Deposing Dictators

[Terry Reedy]

"Stephen Horne" <steve at lurking.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1fcrmt0inrolh6qjpskm7lfm7nh2j0p195 at 4ax.com...
> On Sun, 05 Aug 2001 18:58:13 GMT, "Terry Reedy" <tjreedy at home.com>
> wrote:
> >... what is your purpose in continuing to falsely label him
'dictator' as in
> >'denier of freedom'?  Enough I think.
>
> I did not label him dictator ... I just explicitly
> pointed out that he cannot be a dictator in the sense of a denier of
> freedom - that was the whole point of the 'weak dictatorship'
> statement - so I'd appreciate it if you stop trying to twist my
words.

OK, replace 'dictator with 'would-be dictator' and I don't think I
twisted much at all.  'Dictator' has two meanings: one who speaks, or
one who also enforces his words (and thereby denies freedom).  If you
did not mean 'weak speakership', which I very much doubt, then it
seems you must mean 'weak enforcement'.  The clear inplication *to me*
of both your original 'weak dictatorship' statement and your
restatement above is that there is a would-be or intended dictatorship
that is failing.  Otrherwise the statements seem pointless.  Given
that the Python license is about the freeest there is, I think that
implication false.

Terry J. Reedy