A 'Benevolent Dictator'
by
Gail Jarvis
by
Gail Jarvis
In
a recent discussion of the problems our country is facing, someone
suggested that we need a "benevolent dictator" like Abraham
Lincoln. A comment like this is usually made by a person who, like
many Americans, has neither the time nor the inclination to look
beyond the establishment’s portrayals of history. And court historians,
with the help of a complicit media, have prevented the true Lincoln
from being unmasked for a generation or more. They admit that Lincoln
was a dictator, but try to sanitize his actions as being those of
a "benevolent dictator," dismissing his illegal and cruel
acts as simply minor abuses of power.
Of
course, with politicians, abuses of power are a common occurrence.
Not a day goes by that we do not read about an elected official’s
involvement in some kind of scandal. The more flawed the individual,
the more serious the breach of ethics. But these unethical lapses
do not usually threaten lives nor cause death. And that is the difference
between a corrupt public official and a tyrant. The actions of dictators
often cause the loss of lives, yet dictators believe that their
actions are defensible because the end justifies the means, however
harsh they may be.
Dictators
do not feel bound by rules of law; their actions must not be questioned,
they do not negotiate, and they silence or eliminate those who oppose
their policies. Unfortunately, no form of government has been designed
that can prevent the emergence of a tyrant. Dictators simply ignore
or circumvent established laws by using cunning verbal platitudes.
And too often, those with influence do not speak out against them
until it is too late.
But,
contrary to what court historians claim, there is no such thing
as a benevolent dictator. A brief look at some of history’s more
famous tyrants will show that they all were cast from the same mold
and they were not benevolent.
Although
he was Emperor of Rome for only four years, that was enough time
for Caligula to create a legacy of barbaric cruelty. Caligula
had been raised by his uncle, the Emperor Tiberius, who decreed
that Caligula and his nephew, Tiberius Gemellus should succeed him
as joint emperors. But Caligula had his nephew murdered in order
to become sole emperor. Caligula soon depleted the treasury and
had to impose heavy taxation, including a tax on prostitutes, in
order to maintain his lavish, debauched lifestyle. Like most dictators,
he aggressively silenced and eliminated any opposition primarily
with "treason trials" for those he accused of "disloyalty."
Conviction of treason was a foregone conclusion and those convicted
were executed and their property confiscated. (So many so-called
"criminals" were executed that there weren’t enough criminals
to fight lions in the arena. On one occasion, Caligula became so
peeved by the inadequate number of criminals that he literally ordered
spectators to be dragged from their seats and placed in the arena
to face the lions.)
Many
believe that Caligula was insane and as evidence they cite his attempt
to make his horse a senator. But this may have been the Emperor’s
way of expressing what he thought of the Roman senate. Caligula
created so many enemies that a member of his own guard finally assassinated
him.
It
shouldn’t surprise anyone that someone who becomes the absolute
ruler of a nation at age three would eventually develop despotic
tendencies. So it was with Ivan the Terrible who assumed
the throne when he was three years old and became Russia’s first
tsar at age sixteen. There were positive aspects of Ivan’s reign
but they are overshadowed by his tyrannical actions. He enacted
laws restricting the freedoms of peasants that eventually reduced
them to virtual serfdom. Also, Ivan created the infamous Oprichnina;
a personal security force whose purpose was to suppress those, primarily
members of the nobility, who offered opposition to his actions.
The Oprichnina murdered both nobles and peasants as Ivan viewed
his rule as absolute and would not tolerate dissenters. Ivan murdered
his own son during an argument. And history reports that a secret
dose of poison caused Ivan’s death.
America’s
founders thought they had fashioned a republic resistant to a dictatorship.
But President Abraham Lincoln brushed aside the Constitution
and the Bill of Rights that the Founders had so carefully constructed.
"Saving the Union" was Lincoln’s excuse for refusing to
meet with representatives from Southern states in order to attempt
a negotiated compromise to the impending war. In true despotic fashion,
Lincoln decided that there was only one way, his way, to save the
Union. (Can you imagine George Washington, Thomas Jefferson or any
of our other presidents refusing to attempt a negotiated compromise
to a war; especially an internal war that would eventually cost
the lives of over 600,000 young men?) Apparently, "saving the
Union" was also Abraham Lincoln’s justification for waging
war against defenseless civilians in Georgia, South Carolina and
other parts of the South. In doing so he established a bloody precedent.
Lincoln also shut down newspapers, arresting and imprisoning newspaper
editors for being "disloyal."
An
infamous example of Lincoln’s oppressive and illegal acts against
civilians occurred in October 1862, in Palmyra, Missouri. The Union
relied on secret informers to disclose the locations of Confederate
sympathizers so they could be arrested. When their informer in Palmyra
suddenly disappeared, General John McNeil ordered that a public
decree be issued warning that if the informer was not returned within
ten days, military forces would execute ten Palmyra civilians. The
townspeople didn’t take the threat seriously because they couldn’t
believe the federal government would ignore due process and certainly
would not slaughter innocent civilians. However, when the informer
was not located within the allotted time, ten civilians were selected
by lottery and executed. (One was a nineteen-year-old man whose
wedding had been scheduled for the day following his execution.)
Newspapers in the South, the North and even Europe furiously condemned
this murder of innocent civilians, labeling General McNeil the "Butcher
of Palmyra." But President Lincoln rewarded McNeil by promoting
him to Brigadier General of the United States Volunteers.
Lincoln
conducted his presidency using the same techniques he had used as
a country lawyer. He would support one position in one case, and
the opposite position in another. And, although a non-believer,
he laced his compassionate speeches to jurors with biblical quotations.
His passionate, high-flown and manipulative rhetoric worked well
with jurors and seems to be the only basis for today’s "Lincoln
mythology." But Lincoln’s tyrannical behavior earned him the
hatred of thousands of Americans and, as we know, one of those enraged
Americans assassinated him.
The
designation of history’s most notorious dictator might come down
to a contest between Joseph Stalin, Benito Mussolini and
Adolph Hitler. Although the enormity of Hitler’s atrocities
still amazes us, his method of operation was no different from other
dictators. Like Lincoln, Hitler also utilized the military
to suppress any opposition to his policies. He shut down newspapers;
had books burned, spied on and harassed ordinary citizens, and created
concentration camps. Adolph Hitler also borrowed a page from Lincoln’s
play book and converted the "saving the Union" ploy to
lebensraum living space as justification for
war. Whereas Lincoln had made Southern secessionists his scapegoat,
Hitler blamed Germany’s problems on the Jews. So successful was
Hitler’s propaganda machine that he was able to eliminate millions
of European Jews. But Hitler’s grand scheme was too grandiose and
unrealistic to succeed and when it eventually collapsed, the demoralized
dictator took his own life.
Smaller
nations have also been plundered by dictators as evidenced by Francois
(Papa Doc) Duvalier of Haiti. One of Papa Doc’s first acts was
the creation of a secret police force, the Tontons Macoute, that
was used to silence and eliminate his opponents. In addition to
the Tontons Macoute, Duvalier also had a Palace Guard and his own
personal army. Like Lincoln, Papa Doc, claiming "seditious
acts," arrested and jailed the country’s leading newspaper
editors and radio station owners. Duvalier had his opponents executed
and even went so far as to execute his own allies if he felt they
were becoming too ambitious. Papa Doc was able to terrify the uneducated
mass of Haitians into subservience by claiming to be a voodoo spirit
of the dead. For years Duvalier duped Washington into giving him
larger and larger sums of foreign aid, usually playing the race
card by accusing America of leaving his "poor Negro Republic
out in the cold." Although during his lifetime Papa Doc took
in enormous amounts of foreign aid, he died leaving Haiti in financial
ruin; a land of miserable slums filled with a homeless and starving
populace.
These
tyrants I’ve mentioned were all cut from the same cloth, all were
seriously flawed individuals, and all are distinguished by their
arrogance, an insistence on the absolute rightness of their opinions
and a refusal to negotiate differences. History will remember them
for their inhumane treatment of others, especially those who opposed
their actions. The fickleness of destiny thrust each into a position
of power for which they were unsuited, either by temperament or
ability. Consequently, the lives of those they ruled were made worse
by their appalling abuses of power.
But
there are those who say that we mustn’t forget that Mussolini made
the trains run on time; that Hitler planned and constructed the
Autobahn, or that Lincoln "freed" the slaves. These rationalizations
are supposed to mitigate the barbaric actions of these dictators.
However, intelligent people are not fooled. Also these justifications
are not true. Mussolini did not make the trains run on time. The
corrections to Italy’s railway system began long before Mussolini
came to power and even during his reign they were still sub-par.
The construction of the German Autobahn began years before Hitler
came to power. And, not a single slave was freed during Lincoln’s
presidency as a result of any initiative of his some slaves were
voluntarily manumitted by their masters but not as a result of any
government directive. Slaves were finally freed as a result of the
13th Amendment. When it was ratified, Lincoln had been
dead for almost a year.
America’s
current court historians are doing a great disservice to our country
by trying to elevate a malicious dictator like Abraham Lincoln into
sainthood. And the continued justification of the dictatorial acts
of this president can only encourage the acceptance of dictatorial
actions of current and future leaders.
May
14, 2005
Gail
Jarvis [send
him mail], a CPA living in
Beaufort, SC, is an advocate of the voluntary union of states established
by the founders.
Copyright
© 2005 LewRockwell.com
Gail
Jarvis Archives
|