Criteria for being a dictator

The problem with the word dictator is that it has been thrown around so carelessly that it is on the verge of losing meaning. So let us reclaim it. To begin with a dictator is not by definition a political figure that one doesn’t like. I know, for some that everyone they hate is literally Hitler but in all seriousness a deferral to the subjective is never a solid way to define a political term.

For a person to be described as a dictator I would argue that they need to fill the following criteria -

• terminate open opposition nationally,
• clamp down on free elections,
• restrict forums for criticism (often associated with the shutdown of the non-government press),
• rule without deference to an independent legislative body,
• effectively consolidate the judiciary under the executive wing,
• establish barriers beyond an acceptable norm to prevent the removal of said dictator from power.

Now there is the notion of the benign dictator who may ‘relax’ several of these categories, but never to the extent to which they ought to exist within a free democracy. This is often where the grey area around the use of this term seems to reside.