Thande
Donor
Generally speaking, the purpose of military dictatorships is to prevent ideological movements (usually left-wing ones) from gaining power in a country. Witness various coups in South America historically and SE Asia more recently.
Now, sometimes people who win power through a military coup may then go on to create their own ideology (e.g. Gaddafi, various Africans) but this is then no longer military rule. Equally, North Korea, although part of its ideology is being a very militarised society, is not a military dictatorship.
However, Burma. Or Myanmar if you're hopped up on frantic political correctness. It doesn't matter. We now reach the point of this thread. Burma's military dictatorship - sometimes described as a 'military republic' - appears to have invented its own ideology, in which the purpose of military rule, to paraphrase Orwell, is military rule. Voltaire's Prussia taken to the extreme.
So, I wonder if we can have some sort of exportable ideology which states that countries should be pragmatically run by generals and democracy should be suppressed?
Now, sometimes people who win power through a military coup may then go on to create their own ideology (e.g. Gaddafi, various Africans) but this is then no longer military rule. Equally, North Korea, although part of its ideology is being a very militarised society, is not a military dictatorship.
However, Burma. Or Myanmar if you're hopped up on frantic political correctness. It doesn't matter. We now reach the point of this thread. Burma's military dictatorship - sometimes described as a 'military republic' - appears to have invented its own ideology, in which the purpose of military rule, to paraphrase Orwell, is military rule. Voltaire's Prussia taken to the extreme.
So, I wonder if we can have some sort of exportable ideology which states that countries should be pragmatically run by generals and democracy should be suppressed?