Is it possible to rule a country with an iron, but fair fist?

Is it possible to rule a country with an iron, but fair fist?

Yes

the phrase "iron fist" is meant to imply that it's rigid to the point of only being useful as a blunt instrument. So your suggestion doesn't really matter.

Social democracy with closed borders and no feminism the final redpill, OP

You mean kind of like how Donald Trump is doing right now?

Literally wrecking all the democratic cucks and not giving a fuck all the while keeping all his promises to his voters, if he keeps to his promises he is literally going to use his iron fist to remove power from the government once he's done cleaning up this fucking mess.

Only if the leadership and majority in the country are right-wing/conservatives. Liberals will complain endlessly about everything no matter how good things are, when things are perfect, they'll just invent something new to be upset with.

So yea, if you're living in a right-wing Utopia of sorts, where immigration is restricted, jobs are plentiful, taxes are manageable, education is accessible, medical services are available, crime is low, etc. then absolutely because the majority of right-wing people would never complain under those conditions.

yes

Yes.
The problem is with succession.

To centralize power in yourself you basically need to make most of your subordinates useless, which means your successor is politically loyal and dumb - because if he wasn't, he'd probably kill you and take your place.

>democracy
>redpill

You get to pick only one.

Singapore is a fairly successful authoritarian nation.

you tell me

Of course, a small city state could be ran with relative ease despot style.

This, Kekkonen showed us that being similar to dictator doesn't always mean the people are oppressed

>implying a 0 party democracy in a hemoginous state would be bad

We're coming to help bud, stay strong.

Certainly is.

Yes.

The phone call that saved Hellas

No. When violence is your ruling tool, it means your society morals are lacking.
People must believe behaving well and within the laws is a rewarding endevour and not that you should behave for fear of punishment.
It's harder, but the good things are never easy to do.

But you're wrong, honey.

Funny because he proves im right. He grabbed germany by selling high morals. The violence was towards what he targeted as enemies to those morals.

Yes there have been benevolent despots. The problem is that with no checks and balances or ways to get rid of a leader then you are shit out of luck if the next despot isn't that benevolent.

These guys look sharp. What's the rundown on them?

Can i get a quick rundown on all this?