How far does the absolute power meme go? Do you suppose if Stalin

>>1895930
They'd have to follow Obama because not doing so would be against transexual discrimination in the workplace laws.

You have power only as long as you prove worthy of it to those that gave you it.

Exactly, and those who gave Obama his power aren't the people. They are the so called elites. The rich men controlling things from behind the scenes. The corporations who contribute to Congress in order to have laws passed that allow them the freedom to do as they please. While the American people don't truly have a say, but are told that they/we do.

>>1895930
That wouldn't be enough to get people to turn on him, he would have pull Elagabalus style nonsense consistently.

>>1895941
How does speaking ebonics make you transexual?

>>1895930
>If Obama started speaking only in jive and ebonics would people still follow his orders?

Yes simply to avoid being called racist. Our culture in America is self-censoring regarding social taboos.

Stalin on the other hand had enemies, his cult of personality would suffer since it revolved around a built image. While he ruled by fear he would have lost that edge.

Power relies entirely on the society as a whole accepting it. Something ironic I have noticed is that critique of power itself serves to instill power.

If the masses are comfortable in making fun of politicians on the Internet then it serves their appetite instead of having to actually act to change things. If you step back from the jokes and realize what they are doing actually affects millions causing thousands to starve and die then the reality becomes far more horrible and one must act. It is easier to criticize and sit back, not allowing yourself open to harm instead of actually doing something.

Of course not. Generally speaking Stalin was the apex of dictatorship, his power was immense, but even he was quite limited in his power. You see that in the episode after German attack when he retired to his dacha and thought that Politburo came to depose him and execute him (in reality they came to beg him to return).
Dictators like Stalin and Hitler relied on replacing their subordinates and forcing them into competition where they acted as natural arbiters. But above that, they were succesful leaders.Their subordinates accepted it willingly.
In the end most people love to hand over authority, people love to be told what to do. Only the strongest can succesfuly lead.
So outside of some peculiar examples like cult leaders, power depends on dictator being somewhat competent and having an aura of power and strength. Incompetent dictators, mad people, they usually don't last long. Even in fucked up African societies.

>>1897229
Nicely put, that's why a political circus (Trump vs Clinton) is necessary to make people stop focusing on the issues, and instead on the personalities.

>>1897229
>Power relies entirely on the society as a whole accepting it.
Not necessarily as a whole. Some groups hold disproportionate power. If you have the police and the military on your side, you don't need most of the civilians to approve of you. You just need them not to dispise you so much they would risk themselves to depose you.

>>1897259
>Incompetent dictators, mad people, they usually don't last long. Even in fucked up African societies.
The Kim are still going, though.

>>1897259
I dunno man the entire Wehrmacht high command and the NSDAP took Hitler seriously until the very end and by all accounts he wasn't quite all there starting in late 1944.