Plutocracy or Dictatorship, Which is Which?

Both are the similar in substance, though different in approach.

The top 1% still need a leader. That leader still needs cronies to help him to rule.

The top 1% is a dictatorship of a party/group. Their leader is the supreme dictator of the 1%, as well as the ruler of the entire country.

Kishore is being careful and polite. He does not want to offend the powerful dictator. He uses the word plutocracy to replace the word dictator. I think.

Plutocracy is not even a political philosophy. But it can easily fit into any political philosophy such as democracy, monarchy, dictatorship, socialism, communism, etc.

Plutocracy means rule by the wealthy, not necessarily the top 1%.

But every country ultimately will land up being ruled by the wealthy because those in power tend to enrich themselves in wealth and power, and become wealthy and powerful. That is the whole purpose of people getting into powerful positions - to enmass wealth, fame and status through the power they acquired.

Even the commercial and business organisations pay their top managers, CEOs, Directors, Chairmen, etc, thereby allowing them to move from the bottom class to the mediocre class, and ultimately to the wealthy class.

The same applies to Kings, Queens, and Emperors and Empresses. They also enrich themselves and live a comfortable life through the power entrusted on them by their subjects, at the expense of their subjects.

Nevertheless, whoever rules the country will make sure that they themselves are rewarded heavily, until they become filthy rich, mostly and usually at the expense of the masses, the working class, the common folks.

Therefore, plutocracy can be applied everywhere - in government, business or non-governmental organisations.

NKF is one good example of plutocracy seeping into a non-governmental charitable organisation, where the top people (Directors and CEO) enrich themselves at the expense of the very people whom they are responsible to help, the beneficiaries of the donations.

NKF to keep 90% of the donations and distributed only 10% of the money to the needy, the rightful beneficiaries of the donations.

Likewise, the Singapore system of government is similar to NKF's model. It keeps about 80% of the duties, revenues and taxes collected and the savings to itself and distribute only 20% of the money to all the ministries. And every ministry is supposed to make their own income to supplement their budgets. In this manner, the government has become filthy rich, while most of the citizens remain poor and mediocre.

Then, because of the immense amount of money being passed through the hands of those in power on a daily basis, their eyes turned red and their hearts became greedy. That's why they have been paying themselves the obscene $Multi-Million salary since 1990, when Mr Goh took over as PM. That's how the ruling elites became wealthy. Thus the term plutocracy being used by Kishore.

What say you? Do you agree?


LIPS.