Talk:Political strongman/Archive 1

Untitled
I'm going to move the page to Strongperson (politics). If anyone objects, I guess then can move it back, but please message me.100110100 09:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * First, Wikipedia uses the forms which are in greatest use, not those which someone thinks should be the most theoretically correct. Second, there have in fact been very few female "strongmen" now or in history (since the term is not usually applied to either members of hereditary royal dynasties or democratically-elected rulers). AnonMoos (talk) 16:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with AnonMoos; leave the page where it is. Matt Deres (talk) 21:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Journalese
The term strongman is merely an example of journalese, a term with no clear meaning and not used in general or academic talk or writing. It belongs in a dictionary, not in Wikipedia. --The Four Deuces (talk) 19:48, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Gandhi?
The article currently lists Gandhi as an example of a strongman. This doesn't seem to pass the straight-face test, and it was added with no discussion, citation, or any apparent reason, so I'm deleting it. In the highly unlikely event that anyone does have evidence for Gandhi being a strongman, by all means, bring it up. dcd139 (talk) 06:49, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Origin of term
I have an idea for the article: what is the origin of the term? When was it first used? --Blue387 (talk) 02:39, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Chavez inclusion is pure media terrorism
I am not even going to look at the sources where they call Hugo Chavez authoritarian, dictator, strongmen, whatever. It is an insult to my country, Venezuela, who most of you don't even know where is located, when you say we have an authoritarian regime. Chavez is so authoritarian and that is why all Venezuelan private media say everyday that Chavez is an assassin, a corrupt, mentally ill, dictator, etc.201.248.91.192 (talk) 20:38, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Unsourced entries
Since this term is almost always at least somewhat pejoratively, I think it's irresponsible to list people here, living or not, unless we have a source for their being labeled a strongman. I've just removed all such entries. I'll list them here for anyone who wants to find sources and restore them: Augustus, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Mobutu Sese Seko, Suharto, and Rafael Trujillo. --BDD (talk) 16:06, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 8 December 2012
Hi, it seems that there are certain people taking an advantage of the editing section. There is not a single document that refers Park Chung-hee or Rhee Syng-man as dictators. And even if there is it must be stated that these people are one, and that in scholarly writing that they are indeed the same as the other on that Strongman category. And I do not think times is a good source for the judgments on people because it is simply an expression not a scholarly statement. And I doubt that they even care whether other foreign people expressed bad or good. Please make sure that the source provide are valid and legit.

Thank you, Regards

2607:F8F0:C10:FFF:200:5EFE:CE57:B636 (talk) 07:52, 8 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm Korean and cause my English skill is bad so please ignore some grammar error. There had been atack from Korean Nazis who argue that democracy is wrong and dictatorship is pretty good thing. http://www.ilbe.com/473503593. Park Chung-hee and Rhee Syng-man are undoubtedly a dictator and I hope it will get back soon.
 * If you need an source that verify Park is an dictator, Developmental Dictatorship and the Park Chung-hee Era (Homa & Sekey, 2006) could be an source. This is one from old version. Jiwnuri13 (talk) 08:31, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: I've filed a sockpuppet investigation against 25 editors, including 2607:F8F0:C10, viewable here. Content-wise, I believe it's well-established that Park was a dictator, or at least an autocrat (which is more the definition of strongman). I'm also not incredibly interested in hearing out the argument of someone who, either independently or with their political allies, vandalized this page over 50 times.  Nonetheless, Jiwnuri13, while I thank you for finding a good source, please don't refer to your opponents as Nazis. Thanks. — Francophonie&#38;Androphilie (Je vous invite à me parler ) 09:52, 8 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh yeah? I don't think so. What on earth u r saying that he's not a dictator nor a strongman as rest of world think he is?
 * 1st take a good look @ these references.
 * references http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2130969,00.html
 * references http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F60E17FB345F12728DDDAB0A94D1405B8084F1D3
 * references http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/world/asia/park-geun-hye-nominated-for-south-korean-presidency.html?_r=0
 * references http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/5040964.stm
 * references http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-18778847
 * references *
 * What r ur excuses now?
 * Need more evidence? Y not search for CIA revealed reports or whitehouse reports? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Systec7 (talk • contribs) 10:04, 8 November 2012


 * Come on, let's try to keep this civil. See WP:DENY, WP:INSULT. — Francophonie&#38;Androphilie (Je vous invite à me parler ) 10:25, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thx for ur concern. I'm really appreciate that admins are watching this. But I need to fix this wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Systec7 (talk • contribs) 10:33, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not an admin, actually. If I were, I would've blocked all these editors already. The admins who've helped fight vandalism on this page are Mike Rosoft and Gogo Dodo. Now, may I ask what you mean by "I need to fix this wiki?" — Francophonie&#38;Androphilie (Je vous invite à me parler ) 10:42, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Exactly my thoughts. This is serious crime against humanity history. Whoever try to distort facts, whoever they are I'll fight to the end. And I'm really sorry about my behavior today, I was totally angered, so, I tried to let world know the TRUTH what I SAW. Systec7 (talk) 10:54, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I need to fix this wiki. The Ex-Pres. Park Chung-hee was a dictator and a strongman. I want him listed.
 * http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/world/asia/park-geun-hye-nominated-for-south-korean-presidency.html?_r=0 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/5040964.stm http://books.google.co.kr/books?id=DjQBBU8GQbQC&printsec=frontcover&hl=ko&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
 * Help me. And Thanks again for ur all concerns. Systec7 (talk) 11:11, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I have now re-inserted Park's name to this list, citing the New York Times source you gave above, as well as an obscure LA Times article that explicitly used the word strongman. However, I'd encourage you to not edit the encyclopedia with the sole purpose of promoting a specific point of view. — Francophonie&#38;Androphilie (Je vous invite à me parler ) 11:15, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Thank you so much. We want the truth not distortion. Thank you for your support. Systec7 (talk) 11:19, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Attack List?
Why is there even a list of political figures in this page? The entire list should be removed. Was Abraham Lincoln a 'strongman'? It would depend on whether you asked a Yank or a Rebel. The first would say he was democratically elected under a free constitution. The second would say the states had a right to leave the constitution and were being forced into submission and that Lincoln was, therefore, a strongman. You can argue either side and they're both contentious. So what is the point of having such a list in this page in the first page? So people can bicker over whether Sigmund Rhee was a dictator who put people in concentration camps... or whether that makes FDR a dictator for violating the US constitution and putting Americans in concentration camps (specifically those of Japanese descent). Obviously FDR will never be put on this list, so this is nothing more than a popularity contest and who can cite the most sources. Was Yanukovich a 'strongman' in Ukraine when he was democratically elected and choose to leave office rather than use violence? Those in power in Kiev now would say he was a strongman regardless. There countless such examples... such an attack page serves no purpose. 173.79.251.253 (talk) 15:53, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Mahmoud Abbas
Though some of his decisions with regard to extension of term length, may be questionable, I don't believe he falls into the category of "generally referred to as strongman". Apart from that single (and quite POV) source, I have never seen him be called a "strongman" or dictator, and he certainly doesn't belong on the same list with Mao, Stalin and Pinochet. I added the "dubious" tag, but feel free to remove it if you can prove me wrong. --Medizinball (talk) 00:18, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Perhaps Mohammed Dahlan should be mentioned instead. see e.g.,, , , , etc. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 03:00, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I've removed the Mahmoud Abbas entry from the list. Please discuss further as appropriate. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 07:28, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

List needs Adolf Hitler
I don't want to add anything since it might get removed. I assume there is a reason why Hitler isn't listed? 99.45.166.113 (talk) 03:31, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm guessing that he isn't in the list because nobody came up with a source supporting the assertion that he has been referred to as "Strongman". I've found such a source and have added him, citing that source. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 05:04, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Confusing section header
This edit caught my eye. The edit removed a cite-supported mention of Juan Perón from the article section headed Political figures referred to as "strongmen", saying "Peron didnt ruled by force, his was elected President in two democratic elections and doesnt even fit the term's description".

The removed supporting cite Refers to peron as, "the Argentinian strongman who died in 1974". Another source, currently cited in the WP article about Peron, is titled Argentine Strongman's corpse disturbed again. Clearly, Peron has been referred to as a "strongman". I am guessing that there are additional sources out there referring to Peron as a "strongman".

However, the article's lead section says, "A strongman is a political leader who rules by force and runs an authoritarian regime.", and has said this for quite some time.

Since pronouncements by reliable sources trump expressions of editorial opinion by WP editors, I've reverted the edit removing Peron. However, it appears to me that the section header is confusing in light of the info in the atricle lead. Perhaps the inclusion criteria for the table should be clarified in the article. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 06:38, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Missing from list
Why no Mussolini? Franco? Tito? They are some of my favorite strongmen.--75.101.48.89 (talk) 01:22, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Why no Adolf Hitler? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.239.203.124 (talk) 10:07, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Why no Jiang Zemin, Hashim Thaci? They are some flamboyant and recognized political strongmen — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.193.155.238 (talk) 23:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

List needs Richard Nixon and Jiang Zemin
They are both could be characterized as a Strongman — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.193.155.238 (talk) 23:41, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

List is so subjective and based on political biases that it may as well not exist
Strongman is at best a colloquial term. It is not interchangeable with "dictator," as dictator has a historical precedence to it in the Roman Empire, just as "tyrant" had precedence in Ancient Greece. (However, I don't advocate the removal of the phrase "The term is often used interchangeably with "dictator", but differs from a "warlord"." as "often used" identifies it as subjective, so that part is fine - but the point is "Strongman" has no historical precedent unlike dictator; so it's an insult first and foremost, not a political title that now carries a negative connotation) While all have come to be used to mean "a political leader whom I do not like", just because someone is disliked by the authors of an encyclopedia is not a valid reason for that encyclopedia to attach a title which does not have any equivalency to historical uses of that title. I have no problems with the article "Strongman (politics)" existing. It is a concept which is common enough to merit inclusion on wikipedia. However, judgement of political regimes based on a word that is, by this article's own admission, is not dependent on a fixed definition but rather on how it is used by certain people to describe their view of a particular regime. To quote: "A strongman is not necessarily always a formal head of state or head of government; sometimes journalists use the term to describe a military or political figure who exercises far more influence over the government than a constitution allows." This definition is completely fine, but inherently biased. I can see clearly that all leaders in the list have sources, but so what? So what if one journalist calls someone a strongman? If tomorrow a journalist in the American South calls Abraham Lincoln a strongman due to the Suspension of Habeas Corpus - which is a completely valid criticism for someone to make about Lincoln - are we to include Lincoln in this list? I would say that'd be absurd, but given the way this article is right now, an editor might believe himself justified in adding Lincoln's name to this list, and the result might be an edit war or stupid argument that last weeks. To avoid that mess, let's just delete it right now. I am not saying any particular person does not belong on the list or that any of the sources are invalid. Who is on the list and why is irrelevant because the list itself is what's the problem. A reporter's judgement of a political figure should go in that politician's article, not here. This list does nothing but parrot someone else's judgement, however valid that may be, without any context whatsoever. If other people want to add that context of how a poltiical figure got labelled a "strongman," go for it, but right now this article looks like it was written by someone with a third grader's understanding of the world, separated into "good guys" and "bad guys". Just because we sit here in the democratic west does not mean we should assume moral superiority over every authoritarian in the world, because if we did do that, I'd hope we'd apply similar criticism to every monarchy in history and include their rulers on this list. Charlemagne killed 4000 Saxons at Verdun. Does that meet the definition of "Strongman" or is he just a man of his times? I'd say we shouldn't pass judgement so flippantly, because then we'd be little better than North Korea's propaganda ministry. Wikipedia can do much better than that and this article can either be made less biased with the list's removal, which is what I'd prefer, or much more informative by changing the list to include information on what exactly was the circumstances behind labelling the individual a "strongman." Otherwise you get people like the one above this one, saying that this list should include "that one guy I don't like". We all don't like a certain political figure! The opinions of editors, and sources not given appropriate context, don't belong on Wikipedia. Well written analysis of the facts does belong on Wikipedia, and you are welcome to add it to this article, but in my opinion that's too much work to salvage what is by the article's own definition a subjective list dependent on whether or not a reporter uses the particular word "Strongman" as apposed to just "tyrant" or "dictator." 50.45.222.236 (talk) 23:31, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Strongman (politics). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/vazgen-sarkissian-740258.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 09:14, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Strongman (politics). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130903134742/http://www.historyoftruth.com/ebook/kitab20110130094307919.pdf to http://www.historyoftruth.com/ebook/kitab20110130094307919.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 10:45, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Not all strongmen are dictators
Actually not all strongman are dictators. Golluman96 (talk)

Some of the strongman with citations should be removed from the page. For example, David Cameron, Theresa May, Donald Trump and Justin Trudeau should be removed. Marxistfounder (talk) 13:39, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Donald Trump
Come ahhhhhn — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.45.16.190 (talk) 23:11, 21 October 2016 (UTC)


 * This needs removed and replaced by Barack Obama based on several violations of the constitution. source= President Obama's Top 10 Constitutional Violations Of 2013 December 23, 2013 Forbes
 * Trump is not in power and currently has not violated any constitutional laws (yet) so fails to meet the definition.
 * I would suggest that he be listed under the bogie man definition due to the unfounded fears instilled by an overzealous media.
 * — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.13.34.108 (talk) 14:30, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I would encourage editors to discuss here whether Donald Trump should be included on the list, and to refrain from edit warring.
 * As for the point about Obama, the source doesn't use the word strongman, so let's not go there. Let's stick to the topic.
 * i.e. Should Donald Trump be included in the list? Which sources describe him as a strongman?  Are they reliable for this purpose?  Should we discount the idea of including him before he is inaugurated, on the basis of WP:CRYSTAL?  etc.  Yaris678 (talk) 16:14, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, per WP:CRYSTAL, we should not have Trump on this list (nor should some other people from stable democracies be on the list). We cannot say of Trump that he "rules by force and runs an authoritarian regime": We have to see what he does in office. Even when he attains the presidency we have to beware of extravagant claims, hyperbole, warnings and concerns of possible Trump behavior in office or even Trump's own rhetoric. Only actions count. SeoMac (talk) 07:18, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

President Donald Trump is not either strongman or dictator. This list should be removed. Marxistfounder (talk) 13:43, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 April 2017
2602:304:CF85:81C0:E544:CDAC:A670:E414 (talk) 17:21, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Gulumeemee (talk) 02:06, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 May 2017
2602:304:CF85:81C0:E544:CDAC:A670:E414 (talk) 12:41, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Murph 9000 (talk) 13:24, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

List needs Magaret Thatcher
She is reputed and famous by her uncompromised political and administration style, and named as The Iron Lady by the public. Thus, she can be counted as a strongman leader. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.183.119.210 (talk) 06:32, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
 * . She certainly fits the definition of a leader "who led by force of will and character".--Nev&eacute;–selbert 14:26, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, it seems my edit has been reverted. It seems as if this list is limited to men only.--Nev&eacute;–selbert 17:04, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No it just was not backed up with an RSApollo The Logician (talk) 17:08, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Not true, . Unless, that is, if you consider Reuters an unreliable source.--Nev&eacute;–selbert 00:37, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The source never called her a "strongman" or woman.Apollo The Logician (talk) 15:51, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * "Thatcher clearly relished her strongwoman poster image".--Nev&eacute;–selbert 19:25, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Cultural bias
The last part of the sentence (after especially):

The term is often used interchangeably with "dictator" in the western world, but (...) commonly lacks the negative connotations especially in some Eastern European and Central Asian countries.

is clearly a display of bias by whoever wrote it. I hope most people are aware that Eastern European and Central Asian countries do not use English as their native language. I'm not even sure how to precisely translate "strongman" into the Eastern European language I speak, let alone what its supposed connotations are. I suspect that whoever wrote it just based their judgement on a (partly true) western stereotype of Eastern Europe and Central Asia as places with current or historical dictatorships. But the presence of dictatorships in a given area says nothing about common perception of the word "strongman" in English, or the existence of words in the native language which somehow approximate "strongman" without negative connotations. I think the part after "especially" should either be removed, or made more precise/specific with references, explaining what exactly is meant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.50.12.162 (talk) 15:16, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Lists of strongmen names
Zman19964 Removed all the names from the article. We can't just accuse people of being strongman. There are more strongman and people in the article shouldn't be called them. Trump, Andrew Jackson, And for could be considered strongman. In addition Margret Thatcher was called the Iron Lady. I suggest we just it as I left it, as a definition. 11:40, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I do agree. --Discasto (talk) 21:28, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Probably for the best.--Nev&eacute;–selbert 09:56, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The list is called List of people characterised as strongmen. There is a difference.Apollo The Logician (talk) 10:58, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Unless there are solid reliable references stated that the subject is characterised, that list is useless. What was deleted was a list of people supported by cherrypicked references which, at most, supported that the words "strong" and "man/woman" was used some times with regard to the subject. --Discasto (talk) 08:31, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree. There are plenty of people that have been called strongmen by solid reliable references. Fidel Castro or Stalin are two examples.Apollo The Logician (talk) 09:35, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Such "plenty of" as just a handful of cases. The remaining ones in the former list is a never ending list of people based on cherry picking from dubuious sources. As the list does not add anything to the article. It's fine how it is right now. --Discasto (talk) 13:47, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Some strongmen are controversial figures. This should have further evidences to prove. Marxistfounder (talk)

People need to stop readding that list.Apollo The Logician (talk) 07:59, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Strongman (politics). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131029212945/http://pakistantimes.net/pt/detail.php?newsId=11104 to http://pakistantimes.net/pt/detail.php?newsId=11104

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:49, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

"Political figures referred to as strongmen"
I don't think that the list accurately depicts the actual definition of Strongmen as many of the sources for some of the politicians listed are from rather biased sources or the word "Strongman" is taken out of context. Examples of this include the two New Zealand Prime Ministers formally listed here, both of whom were not dictators or even authoritarian and neither ruled by force, Yet because of these a b sources they are considered to be the equivalent of South American Dictators. I think that this list should be renamed, as "Political figures referred to as strongmen" seems to end up listing many people who do not fit the description.
 * Second this. Normally saying "referred to as" is considered a weasel word. Granted there are citations for most of the figures on the list, but "referred to as" is such a low bar that these citations may as well be meaningless. After all, anybody can call anybody anything they want, there's no point in documenting that on its own. This list is useless unless we make some attempt to distinguish who is actually a strongman per the explanation preceding the list, and who has simply been called that as a pejorative.AARPterrorist (talk) 22:06, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Totalitarian strongman...
Including this...
 * Josef Stalin
 * Benito Mussolini
 * Adolf Hitler
 * Kim Il-Sung, Kim Jong-Il and Kim Jong-Un
 * Mao Zedong...

136.158.7.225 (talk) 02:44, 27 November 2020 (UTC)


 * I've reverted your edit. You just can't throw anything you want into a Wikipedia article, stuff needs to be supported by a reliable source. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:50, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Strongman (strength athlete) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:03, 3 March 2022 (UTC)