What India needs is a Dictatorship?

No friends, a dictator is the ideal form of government for India. In this vast country of diverse people, coming to a definite idea is an arduous task. Only a dictator can speed things up. Most of you will may take Adolf Hitler as an example to prove me wrong.

Well friends, Nazi Germany made tremendous progress in a short period of time had the antisemitism element been absent, it would've won the war and we see Adolf as a hero. Also the population in general was happy.

A majority of people would not join politics. So, might as well leave the government in the hands of one capable man who ensures the moral and material progress of the people. Only a dictator can root out social evils. Only a dictator can bring about a surge of intense nationalism.

A leader who as they say can walk with the kings yet not lose the common touch is the ideal leader.

Hello friends,

My name is Bhupendra Rawat. Dictatorship should not be in India because in dictatorship only one person will rule on the country, I would like to remember about ancient Indian there were lot of kings and Nawab. They used to make new law to live in his kingdom.

They used to do whatever they want, they never ask suggestion from any one. They used to try to defeat to each other and pile up. The result was that British did rule over the India. But in democracy do not allow so, in democracy, king is elected by people, people rule over the country, people makes law and follow. They have freedom to speak.

Thank you.

Hello everyone.

I would agree with Ritika. But taking the fact of politics in India passing of a bill is done on the basis of vote banks but not for well being of all. We Indians must love all other Indians. The type of government doesn't really affect the country its the public which does. If we ask why is USA so much developed, its just because they love each and every citizen of theirs, but in India its all majority wins principle.

And we can take the example of reservation, Dr. Ambedkar gave the proposal of reservation only for a decade but as our politicians learnt that reservation is a bank of votes from the reserved people they won't respect the proposal of Dr. Ambedkar.

Dictatorship is basically some activist who leads a group of people fed up of corrupt government and go against it. Indian army is not as corrupt as politicians and hence if the army overthrows the Indian democracy we could have disciplined society. But we mustn't neglect the fact of restrictions imposed upon us. If we consider developed democracy, even if 1 of its citizen even may he/she be poor is protected if in danger.

So eventually I would say that well being of the nation begins at home if everyone who reads this even follows what's India's pledge will give certain contribution in India's well being. I hope one day we would be the BEST! I love India! And Must all do!

Very nice discussion going on thought I would include some of my ideas also, I think that a dictator although may not sound too good for 21 st century people because of the bad history of the dictators, but this is something very important.

A parliament can't take quick decisions, in parliament the opposition unstabilizes the whole environment sometimes on the other hand a dictator along with his council can take advice's and then finally give a decision.

Thanks.

We don't need dictatorship what we need is strict enforcement of law. The punishment on the crime should be so severe that others can't even think of committing that crime again.

Sisters and brothers of India, let me please make understand the importance of dictatorship and clear your conscience of influential impressions formed over decades of misleading facts provided by the subjugated intellectual authorities.

Considering the long history of India (some of it not recorded) India lost its importance and glory when it lost its brutality. The Indian civilization as we all know began and advanced well before any other known civilization. Hence as it is evident in the recent history that the more advancements and growth a country makes the less brutal it becomes and the more it comes under diplomatic foreign influences.

Therefore being established long before the Indian empire after completing its quota of (annexations, attack, division of kingdoms, establishment of dynasties, killings in the name of king) brutality, it became a stable militarily weakened and a moral and intellectual and peace loving empire. Taking advantage of this weakened brutality the foreign invaders ruled India for over 800 years. So after finally getting independence and recognition in 1947.

India should have re established its brutality and firmness to tackle the newly reformed world that is India needed a strong dictator to dictate terms instead of professing a new concept of democracy at that time.

Due to Indians lack of knowledge about the western idea of democracy India became a victim of unawareness and constituted a system of government divided on religious lines just to overcome its tendency to get exposed globally on how tough it was for India to sustain its diverse culture.

Hence I strongly believe that just one term of dictatorial or authoritarian government would have lifted India morally as well as economically as is the case of china. India would have been a more respected nation by the western world.

I completely agree with Bharat. We all are the part of world's largest democracy and proud of it because we know the position of dictatorship country. In these countries, there is so much restriction. In our country everyone has rights. In Saudi arabia if you were going to the shopping then you must carry with someone else. And democracy will give, the better living policies. We all are seen the worlds powerful country USA also stand due to democracy not for dictatorship.

To all those who feel that there should be dictatorship in INDIA, friends, if there would be dictatorship, you would not be even able to express this view of yours. We can debate here only because there is FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION.

And how can we forget the efforts of all the freedom fighters who fought for our freedom and not for the rule of one. If dictatorship would have been a better option, than there was no need of struggle for freedom because there was the dictatorship of the English people.

Another point is that everything takes its own time and charity begins at home. No development can take place until unless WE make collective efforts and don't just blame the government. There has been evident growth in India. So, in my opinion, we should be proud to be a citizen of the world's largest democracy.

Yet, there are some ill- effects of democracy as well and they can be removed by the laws and our own conscience. Spitting on roads can not be fined in this largely populated country. We have to think that it is our home and we only have to keep it clean.

Friends lets not forget that dictatorship is all related to skill of convincing people in one direction and no matter then what comes in its way, but looking at India a country who has shown how people can develop, in spite of the different culture traditions and its huge population, where people have different opinions.

In my opinion we set a real good example for world to see how democracy can be practiced without being affected by any barrier and for that I think India do not need dictatorship its happy being democratic and in future it will show why democracy is good for it.

Many of my friends will say that why we still not developed but my dear friends I will ask you to be patient because some things which have thousands opinions need time but don't forget the fruit of patience is always sweet.

If you look around the world today, there is no single country who was democratic before the country is developed.

All countries are developing one way another compared to its own country vertically. However, if you compared laterally, then democracy does harm the rate of the development as it takes time to reach a consensus.

Remember, whatever the policy or decisions made by government, there will be objections.

What ever policy or government made will harm some people, the questions is "will it benefit to majority or whole nation".