of everyone. Which means the development takes time.

I wonder what an enlightened government 500 years from now would look like (if we survive as a species that long).
Click to expand...
My conclusion is that democracy in time regresses into anarchy. Or is in danger of it. Social media is nowadays the vehicle towards anarchy. Urban myths become facts academia are overwhelmed by the sheer force of numbers. Tyranny still uses the same tools, to give them bread and circuses as a means of control.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top