In conditions of total war, this is more dangerous than dictatorship, and certainly worse than democracy.
Many people dream of dictatorship.
This is not surprising, because the chaos is terrible, institutions don’t work, the right hand doesn’t know what the left is doing, there is patriotic propaganda on boards and on TV, the TCC is rampant in the streets, the deputy changes commanders in chief like gloves, half of Kyiv sits on armor in restaurants, and drone manufacturers are being sent to the front lines... Some are fighting, others are resting, some are stealing, others are collecting scraps from the world for the most necessary things in war. There is no Pinochet on all of you...
Maybe we really need a dictator who will restore order, restore justice and force everyone to work for victory?
Of course, a dictatorial regime can quickly restore order, jail corrupt officials and saboteurs, and send millions of people to dig trenches and produce drones. Under a dictatorship, no one will dare to take bribes to excuse themselves from mobilization, and no one will be able to excuse themselves.
Of course, the army will quickly compensate for the losses, there will be more drones, and Ukrainian shells and missiles will begin to be produced. Dictatorial regimes know how to mobilize all resources to wage war. You can even make an atomic bomb - after all, the DPRK was able to...
What dictatorial regimes cannot do is avoid making fatal mistakes.
Where everything is decided by one person (or “5-6 effective managers”), there is no room for other thoughts. And then Mussolini makes a fatal decision for Italy to join Hitler. Hitler makes the fateful decision to attack the USSR. Paranoid Stalin slaughters a quarter of the country and half an army on the eve of world war. Putin makes a decision, fatal for Russia, to attack Ukraine in 2022.
On the contrary, the ruling circles of democratic countries such as the UK and the USA made maximum use of democratic institutions, made decisions collectively, taking into account many opinions, and in every possible way delegated powers to constitutional authorities, and not to “5-6 managers”.
Throughout the war in Britain there was a War Cabinet consisting of representatives of all political forces, Parliament worked continuously, heard the Prime Minister and made the most important decisions for the country, which were prepared - collectively - by the best officers, economists and industrialists.
Their deputy was a fighting unit, the chairman of parliament was a national figure, the minister was a minister and was responsible for everything in his ministry, and in the country as a whole, the commander and commander in chief determined the tactics and strategy of the war, listened to subordinates and were responsible for the decisions made.
In the end, democracy won. Democracy was able to mobilize motivated people (not by force, but by law), produce more weapons and ammunition, plan and carry out unprecedented amphibious operations, feed half the world, and even create an atomic bomb.
Until our parliament starts working, until ministries and departments are headed by overseers, not ministers, until the commander-in-chief plans military operations under the threat of incriminating evidence, we will dangle between democracy and dictatorship under the control of “5-6 effective managers.” and with the total irresponsibility of the nameless “pounds”, whose main task is to cover up the big bully and insatiable thirst for power.
Therefore, the question is not in the form of government, but in methods, and a dictatorship will not help us in any way if it is a collective “Pinochet” of 5-6 “effective” managers. A dictatorship is strong because it relies not on 5-6 people, but on thousands of diligent functionaries.
Today, methods of manual control through observers have replaced democratic institutions, but have not created a full-fledged dictatorial vertical. This is why the public administration system works so poorly. In conditions of total war, this is more dangerous than dictatorship, and certainly worse than democracy.
