The article explores the nature of dictatorship, defining a dictator as someone who exhibits egotistical tendencies, absolute power, and a belief in their own truth, governing with impunity through censorship and often fraudulent electoral processes. The author emphasizes that a nation without free elections is essentially voiceless and powerless, quoting Octavio Paz to highlight the severe restrictions on freedom that dictators impose.

Furthermore, the piece highlights historical examples of dictators from Ancient Greece, the Roman Empire, and enlightened despots of the 17th and 18th centuries, as well as those from the 20th and 21st centuries. It brings attention to the subjective nature of evaluating dictators, suggesting that not all dictators are judged by the same standards due to the ideological lens through which their actions are viewed. The implications of this exploration suggest that the categorization of dictators into “good” or “bad” often reflects the biases and ideologies of the observers rather than a neutral assessment of their governance.

In conclusion, the article argues that the assessment of dictators should be approached with an understanding of these biases, urging a more nuanced narrative that goes beyond the simplistic binary of good versus bad. By doing so, society can engage in more critical discourse regarding power dynamics and the implications of authoritarian governance.