Those who support Fascism/NatSoc, or any political theory featuring a strong and powerful leader who keeps the system in check, how do you counter the fact that power can (and almost always) become corrupted?
I've become more open to these ideas, but this is one of the obstacles that has come up in my thinking. These leaders aren't chosen by the people because the idea is that the people don't know what's best for them. This was Plato's main critique of democracies, that it causes human manipulation on a grand scale. But what is a better alternative?
Let's say one of these leaders ushers in one of these systems and he's perfect for the role. He causes the economy to flourish, the people to become united, etc. What about when he dies? Who fills that role? Does he appoint a close friend of his that he trusts? How would this not degenerate into full on monarchical tyranny? This kind of system seems doomed to end in corruption. The same proponents of these political theories tend to be the same ones who deny Marxism for the same reason I'm pointing out, that power will always be corrupted since human nature itself opposes the system.
Could anyone with more knowledge of these systems give their input? I'd like to see a thoughtful discussion on this.