Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It's much easier to be an autocrat if people support you and don't realize what you are doing.

Happened to us in Peru with Fujimori [1]. Elected a guy that promised to be tough on crime and actually get things done. He did lots of things (tackled terrorism, hyperinflation, etc.), but bit by bit he started gaining more power. Closed congress, installed judges to the supreme court, changed constitution (he actually called for a referendum, and we all voted for it!)

A lot of people criticized him, and he was not jailing them but letting them be. Only if you were a major figure (opposition, some investigative newspapers), did he really go against you.

At the end, he started torturing people, embezzled a few billion dollars, committed massive election fraud, and was somewhat miraculously kicked and jailed after 11 years.

I don't want to draw the parallel too far, but believe me, the difference between autocracy and democracy is not black and white, and the way you play the game, is you try to do the "boil frogs in water" trick, but with people instead of frogs.

(Also, I thought that Ressa broke a law written AFTER she broke it? Which is in most places of the world completely unconstitutional..)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Fujimori




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: