A dictator, like Napoleon, may claim a monarchic title. That would be a species of self-proclaimed monarchy. That is usually not recongnized by anyone outside of that monarchy, except for some self-serving reason.
Communist leaders never claim a monarchic status. They never assume real owenrship of the nation's resource, for example. They typically say that they are popularly elected and set up sham elections to justify the continuation of their rule. They derive their power, they say, from the people, whereas a monarch ordinarily understands that he is divinely appointed in charge of the country. Power ina monarchy comes form God. Power in any form of democrachy, e.g. of a communist kind, comes demagogically from the people and in fact is raw military power of coercion.
A monarchy is a form of government in which the head of state reigns by some kind of perceived divine sanction. It is usually hereditary and there is usually only one monarch, though there are significant exceptions to these. The monarch often bears the title king or queen. However, emperors/empresses, grand dukes/grand duchesses, and other ranks, are or have been used to designate monarchs. As explained below, the word monarch means 'single ruler', but cultural and historical considerations would appear to exclude presidents and other heads of state. Historically, the notion of monarchy may emerge under different circumstances.
A dictatorship is defined as an autocratic form of government in which the government is ruled by an individual, the dictator. It has three possible meanings: A Roman dictator was the incumbent of a political office of the Roman Republic. Roman dictators were allocated absolute power during times of emergency. Their power was originally neither arbitrary nor unaccountable, being subject to law and requiring retrospective justification. There were no such dictatorships after the beginning of the 2nd century BC, and later dictators such as Sulla and the Roman Emperors exercised power much more personally and arbitrarily. A government controlled by one person, or a small group of people. In this form of government the power rests entirely on the person or group of people, and can be obtained by force or by inheritance. The dictator(s) may also take away much of its peoples' freedom. In contemporary usage, dictatorship refers to an autocratic form of absolute rule by leadership unrestricted by law, constitutions, or other social and political factors within the state.
May I ask you something? I patiently respond to your posts and substantiate my response with facts and logic. Would you please do the same?
No dictatorships are when someone has absolute power. just look at the dictionary.
dictatorship:
absolute, imperious, or overbearing power or control.
monarchy:
supreme power or sovereignty held by a single person.
Let’s dig a little deeper into the origin of the word monarch:
“rule by one person,” late 14c., from O.Fr. monarchie , from L.L. monarchia , from Gk. monarkhia “absolute rule,” lit. “ruling of one,” from monos “alone” (see mono-) + arkhein “to rule” (see archon). Meaning “a state ruled by monarchical government” is from early 15c.
You see how words like “absolute” keep appearing in both? Do you understand why? Because all a monarchy is is a form of dictatorship, a brand, a flavor.
Oh look you went to the divine power dodge, just like all the dictators of history. A monarch’s power doesn’t come from God, it comes from the vagina he sprang from. That’s why I keep calling it venereal transfer of power, it’s all about who screwed who, just like syphilis.
I’ve used plenty of facts and logic in my posts, you just don’t like them so you pretend they don’t exist. The facts are that monarchies are dictatorships, and dictatorships aren’t freedom. Sorry the facts disagree with your illusion, but it’s not my problem. Time for you to catch up to thousands of years of recorded human history that tell us that every single non-symbolic monarchy was a dictatorship that exercised abusive rule of the people.