Tyranny: The right way to development

There is a high degree of socialization that happens in democratic states. People grow up being told that democracy is the best form of government and most immediate evidence tend to confirm this. Therefore, this average person has an uncritical view of democracy.

Bungu (L) and Kamuzu

Bungu (L) and Kamuzu

The aim here is not to criticize democracy, but to show this average person the best form of government to development.  After all, who does not want to live in a developed nation?

The problem is a certain stigma is attached to the title “dictator”. People instantly believe that the person is cruel, brutal and selfish. However, this is certainly not the case. There are good dictators, in the same way there are good and bad presidents in the democratic states. If the person who loved their country and even more importantly knew what was best for their country were to come into power, they would  be able to improve the country tremendously.

I would like all of you to know that, a dictatorship has greater control over people and resources allowing for more state driven economic growth, making it in a better position to develop than a democratic state.

The other thing you have to know is dictatorships are superior to democracies in that they can make decisions and implement policies quicker. They can easily modify institutional and legal frameworks towards development goals, as there is no need for a political consensus behind their actions. This also insulates government from special interests that must be reconciled with in democracies. This allows dictatorships to create a pro-investment legal, economic and institutional framework such as low taxes, exchange rate manipulations and import tariffs without facing political opposition.

Look at how long it takes Malawi as a democratic state to implements its policies. Implementation of polices has been a great challenge to Malawi and development as a whole. Cause how would you expect it to develop without the policies?

This is to say due to the large number of people involved in decision making; federal regulation, law and infrastructure takes forever to implement, unless in a dictatorship where the leader requests for something and it immediately gets done. You will see that our government moves slowlywith all decisions having to move down the chain of command, but this is not the case with dictatorships.

Everything happens very quickly in a dictatorship and the slow process of government is not a concern. This allows for a very efficient government in a time of crisis and also allows for less corruption among the government officials. A dictator is very strict with rules and does not allow those working under him to break the laws.

My fellow Malawians, take a closer look at our developments in the different governments. You will find that almost all the developments took place when our leaders turned to be dictatorial. Let tyranny rule the country and development take root. Look at Dr. H.K Banda’s developments. Though I blame all these woes on him (Kamuzu Banda). Look at what Bingu wa Mutharika did when he turned to be dictatorial. All credits goes to this exceptional president Malawi has ever had. Dictatorship is the right way to development.

Due to the lack of rotation in office, a dictatorship allows for a more stable government with the more ability to plan for the long term, which is crucial for attracting foreign investment. It does not even need a research to see that the countries that have developed rapidly have tended to be those that have managed to attract foreign direct investment.

From our country’s context, you can agree with me that each election changes the economic environment and most of it being in a negative way. In our country, a change in each of the governments lead to a switch in policies, partisan appointments to governmentbodies and a short term focus always set on the nextelection. This switch in policies due to new governments in power slows development, but this does not happen in dictatorships where there is lack of rotation in office and hence allowing a more stable government with more ability to plan for the long term.

Democracy is expensive, it is for the rich. The resources needed to run a democratic society and run elections are a large expense for the state and society as a whole.

As we all know, before the donors cut off aid, 40 % of our budget came from them. Unwise enough; our leaders are still asking these donors to resume the aid, of which aid has proven wrong when it comes to developing a developing nation like Malawi. No country has ever developed through aid. If we continue with this democracy, just know that these so called ‘’well-wishers’’ will continue plundering our economy. Switch to dictatorship and see how we can control our resources and use them for the better as the Asian tigers did.

Malawi needs a strong dictatorship to develop. Meaning that the dictator himself is capable, proficient, loyal, intelligent, benevolent and has that soul and vehemence as a leader. With this then the Malawian weak democracy is no match for it. In this case, even though political freedoms will be completely oppressed, the economics and personal lifer remains relatively unrestricted, thus allowing national-wide economic growth.

In this context I demonstrate that poor but large and stable dictatorships exhibit a higher equilibrium growth rate than the comparable democracies. Think about it.

If not for the dictatorial type of government, then get on your knees and start praying for a miracle. I cry for my beloved Malawi. I rest my case.

Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :

Please share this Article if you like Email This Post Email This Post

More From Nyasatimes

More From the World

21 thoughts on “Tyranny: The right way to development”

  1. Winston Msowoya says:

    From what I know is that democracy is a government for the people,by the people and of the people while autocracy is a government for one,by one and of one no further meaning beyond that.You can give credit to your messiah for being a despot,but to some of us we agree to disagree.I strongly disagree that Banda became a brutal despot because he was induced by his lackeys or henchmen.To say the fact,when this fraudster came into Malawi,he had absolutely nothing significant to offer Malawians politically and economically and therefore the people were caught unprepared they did not know the road to take.You might remember that when he was released from Gwelo prison,he forthwith appealed to his so called people not to make troubles to his friends whites and eventually after independence he shawed his true colours by attaching himself to colonial expatriates for thirty solid years and this is one of the issues that culminated into Sept.1964 famous cabinet crisis.There is no reason at all to blame other people for his viciousness,he had no plans for economic development of the nation besides his own selfish trend.He was the richest man in Malawi and Africa therefore for him his personal life was paramount what Malawian ate,was not his concern.The first economic aid to Malawi at self- government,went into building Sanjika while we had only one big hospital in Blantyre,Queen’s Hospital attending to over 3 million people as that was not enough,you saw another one in Lilongwe as the Sanjika was not enough.especially for him who did not have big family members apart from his concubine’s.So Iam flabagasted to read some Malawians supported Banda for being a brutal dictator to his fellow citizens.Fellow countrymen,no matter what,dictatorship will never supported or respected.Millions in the world die each year in the fight against despotic rule.So for instance,Peter Wa Muthalika is throwing our country into a sinkhole,should the people just look at him with smile as you did to your so-called messiah?There is no respect to a dictator be it Chewa,Tumbuka,Yao,Lomwe,Sena,Ngoni,Lambya,Tonga and others.Once again,dictatorship is uncivilized and ungodly therefore for those who think that Banda was right to be a despot,they have to follow him to hell where he is paying for his crime against humanity.Personally,I will never ever lured into praising Banda my father sent me to school to learn what is good and what is bad,so I massively learnt that Banda was a Frankenstein’s monster .

  2. Malawi says:

    As your Father or GrandPa how they lived under kamuzu. To glorify him in this manner shows lack of insight of what the man was capable of doing.

    Now Bingu, He was stubborn and thought he was doing a country a favour forgetting that he was elected and given the mandate by the people of Malawi. Bingu merely implemented UDF plans in his first tenure. UDF were holding to the end of the bargain to keep itself in power for longer by taking time to implement these plans. They got sidetracked by 3rd term which led to their downfall.

    What Malawi needs, It does not need Heroes but strong institutions which can implement and in-force the rule of law. Malawi needs visionery leaders with selfless character for the benefit of the country and its people.

    I suggest that you widen your research on the subject in question.

  3. NZOZO KUNUNKHA says:

    George you have a functional upstairs bro really this very true unfortunately the COS, the media and the opposition poorly translates this for no gain but vanity.

  4. levelheaded says:

    This is the best of the best articles I have ever read on nyasatimes.

    I totally agree with you true son of the soil.
    Even a family where the father does not apply dictatorial tendencies, it doesn’t work.
    Look now, public reforms as good as they are, we are failing to implement them because of the longest approval chain.
    Government proposed to increase public school fees,as good as it was it was later rejected by some MPs. A list goes on .

  5. F Chilalika says:

    Kamuzu had a purpose and direction to steer the country to greater heights, but the hangers-on, “self proclaimed” relatives, bootlickers etc fed him with diabolical stories for their personal gain.

  6. Democracy is bad for the Malawian electorate because of literacy levels. Leaders are voted into power not because of policies but by giving merely hand outs. That is why bad leaders can be elected to power. How does a poor granny in the village know about economic policies and good governance . It is only 11% of the population who can understand that. Remember majority rules in democracy. Democracy is foreign culture of divide and rule. Malawi is so divided in democracy than Kamuzu’s era. Remember what Gadhafi said when he visited Malawi “Democracy has been imposed to you because you need aid” Which is true. Most of us went to demonstrate in Kamuzu highway not knowing what we were demonstrating for. Labya was a great country under Gadhafi. They had the best social services than South Africa. Are Libyans happy today?? Iraqis were better off under Sadam, are they happy today?

  7. MFUMU says:

    Dictatorship is the best. We are very far away from democracy, Chihana was wrong and power hungry together with the Muluzi to cheat us and bring democracy. But Kamuzu well corrected grammer after he had stayed abroad long period of time and new what democracy mean clearly stated that it is war. We have really seen that it is war. E.g cash gate, drug theft in hospital, corruption, poor economy, high inflation rate, Killing, and many more. If Kamuzu had inception democracy in Malawi in 1964 this country could be no more other than being divided apart to Mozambique, Tanzania and Zambia thanks Kamuzu may your soul rest in peace. You usaved diligently and now we are perished by this demon of mathanyula.

  8. EPIGLOTIS says:

    Yes indeed, democracy is for the rich, because they have little to complain about. For a poor country like Malawi to develop, we do not need Democracy. Let me open your thinking Malawians “Democracy is colonisation of the world by Satanists. They force you to do things the way they thing not the way you think. They limit you in all you do. They do not want you to be free. They play with your brain (confusing you). That is why when we look back at Kamuzu’s development it stands the test of time. Bingu and his developments leaves us to want more. Democracy…Rubbish…Satanic

  9. Green Kunyenga says:

    We need strong ,dynamic and selfless leadership not dictator ship. Tell me which country under dictatorship has ever developed. We need leaders who has the welfare of their people at heart not dictatorship. Not these nepotistic and greedy leaders who are there to steal and loot.

  10. kay says:

    I am interested with the woird revolutionalist. This word goes radical way of doing things. Read world history development revolution takes place with strong minbdedness synonmous with DICTORSHIP

  11. Nyani wa ku Mwananyani says:

    Just more views to add to comments by @ No 3 (KKilembe) and @ No 5 (The Ear and Eyes):

    I think the writer is confused between DICTATORS and STRONG LEADERS.

    Bingu was not a dictator by any definition in politics. Like everybody else, politicians have “personalities”, and they are not necessarily a constant. Bingu might have acted in stubborn or “know it all” ways, sometimes, but that does NOT make him a dictator. Reminder: he was elected twice, democratically too.
    Yea, a dictator is very strict … (like the Catholic Church) – my words in brackets. There is no free thought in dictatorships, and this has a big impact on people and the country. Many men and women who grew up during Kamuzu, and even went to Kachenjedes in Malawi, never developed their thinking capacities to maximum potential. Asa.
    Indeed, as someone has written already: I, too, would rather be poor under a democracy, than have lots of money living in a dictatorship.
    Due to “lack of rotation” of dictators, they can plan better, you say. Plan for who? Where is the input of the citizens?
    Corruption, as we know it, is a human trait. based on greed, etc. Corruption was rampant during Kamuzu; himself and others like the Tembos and Kadzamiras, were corrupt “heavy”, Mr. Luwayo. If you add up all the money, and real estate, corrupted during Kamuzu’s dictatorship, the net worth would easily add up to our GNP x ten! Like someone said, you probably did not live under that regime; but I still would hope you would have had access to some of critical literature. Elsewhere, if not at the Catholic U.

    If I had a wish, it would be: your article is only “tongue in cheek”. Otherwise, I am disappointed with the analytical skills they teach you there. I am NOT criticizing the Catholic U. here; only you.
    Read about the wider world – history and current affairs; modern society and development of the human race. And in the end, I doubt if you will be glorifying dictatorship, like this.
    Ukayenda umaona agalu amichombo (travel to democracies, and dictatorships like North Korea, observe carefully, then, and only then tell us your conclusions.)

  12. Kingsley Jika says:

    Young man, only a couple days ago, Laz Chakwera was extending his apologies for the reign of terror that characterised this nation for over quarter a century & here you are inviting dictatorship? You’re eloquent & a promising thinker but flagging in dictatorship is, I think, taking it too far. Perhaps your choice of ‘dictatorship’ is for want of better word. I think you wanted to mean ‘firm’, ‘determined’ to achieve a target.

  13. funzo says:

    This is unbelievable! Countries develop when the people have incentives and these are not encouraged by dictators.

  14. titreo says:

    fellow malawians we are moving backwards with a so called democracy, Malawi needs a leader who is malawian and not a lhomwe, chewa, tumbuka, yawo, nyakyusa, nkhonde, lambia etc. we need a leader who would rule with iron fist without tribal favours and silly systems of weakening the strong and spoon feedind the weak ( like the ideas of QUATER SYSTEM in Education). Malawi needs a leader who would take nsanje to chitipa as one distrct and work with his people in a way that the common man starts to believe in themselves. am talking of one president that would rule for even 3 decades aslong as he/she has the interest and the welfare of people at heart. i do agree with this article 100%. Presidents in democratic worlds do not put 100% of their effort to developing the country but to developing their personal agendas and greed. why? cause they have too little time to make a signitifcant change to the whole nation. the only achievable goal one would do is to make life better for his/her own family and extended relatives and a few friends. this is like husbands being told to marry a woman for 5 years and then divorce follows am sure two things would deffinately happen 1. no kids will be born in that familly, 2, if kids are there, no serious investments will be done by the father for the kids. But any way remember Jesus christ is coming soon and we all are on transit and we cant think of a better investment to make malawi a better place to live. i rest my case

  15. The Analyst says:

    O………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….O
    Democracy is chaos . . . A tool used by the powerful nations to divide and rule the already weak nations.
    . . . Just like owning a car, democracy is a luxury to be enjoyed by the rich. In Malawi, for instance; the first year of an election is spent celebrating one’s victory. The second, laying down developmental plans, third, implementing 10% of the plan, fourth and fifth campaigning and then elections again. Ultimately, only short-term projects are implemented, if at all.
    . . . Thus, at the earliest stage of a country’s development, democracy is not ideal. People need to be whipped into line.
    …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
    . . . But what if the dictator has a mind of a rat or female bird?; that knows no development but only of its own stomach or its children’s?
    . . . And who doesn’t need freedom but a brainless caged bird? Do you even know what freedom does? Ask a prisoner yet to be released from cell; one second upon hearing he/she is to be released; this very air he/she breathes becomes fresher. Slaves can even kill themselves for want of freedom. Freedom is worth having my dear, and anything worth having is worth having more. Its just how we use it that matters.
    . . . I have no reason to believe that freedom makes people mad. People are already mad. And the madness only manifests itself more with freedom than otherwise.
    …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
    Therefore, people need to avoid extremes. Democracy is as dangerous as dictatorship in their extremes. Thus, dictatorial tendencies in a democratic system, is the ideal environment for meaningful development.
    O…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………O

  16. Cashgate1 says:

    I somehow agree. Better dictators with visionary leadership than democracy with blurred type of leaders. Infact Malawi is retrogressing in terms of development if you compare the 30 years rule of Kamuzu. I think, Azungu realized that if Africa will have dictators it will grow fast and somehow be a threat to their egos. That’s why they pushed in democracy to slow down that growth (just a theory).

  17. The Ear and Eyes says:

    I don’t blame you because:
    1. You are a graduate of the Catholic university, therefore you are writing about Kamuzu Banda from ‘ndimamva’ or ‘ndinamva’ point of view, you were born then
    2. Probably your family, tribe, district or region was not a target or did not experience the wrath of the tyrant
    3. Have not made a research why natives of Dowa, Kasungu and Mchinji once touted as tobacco heavens are still poor today after all those years of glorious harvests and sales of the green gold.
    4. Do not economic systems and strategies practiced by Kamuzu Banda government then that ripped off settlers and farmers in rice settlement schemes and left them in the cooler – today they have died one by one without even owning a shack.
    5. Do not know that by 1994 Kamuzu Banda was owning almost 65% of Malawi’s wealth through the company he stole from Malawians – Press Cooperation in broad day light. One of the first Cash gaters.
    5. If Malawi is what it is today; a country of envy and disease I might not be wrong to say that the first Malawian who created this was the tyrant Kamuzu Banda.
    6. Malawi do not need DICTATORS or REFORMATIVE leaders because there is nothing to reform but all we need are REVOLUTIONISTS.
    7. You are a young person, do not crave for DICTATORSHIP because you only hear about it and have not lived through it.

  18. kkilembe says:

    Bad article

  19. kkilembe says:

    This is hog wash. You can develop in a dictatorship. You want to say America and most of Europe developed because of dictatorship? In fact I think Kamuzu retarded this country. We could have don much better than professing about houses that dont leak and making women and children dancing toys to gratify his ego. Everytime I land at Chileka look at those shacks called houses. Only at Chileka do I see such squalid structures. Compare that to Jburg or Dareslaam.
    No to dictatorship, I would rather have no food than facing imminence of being killed because of no card or for exercising my democratic rights to demonstrate. These people we call leaders are not special in any way. They were “bought” from the same hospitals that we all bought our kids.
    Akagwere.

  20. Sly says:

    Kagame is an excellent example of strong leadership and he has achieved great things for the Rwandan economy, but there is nothing in his reforms that precludes a democratic nation from replicating them. He has strengthened weak national institutions by implementing discipline and fighting corruption. He has empowered the private sector by introducing policies that are friendly to foreign investors and make it easy to do business. These are not revolutionary ideas and they do not require a life presidency or firing squads to implement them. Kamuzu had 30 years and that did not change our position as one of the world’s poorest nations.

  21. Maliseni says:

    RWANDA HAS DEVELOPED SO FAST DUE TO DICTATORSHIP. HOWEVER WHERE THE DICTATOR ENRICH HIMSELF IT CREATES CHALLENGES E.G. LAT BINGU WAS GOOD IN THE FIRST TERM, BUT IN THE SECOND TERM HE WANTED TO BE RICH.

Comments are closed.