Why Are Dictators Always Evil?

Dictators are evil only from a republican point of view (note the lowercase "r" please). In almost every country there is a crowd of people who think authority means safety, and they believe safety matters more than freedom.
Of course, once the tyranny has been established, they will lose both.

Well, a lot of recent dictators decided to tweak with economics from a philosophical standpoint and this lead to mass starvation, and so when people read about dictators where millions of their own people starved to death on their watch, well it doesn't add to their reputation. Also, to be a dictator you have to rule a thousand ambitions of people who all think they can rule as good as you, and every now and then you need to do some weed whacking!!! Thin the heard a little, for your own survival. I mean it's not fair but in a democracy you can generally just retire and hope the money you funneled away while in office through your shell companies never gets found out, and the interns you manipulated through the power of your office into blowing you under the table keep their mouth shut. But as a dictator you're at the top, number one!!! And since dictators for the most part get to where they are through violence, it stands to reason that anybody looking to take their place will also use violence and what better way to uphold your position as a dictator than through violence, and not just violence, BUT FEAR!!!! Scaring the hell out of people is always a good way of keeping people people in check and to do that you have to commit the odd atrocity here and there. Also being number one tends to make you paranoid, and when you're paranoid and have a lot of people around you who want your job, and you need to thin the herds once in a while to stay in power, then inevitably people are going to end up dead. Another thing dictators often do is go after minorities and people who don't conform, though there are exceptions, I mean the Tsars, once they got them under control, pretty much let the cossacks do whatever they like as long as they still served the tsar. And there is no more terrible a tale then a minority being picked on, tortured or wiped out by an oppressive regime.

Maybe it's just the good dictators aren't called dictators. If we mean the word along the lines of 'benevolent [caring for their people at least as much as their own power, and using that power genuinely for their benefit] authoritarian', then I might suggest some examples include (had to google dates haha):

Atatürk (Mustafa Kemal), who led Turkey 1922-38. Definitely a dictator but he ended (until recent times anyway) the religious dominance of Turkey's government, gave women equal voting and inheritance rights, banned religious law and introduced a secular state, spread access to education and cultural activities which the Ottomans had banned, and broke up oligarchic landownership.

Josip Broz Tito, the Chilled Communist (1945-80). Initially just as dictatorial as other communist leaders, he chilled out a lot after about 1950 (and memorably stood up to Stalin who attempted, more than once, to have him assassinated), and allowed relatively free markets with businesses 'socially owned' by their workers (rather than by the state...basically he invented John Lewis). While the region of Yugoslavia is know often known for ethnic tensions, he gave all ethnicities and territorial units representation in the parliament, and actually preferred to delegate rather than acquire power for himself.

Paul Kagame, (President of Rwanda since 2000, and VP since 1994 before that), started off as a rebel military leader, but in 1994 used his army to stop the genocide (something the west rather failed/refused to do). Under his watch the country has been moved towards a wealthier, knowledge-based economy, state owned industries were denationalised, ethnicity was banned as a marker of identity to try and quel some of the tensions that led to the 1994 genocide. Might be worth noting that Rwanda currently has (61%) the highest proportion of female MPs in the world.

And we could look further into history and I'd suggest figures like Joseph II (Holy Roman Emperor) or Fredrick II ('the Great', King in/of Prussia) were also benevolent dictators

Not saying any of these people were/are remotely perfect, and they are/were all definitely authoritarian in the sense of not brooking a tremendous amount of opposition (though I don't think anyone suggests that Kagame wants opponents beaten up or imprisoned, more just bolsters his genuine popularity with bouts of electoral fraud), but I would argue that they used/use their dictatorial power for the betterment of the country and not to support either their own ideology or powerbase alone.

And yes Hitler was a vegetarian anti-smoking pro-fitness campaigner who built motorways but I think that's not enough in his credit column by quite a long chalk, before anyone suggests it.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely!
It reminds me of how Donnie Trump has problems with the law all the time since he has never got in trouble for violating it he doesn’t know how to follow it the same thing would be with a dictator because there will be nothing to constrain them so that they would do anything that they please.
selfish desires…evil…very similar in practice.

There’s atleast one guy here looks back on Hitler with nostalgia. Named himself after a brand of fruity cheap English cider.

There is a lot of truth in the saying that absolute power corrupts absolutely. Whenever anyone has absolute or nearly absolute power/authority over anyone/anything, it invariably corrupts them - even those with the purest of intent fall victim to this.

Could it happen with Trump? And what makes a dictator? I don't actually hold Trump as one, but he certainly could find a following if he wanted.

I was just thinking there should be an addiction recovery program to treat the uncontrollable lust for power.

Actually, while hard to believe, it's been said that Adolf Hitler was a dog lover and openly affectionate with his own dogs.

Having Power & Control Corrupts People thats why most Dictators Are Evil Rulers

"Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Lord Acton

Think again.

[media=https://youtu.be/ihGGjUO5sxg]

I have to disagree here. Hitler has many fan clubs around the world.

Because democracy is a universal human right.
MURKA not know stuff. Murka kill instead.

Well no one really talks about the good ones. They are just not that interesting.

I suppose you have to be a certain level of cruel and ruthless by default to maintain the position. Beyond that, they undermine a country's institutions - and do lasting inheritable damage to things like the rule of law, democracy, etc.

There have been benevolent dictators. If he actually existed, King Arthur was a prime example.