>Some people think that a dictatorship is OK as long as the trains all run on time. Some people are influenced by propaganda and the historical connotations as

>Some people think that a dictatorship is OK as long as the trains all run on time. Some people are influenced by propaganda and the historical connotations associated with the word "dictatorship." There's nothing inherently bad about the word, it's just the association. If you look at dictatorships objectively there are many successful examples. Here are a few modern ones: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_dictatorship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_dictatorship That's just a couple. Your first reaction would be to say that the examples represent a minority. The problem is, though, if you look at ancient history, the most successful civilizations that prospered and succeeded were basically all empires with central rule. It shows that if you were intellectually unbiased, you would not simply dismiss "dictatorship" in a single sentence. Democracy is a recent phenomenon when viewed in terms of human history and, if anything, still experimental (there are many examples of complete failures of democratic governments). That being said, to swing it around to your statement. There is no definitive "right" way to solve a problem. Gatekeeping could work, and it could fail. Simply "improving society" can also lead to complete and utter failure. The inputs and various factors influencing the outcomes are so complex we cannot point to one way that works. So I say give gatekeeping a try. It's not like the government is doing this either... It's a business.