Tyrannicide, or the idea that killing a tyrant leader can be justified for the good of the public, is a very controversial idea that goes all the way back to the Ancient Greek and Roman periods. According to Andrade, “like it or not, tyrannicide does form part of the American ethos,” and we are even teaching kids that tyrant leaders should be killed through movies like The Lion King. While I agree in theory that killing a dictator is justified if it will save the lives of many people, I think that in reality it is much more complicated than that and tyrannicide is ultimately not beneficial in most cases.
One reason that I believe tyrannicide is not a good solution in the long run is that the outcome is extremely unpredictable. It can lead to instability if there is not a viable replacement for the tyrant leader who is not also a tyrant. Andrade uses examples from both ancient and recent history to demonstrate this. In the case of Julius Caesar, which is also discussed in the George reading, Brutus’s plan backfired because after even though Caesar was killed, emperors came to power shortly after, and these some of these emperors were even worse tyrants than Caesar. In the modern Middle East, the deaths of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi, who were both brutal dictators, have not made Iraq and Libya have led to extreme instability and creation of other terrorist groups.
Another reason that I think tyrannicide is not the best solution is because tyrant dictators are rarely acting entirely alone, they are usually part of a larger movement or group. If the leader or figurehead of the group is killed, someone else who shares the leader’s ideologies could easily step in, and people would not be any better off.
I agree that tyrannicide is not the best solution in many cases. Especially related to the Middle East, the US’s actions there have created even more instability with our interventions. Because the tyrannical rulers aren’t just acting alone and have a network, or institutional system, rebellions/revolution might be a better solution to create change that won’t result in another tyrannical leader.
I agree that killing a tyrant is not the best solution to tyranny, even though it will save the lives of many people. Most of the time a tyrant has a large group of followers who will quickly take his place if the spot opens up. I really liked how you offered a better solution to this issue by suggesting having a rebellion instead.