Freedom vs. Stability: Are Dictators Worse Than Anarchy?

Internal rebellions and pressure from external sources have undercut brutal dictatorships in the Middle East and Northern Africa, and many initially celebrated. But in too many communities, anarchy has followed as well as unease among the celebrants. “Iraq and the entire region have descended into chaos and anarchy, clearing the way for the radicalization fostered by Islamic State,” writes Christiane Hoffmann in an essay for Spiegel Online, pointing to the 2003 US-led invasion as a trigger for regional chaos. Onlookers can no longer claim that “anything is better than despotism.” Democracy does not automatically replace autocracy, and well-functioning institutions of law, education and governance can vanish overnight. Rule is order, Hoffman quotes 17th century political scientist and philosopher Thomas Hobbes, suggesting that any form of rule is better than anarchy. Anarchy is particularly lethal during a time of rapid population growth when stability requires that limited resources be shared and regulated. In Pakistan, Yemen, Syria and too many other nations, large swaths of territory lack government controls. Democracy and civilization require stability and order. – YaleGlobal