[Cboldt]

We've been conditioned to recoil and reject "dictatorship", "monarchy" and other forms of totalitarians, on the premise that "self-government" is better.

But "self-government" is a sham, equated for the most part with conducting a vote. It's a sham because there is no way to rein-in the growth of unaccountable government. Further, at this point, a majority of the public sees the government as its sugar daddy, so elections are driven by nonsense, not by sound principle.

And totalitarianism, be it via a dictator or a monarch, is not per se "bad." Some dictators have done better for the populace they govern, than our elected officials do. By "better," I mean that the dictators give the public more freedom than our elected aristocracy and governing class allow.

[Right-wing Librarian]

I’d have to agree with what you have written. My Dad used to say his preference for government was a “benign totalitarian” one. : )

[Zionist Conspirator]

And totalitarianism, be it via a dictator or a monarch, is not per se "bad." Some dictators have done better for the populace they govern, than our elected officials do. By "better," I mean that the dictators give the public more freedom than our elected aristocracy and governing class allow.

You're confusing totalitarianism with authoritarianism (at least I hope you are). The latter can be benevolent. The former is always a nightmare.