Well, sort of. At least permanent dictatorships. But when you think of the damage Obama and his predecessors have done with Executive Order, at least on a temporary basis until the next guy comes in and reverses previous EO's, the EO by itself is a tool of tyranny. At least in the wrong hands. And whether the current hands are the wrong hands can change every 4 years or so.
The alternative is the actual form of government defined in the US Constitution, where the legislative branch writes laws after significant debate and majority votes, the executive branch signs the law into law and executes the existing laws, and the judicial branch rules on whether or not individual laws are constitutional.
I know a lot of supporters of the current president want him to start writing more executive orders to provide some kind of relief from current conditions, but let's not forget that the only thing Obama has as an actual legacy is Obamacare, which probably won't survive the calendar year, and a bunch of EO's that can be washed away like a line in the sand when the tide comes in. Actual laws that can withstand legal nullification are the best outcome to prevent another disaster like the last 8 years.
Executive orders are not able to create law, but rather issue directives to the departments of the executive branch. The President is CEO of the executive branch.
Of course, he would have a lot less power, with far fewer departments (filled with bureaucRATs) exercising control over us.