Tunisia's Saied issues decree strengthening presidential powers, will rule by decree
By - lalalalalalala71
Pretty sad that the last of the arab spring got couped. Democracy is no substitute for poor governance. Although you can be very sure that this guy will rule over stagnation at best.
The democratic reforms in Morocco is all that is left from the Arab spring and that is still essentially a dictatorship from the king with some limits.
Democratic reforms over many years is how U.K, Scandinavian and other constitutional monarchies became full democracies. Let's keep a little faith in Morocco continuing to make progress towards democracy as long as people there are able to continue pushing for it.
Yup if you read about western democracies and how they functioned during the 1800s, you would not even consider them to be democracies. It takes generations for it to work out.
Literal vote-buying, extremely unevenly populated constituencies, only letting certain types of people vote, etc were all common.
Tunisia seems a more likely candidate.
It's actually on the same bag. Liberal democracy is not something you reach in a few years, with rare exceptions. Tunisia will have its chance again (with some luck).
Well crap. There goes one of the few (mostly) stable democracies in Africa
Some people in this sub were saying what this guy did wasn't a coup and that he wasn't a dictator.
It is totally a coup, and he's totally a dictator.
In Africa, the intervention usually comes from the regional grouping the country belongs to... oh wait.
I mean Tunisia is the perfect country for intervention.
-some democratic traditions
-no ruling family yet
-close to Italy (easy logistics)
-an Airforce which consists of a dozen F5s
-close economic ties to europe
Also there is precedent. We did it with Carthage three times.
Presidentialism = bad
The executive branch should always be under the thumb of the legislature.
What's sad it that *they fucking knew it and put it into their Constitution*. They were a parliamentary regime, they didn't give him that power, he took it by force (I'm not disagreeing with /u/Deladi0 , just saying this wasn't even the case in Tunisia).
And some folks here justified that because the largest party in Parliament - but not nearly a majority - was Islamist.
Jeez who'd have predicted giving a tonne of power to just one person mightn't be the best form of democracy.
“Mightn’t”? Love that contraction, never seen it before
Using various new contractions that're technically correct and hoping they somehow become a thing to hopefully one day piss off english teachers is a hobby.
On a similar vein, there was some dude here who consistently used the Old English letters þ and ð like they still use them in Icelandic - ðese are ðe sounds ðese letters make, like þin breaþing þings.
I unironically think English would be better off using ðese, if only the costs of the transition weren't so gigantically humongous.
*America looks around nervously*
hahahaahah as if they'd ever be that self-aware
This guy looks like Tunisian Biden
Looks like a Biden Carter hybrid
>Runs on platform of "decentralized democracy"
>Enacts a centralized autocracy
He was explicitly anti-democratic, he ran on moving from parliamentarism to presidentialism, which is something only petty tyrants do.
Welp. That's the end of the Arab Spring, I guess.
This is exactly why I became a neo-liberal. Popular revolutions are romantic but very rarely work. Incremental change and evidence based policies instead of "big business bad" or "big government bad" is the only way to lessen the suffering of the masses.
I don’t see how you can incrementally change a dictatorship to a liberal democracy.
Let em introduce you to a wonderful book called *Why Nations Fail* that addresses this exact process.
angry england noises
Some monarchies are dictatorships but not all. And the UK and England have had a parliament with significant power for a long time.
Uh huh. So you're saying it happened very incrementally.
England was never a dictatorship. Not in the modern sense. Dictators nowadays have access to weapons, armies and ways of tracking and controlling their populace that the rulers of old could only dream of. Transforming a modern dictatorship to a democracy gradually does not seem possible.
But to address your quip, no the origin of the British parliament [wasn’t gradual at all](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Carta)
Traditions of some degree of a noble council exerting a check and balance on the power of the king goes back to the Witenagemot, which in turn originated from ancient germanic folk assemblies. So in reality it was \*incredibly\* gradual.