Talk:Family dictatorship

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on December 14, 2006. The result of the discussion was KEEP.

"Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew plans to transfer power to his son Lee Hsien Loong "

What position does Lee Hsien Loong hold in the government? What about PM Goh? --Jiang

Isn't Singapore democratic, anyway? user:J.J.

Nominally so, but the same party has held power since independence and the opposition have had very very poor showings throughout that time. If it smells like a duck... Morwen 20:02, 9 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Goh may be PM, but Lee Kuan Yew has stayed on as "Senior Minister" and it's pretty clear who calls the shots if push comes to shove. Lee Hsien Loong is Deputy Prime Minister, and it's already been announced that he will succeed Goh. --Jpatokal

At any rate, they haven't died in 2005, as the article states. Actually, to be consistent with the rest of the list, first and last years of the term should be listed. - Lev 12:19, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Regarding Jiang's question, Goh became Prime Minister in 1990 and remained so for 14 years. In 1991, when Goh became the Secretary-General of the People's Action Party, it was recognized that the power transition was completed. Should the entry really be in here? The gap between the two Lees (14 years) is longer than the one between GHWB and GWB (8 years?). Also, Lee's rule is not recognized as a dictatorship except by dissidents, hence the label is POV. Unless the title of the article is changed, that entry should be removed. --Vsion (talk) 01:38, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
The gap is irrelevant, what matters is that the succession happens, and that it happens in a nominally democratic state (ie. there are no laws setting forth the succession).
The statement "not recognized as a dictatorship except by dissidents" is meaningless, as the last person to officially adopt the title was Sulla back in 81 BC. I'm sure that if you ask the North Korean embassy, KIm Jong Il isn't a dictator, he's a Great Leader elevated by the free will of the masses yadda yadda, just like Loong-Loong.
That said, I agree that the current title is a little inflammatory and am open to suggestions for better ones. The new title should, however, be able to convey the facts that the succession is a) not monarchical, and b) happens without direct, free elections (ie. the Bushes can't really be considered a family dictatorship). Jpatokal 08:54, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

George HW -> George W doesn't count? BL 20:03, 9 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Well, the last I checked HW was still alive, and there was quite a long hiatus between them. Morwen 20:05, 9 Nov 2003 (UTC)
These aren't all dead. People retire. Secretlondon 20:06, Nov 9, 2003 (UTC)

W. wasn't groomed to succeed his father. Few would have expected him to become president in 1993. It was the Republican Party that handed the opportunity to him, not his father. --Jiang

By the definition given at the start of the article, the Bush family should be included. Perhaps a rewording of the definition could clear this up. Otherwise, inclusion on this list seems subjective. BTW, an argument could be made that GWB was groomed for the position during his father's term, since iirc, he played a key role in cooperating with the Christian right that later made up his base. 217.53.50.5 17:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)M

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.53.50.5 (talk) 17:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I think there are more in the CIS - needs research. The BBC had an article on it but I can't find it anymore. Secretlondon 20:05, Nov 9, 2003 (UTC)

Here is the article: Dynasties of the ex-USSR -TwinsFan48

It's not clear that Kim Jong-nam will succeed Kim Jong-il. See [1] --Jiang

Contents

[edit] Dynasties of Democracy

I think that we need article of this name on wikipedia where we will write name of democracy rulers which has with time been succeded (indirect succesion) from family members. For me best examples in the west of that are U.S.A (Smith in XIX century, Bush XX - XXI) and Greece (Papandreou i Karamanlis). --Rjecina

  • I'm not sure who you are thinking of regarding "Smith". The United States has never had a President Smith. --Metropolitan90 05:43, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
  • You seem to be thinking of political families as listed at Political families of the world and linked from the article. --Kineticman 01:07, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cuba

I would like to know if anyone would object to listing Cuba as an "interim succession". After all, Fidel Castro has certainly been succeeded by his brother Raul on an interim basis. --Metropolitan90 05:40, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Costa Rica

I believe this entry needs clarification:

If Bernardo was Próspero's posthumous son-in-law, that would mean that he married Próspero's daughter after Próspero died. But according to their articles, Bernardo succeeded Próspero immediately upon Próspero's death. That would mean that Bernardo wasn't married to Próspero's daughter at the time Próspero died, and so Próspero was succeeded by someone who, at the time, was not related to him, which would mean that the Próspero-Bernardo succession doesn't belong on this list. --Metropolitan90 06:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Romania

Are their any other sources claiming that Nicu Ceaușescu was in fact his father heir-apparent? Because there are countless publications in Romania that have no solid founding, and I'm curious is Nicu was actually officially considered the heir to the reigime. 92.81.60.109 (talk) 19:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)