Profile picture
Sebastian Freitag @SebFreitag
, 19 tweets, 4 min read Read on Twitter
Autocracy is bad, mkay. It doesn't really matter if the autocrat wants a socialist or a capitalist or whateverlist economic system. It won't work. Why? Because autocracy inherently leads to corruption and incompetent-but-loyal people (looking at you, Mr. Albayrak) in charge.
Autocrats rarely look for "the best people". The nature of man dictates that their position is constantly threatened, so they look for people that are loyal and support them above all else. President Trump was absolutely on the point when he explained that he hired a certain
person, despite her dysfunctionality and incompetence, because she always said so many nice things about him. But, I here the voices in my head say, what if there was the perfect leader, a philantropist, wise, well educated, good instincts, incredibly lucky, charismatic?
Should we give him not more power than the well controlled and checked powers of a presidency? The answer is: No. Nobody should have that kind of power. It's bad. It erodes everything. The perfect leader does not transcend the entire population of people running the show.
The perfect leader does not transcend time. And so, even under the perfect leader, corruption will grow, close connection to the autocrat will be rewarded over personal initiative and integrity. Some of those concepts I just described, clearly apply only to very big organisations
and nationstates. Smaller organisations, companies, have found ways around many of the problems. They often have a kind of autocrat and are still not corrupt, why is this? This is because the power of those small tyrants is far away from absolute.
They have to consider their financiers, customers, competition, compliance with laws and regulations and so forth. And everyone in the organisation can play those external rules and factors against the tyrant. And so the "mighty CEO" is not neccessarily as harmful as a dictator.
I chose my words carefully here. In certain circumstances, when the autocratic ruled company is acting in weakly regulated environment and has a monopoly, then it is bound to fail. This is what Trump does not understand. When he cuts regulation and strengthens the market position
, using tariffs, of american companies, then he enforces autocratic tendencies within those companies. Momentarily it might help them, mainly financially. But on the medium to long run, he sets them up for failure.
So, can you be a turkish patriot and like Mr. Erdogan at the same time? No, that is impossible. He is an autocrat ruining the country. Even if he is the perfect leader, he is still an autocrat. Can you be an american patriot and like Donald Trump at the same time? Of course not.
Same for Venezuela, which is not really a prime example how socialism failed. The level of socialism in Denmark is probably higher than the level of socialism in Venezuela. It is a prime example how autocrats (first Chavez, then Maduro) failed. But there is a connection between
between autocracy and an economic system. If your economic system requires to take away economic freedom from a large group of people to put it into the hand of the state, in the hands of a comparably low number of bureaucrats, then the same mechanisms will spring to live.
The 1% controlling 50% of the money. Yeah, sounds horrible. But how about 300 Bureaucrats in a "Ministry of Fair Distribution" controlling 50% of the money. That is 0.000375% in a country with 80 Million people. Giving the money of the 1% "to the people"? Well if they then mostly
consume it, you are also worse off than before because the number of people that still have influence just got reduced by a fair margin. It's a trap. So, just give everyone a maximum amount of freedom for a successful country? No, that would be too easy. As outlined earlier,
sometimes you have to regulate in order to provide a free and encouraging environment. Life is rigged towards the player who already has an advantage. This follows from the way exponential growth works. So many games and sports have rules to slightly slow the guy in the lead,
to keep the show interesting until the end. So, if your society does not have those rules, then again, you promote autocratic tendencies. The biggest company will take over the second biggest. The richest guy will set up a fund and the second richest will put his money into that.
Not to talk about the vast number of people that will never have the chance to catch up. Previously I was critical about certain concepts in idealist-socialist programs. Unregulated capitalism is just as bad. Same reasons in the end, just on different levels.
Whew, quite a wall. But this came to my mind just now and I wanted to write it down. So why not Twitter. :)
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to Sebastian Freitag
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member and get exclusive features!

Premium member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year)

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!