Cincinnatian Dictature?

Yorel

In the Roman Republic, the Dictatorship was a special magistrature used in times of crisis: a man was named Dictator for six months with unlimited political power, so that he could solve a crisis. In this regard, Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus (519-430 BC) is held as the best example a Roman Dictator should have been: he was named Dictator twice and, each time, he gave up power once his tasks was done.

In more contemporary times, we only have known Dictatorships as "evil" because most of the people who held this position used it to stay in power and get rid of the opposition. However, is there a possibility we could have a Cincinnatian form of Dictature showing up? What I mean is: a special magistrature to solve big crises (economical, political or whatever), that gives a man unlimited political power for a limited period of time and that he has to let go once it's over?

By the way, I'm not sure this is the right place to post this so if it's not, please move it to where it should be.
 

mrmandias

The early Republic was heavily influenced by Rome, so you may get some alternate Constitution that includes something like that.

Prerequisites include (1) a constitutionally weaker presidency during normal times, because the OTL presidency was about as much concentrated power as people could handle. The possibility of a dictatorship pushes it over the line. So maybe the presidency has less powers (no veto?) or you get three presidents or a rotating presidency or something like that. (2) Either the dictator only has all federal power or else there has to be a separate mechanism for approval by the states.

Interesting question.
 
Maponus

Maponus

This may be easier than people think, because it was largely Mussolini and Hitler that made dictator a dirty word (tyrant was the popular projective in the liberal tradition before then). Garibaldi was quite happy to name himself Dictator of Scilly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top