Consultant - Business Decision Making Automation, Dow Chemical Company

This conversation is closed.

How can we better get rid of leaders that harm its citizens in very profound ways?

We have repeatedly seen how one leader/ruler of a country can literally enslave its people or commit it to wars far beyond what is rational. We let situations erode to a point where only war and bombing is necessary in order to oust that person. With all the advanced thinking that we are suppose to be able to enlist, I can not understand why we can not come up with a better way of replacing these leaders.

Our advances in technology are only enabling bad leaders to do more destruction. For all you great thinkers out there, I trust that one day you can feel good about the great things to create and develop. We are all minimized and disgraced by people that abuse those very same things.

  • May 15 2013: A leader that enslaves, murders, or otherwise deprives citizens of basic human rights is a crime.

    Having individual nations decide when a leader should be replaced, particularly when they might have a vested interest in a particular individual or political party in power might be almost as dangerous.

    The proper course of action might be best determined by the United Nations. The United Nations is an international organization whose stated aims include promoting and facilitating cooperation in international law, international security, economic development, social progress, human rights, civil rights, civil liberties, political freedoms, democracy, and the achievement of lasting world peace.

    Regime changes are rarely peaceful or pretty. Often the leaders come to power by being the most ruthless, biggest religious zealot, or meanest thug. Some cultures have different levels of tolerance for various oppressions which permit these factors to be highly influential in determining a leader. Technology is available to both sides and just part of arsenal in modern wars.

    The only thing I can think of as an improvement to the current system is to somehow decrease the threshold for involvement of the UN in a country that is abusing the human rights of its people so that the effect of ruthless leaders can be minimized.
  • thumb
    May 15 2013: We generally don’t agree if a leader is helpful or harmful, so first step is make a good agreement as to why a leader is harmful. And when we do agree, we often disagree on how to get rid of them.

    Currently the best way is by improving education and communication, it's a slow process but does work. You said “Our advances in technology are only enabling bad leaders to do more destruction.” I disagree, and say “Our advances in technology are improving education and communication, and that is what they fear most”
  • thumb
    May 15 2013: Covert influences, up to and including assassination, have always proven cost effective and discreet.
    • Jun 12 2013: JFK was a bargan. Not so discreet though.
      • thumb
        Jun 13 2013: Yes, it is only discreet for the perpetrators. Also, I don't know if having LBJ for POTUS was such a bargain.
  • thumb
    May 15 2013: G'day Martin

    All our leaders sell us out to the rest of the world in Australia in one way or another, the kick backs in doing so is enormous as they are doted on big time by the countries they have sold us out too even after leaving office.

    Other than a bullet who really knows because it doesn't seem to matter who you vote in they all have the same agenda, themselves, bugger the country.......or is that bugger up the country??????