The word dictator has been generously used in the recent past particularly in respect to one politician. Whether this be true or not, propaganda or otherwise is not the subject of this thread. Rather the question is does the term apply and if so, is there a fit?
 

1. Seized power unconstitutionally, often violently, through means of a coup d'Etat. These dictators include, Benito Mussolini, Idi Amin and Mao Ze-Dong.
2. People who have achieved high office legally and thereafter proceeded to overthrow constitutional restraints such as Adolf Hitler
3. Extraordinary amount of power and who use it capriciously with total disregard to prevailing norms and established conditions of governance such as Joseph Stalin
4. The Chief of a nation that prefers the pestilence of despotism rather than the plague of anarchy( pun not intended)

The rule of dictators has been preeminently marked by violence, death and even genocide of political opponents. Dictators amalgamate as much power as they can to themselves and entertain megalomaniac fetishes as was the case of Idi Amin who described himself as “His Excellency President for Life, Field Marshal Al Hadji Dr. Idi Amin, VC, DSO, MC, Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Sea and Conqueror of the British Empire in Africa in General and Uganda in Particular."

Infrequently will dictators advocate for power to be shared out or devolved to other centers other than to themselves or their proxies.

While the foregoing definition is at the least exhaustive it carries the fundamental idea about who or what a dictator is: an absolutist with immense power and one who frequently derives power from violence, anarchy, unnecessary intimidation and assassination of political opponents. The modern dictator attacks before he is attacked and brands his opponents as non reformist, puppets, dictators, among other things to hide his true intent while gaining a political support base.

Does this definition fit the hallowed, much feared politician who among the current Kenyan presidential aspirants has the longest record of sustained attempt at advocating for “second liberation” of the Republic? That is best left to the reader to evaluate and justify.

The term has also been misused to apply to political opponents as was the case of nineteenth century American atatesman, orator and House Speaker Henry Clay. Despite being credited a great speaker, compromiser and having advocated for laws that immensely contributed to the development of the American economy, industries and infrastructure, frequently he was described as a dictator by his political opponents. Perhaps this was due to his domineering stature, envy at his oratorical skills or his precocious prominence in public affairs. However, his was not a dictatorship in the pure sense of the word. Unfortunately, his presidential ambitions were unsuccessful the five times he tried.

A dictatorship is different from a tyranny, which is what Kenyans should truly be in fear of as it points to a wicked or oppressive ruler, an absolutist or totalitarian ruler. A tyrant does not pay heed to an established system of governance frequently resorting to violence and not the vote to establish and perpetuate his position.

And as Kenyans evaluate whether or not to elect or retain dictators or not so dictators (irrespective of which regions they hail from) as their executive presidents they clearly need to demarcate the line between a tyrant and dictator, fact or fiction, propaganda or truth.

Extreme caution must be exercised and the words of George Bernard Shaw are instructive in this regard, “Politics are just as much a part of life as gambling or poetry; and it is extremely instructive to see how impotent the political opinions which men think, are to produce action, and how potent the political prejudices which men feel, are to produce it.”