Depends on what you mean by worst.

Worst as in most despicable or worst as in most incompetent at their job.

If going by both of the above ie you mean most idiotic and incompetent and a despicable piece of human excrement to boot then I advise you to look at the tyrannical rule of Jean-Bédel Bokassa who overthrew the Central African Republic and ruled it for some 15 odd years. His highlight consisted of him declaring himself Emperor and bankrupting the country to support his coronation. His coronation involved him wearing a diamond encrusted crown and a solid gold throne in the shape of an eagle. He eventually got overthrown after he personally beat some 100 odd elementary school kids to death sparking off a huge revolt against his rule. There are also rumours that he served human flesh to foreign visiting dignitaries including the then French Defence Minister. From all accounts the guy was seen as an idiot by everyone who met him but that didn't stop him seizing power and being a total shit to anyone who opposed him.

There is an account of him personally murdering a rival in a cabinet meeting of the countries ruling assembly in front of his cabinet. He apparently hacked the guy to pieces on the cabinet table carving him up and then supposedly sending his remains from barracks to barracks to send a warning to any other soldiers considering a coup.

All in all a lovely sounding guy.

That depends on how you define "worst".

By pure numbers of deaths, Mao Zedong probably leads the field.

However, what Hitler, Mao, Idi Amin and many other dictators have in common is that the evil that they came to represent wasn't what they intended. They honestly thought that they knew what was best for the country and that their actions were justified. And then things just went horribly wrong.

The are also dictators that just led the country in the same way as their predecessors, just with more modern weaponry, leading sometimes to more deaths. Dictators like Sadam lead the country with the same iron hand as most of his predecessors. To them, that was/is just the way how the world works.

In my book, the truly worst dictators are the ones that were truly evil: Ivan the terrible, Caligula, Vlad the impaler and many others. They are not necessary known for extreme numbers of death, but they had absolutely no good intentions what so ever. They enjoyed killing or had absolutely no regard for human life.

Here are some real charmers.

There is a proverb from West Africa: "Until lions have their historians, tales of the hunt shall always glorify the hunter."

Thomas Sankara (1949-1987) was president of the west African nation of Burkina Faso from 1983 to 1987. His regime was one of brief and peculiar form. Despite after thirty years, many African scholars and political philosophers look to Sankara's vision of a united Africa. Even today, he is considered a hero by many Burkinabe as well as Africans.

When I first heard of Sankara, which was just a few years ago, I was really shocked. This guy was really a piece of work, and yet I never heard of him until then. As a former resident of Africa, I admit to being embarrassed over my own ignorance. Even my father had met him briefly during Sankara's visit to Addis Ababa.

Thomas “Tom Sank” Sankara was an officer in the Burkinabe military when the country was known as Upper Volta. His father served in the French army during WW2 and was held as a POW by the Germans. As an officer cadet, Thomas Sankara was influenced by marxist writings during his military education in Madagascar. He gained a heroic reputation during the 1974 border war with Mali and was also a popular guitar player. He was strongly influenced by Che Guevara and fashioned his rock star image in a similar manner. Even as president, Sankara continue to wear his signature military fatigues and red beret. As such, he is commonly known as "Africa's Che".

Courtesy of Guardian.com. Sankara arrives in Addis Ababa. I suspect my father is somewhere in this crowd

In 1983, with broad support from fellow officers and citizens, Sankara was installed as president after Jean-Baptiste Ouedraogo was overthrown. Some support was provided by Qadaffi, who at the time was not on friendly terms with the French (Chadian-Libyan conflict).

In the brief period he ruled, Sankara initiated a number of policies which has given him a favorable reputation throughout the continent. I'll write them all in bullet point.

* On the first anniversary of his coup, he got rid of the name "Upper Volta". In accordance with his anti-imperialist stance, Sankara removed the name as it was given by the French colonists. He renamed the country as Burkina Faso, which means "Land of Upright (or Incorruptible) People" in the local Mossi and Djula languages. He even personally composed the national anthem which remains used today.

* Another early change he implemented was the replacement of the government's luxurious Mercedes cars, such as this 1980s model...

with this...

The Renault 5, at the time the cheapest available car in Burkina Faso. Under Sankara's presidency, it was the official vehicle for all government employees, including himself. Honestly, can you think of a single African president willing to drive in this?

In addition, officials, including ministers, were not permitted to hire private chauffeurs or use 1st class airline tickets. Sankara stated that before his presidency, the country's ministers took more luxury trips to the US and Europe than to the countryside of Burkina Faso.

* He changed traditional power structures among tribal chieftains. No longer were they allowed to extract tribute from peasants or forced labor. Local farmers now owned the land they worked on. This allowed Sankara to further implement a policy of self-sufficiency. By redistributing feudal landholdings and instituting large-scale irrigation and fertilization projects, Burkina Faso was producing enough of its own food and no longer dependant on foreign aid. In 1986, Burkina Faso was producing 3800 kg of wheat per hectare, more than double of the average 1700 produced by other countries in the Sahel region.

"The science of the multinationals does not offer them these means, preferring to invest in cosmetics laboratories and plastic surgery to satisfy the whims of a few women or men whose smart appearance is threatened by too many calories in their overly rich meals, the regularity of which would make you—or rather us from the Sahel—dizzy"

* With the aid of Cuban doctors, he launched a national vaccination program to eradicate polio, meningitis and measles. In one week, 2.5 million Burkinabe were vaccinated, a feat that earned Sankara the congratulations of the World Health Organization. Sankara was also the first African leader to publicly acknowledge the threat of AIDS to Africa's development, a revolutionary act considering that AIDS denialism is still thriving on the continent.

* Promoted women's rights and their political participation. He was among the first African leaders to appoint female cabinet members and his government consisted of 20% women, more than most African nations. Even military service was open to women. (Some say that, like Qadaffi, Sankara had female bodyguards that rode motorcycles. But I haven't found any evidence indicating this is more than a rumor)

He also banned female genital mutilation, forced marriages, child marriages, and polygamy. Right to divorce and widow's right to inherit were introduced. Contraception was promoted and if a girl became pregnant, she was allowed to remain in school. He argued it was discrimination if a girl should remain at home because of her pregnancy, while the boy who made her pregnant may continue his education. By placing the pregnant girls in the same class, boys would be reminded of their irresponsibility on a daily basis and be less encouraged to "fool around".

In addition, he introduced "women's day" every year, in which men would perform the chores traditionally assigned to women, such as buying food at market or cooking. Men were to experience first-hand the conditions endured by their wives and daughters.

"The revolution and women’s liberation go together. We do not talk of women’s emancipation as an act of charity or because of a surge of human compassion. It is a basic necessity for the triumph of the revolution. Women hold up the other half of the sky"

Excerpt from Sankara's speech to the Organization of African Unity in Addis Ababa

* In a number of international forums, such as the Organization of African Unity, Sankara advocated for African nations to oppose the economic exploitation by western corporations and repudiate the foreign debt. He argued that the poor and exploited do not have the obligation to pay the rich and exploiting. The purchase of weapons from western nations to be used against fellow Africans was also an obstacle to development. And last but not least, he pushed for a common African trade organization (similar to the European Union) which would allow African nations to trade and exchange labor. These ideals have also been promoted by other pan-African leaders.

* Privately, Sankara was a man of very few possessions. He lowered his monthly salary to $450, owned one Renault car, four cheap motorcycles, three guitars, a fridge and a broken freezer. His simple home had no air conditioning, and he would not install any until every Burkinabe had one in their home.

By refusing to wear a business suit, Sankara denounced the opulent lifestyle of politicians. Wherever he went, he either dressed in his iconic military uniform or traditional African shirts.

His portrait did not hang in any public places, unlike many African nations where they have laws requiring a portrait of incumbent presidents in public areas.

“From our point of view, a revolutionary is someone who knows how to be modest, while at the same time being among the most resolute in carrying out the tasks entrusted to him. He fulfills them without boasting and expects no reward” - Sankara’s Political Orientation Speech on October 2nd 1983

* Launched a nation-wide reforestation campaign to prevent the gradual encroaching Sahara. 10 million trees were planted, and new owners or tenants of new housing units were required in their housing/rent contract to plant and care for a minimum number of trees. Women and youth built tens of thousands of improved stoves to reduce the consumption of firewood. An old tradition of cultivating trees in towns and villages was revived, and each family was given the means to plant one hundred trees per year. The cutting and sale of firewood was strictly regulated.

“We are not against progress, but we do not want progress that is anarchic and criminally neglects the rights of others. We therefore wish to affirm that the battle against the encroachment of the desert is a battle to establish a balance between man, nature, and society. As such it is a political battle above all, and not an act of fate.” - At the International Conference on Trees and Forests on February 5th 1985

In summary, Sankara's policies were radical, massive, and groundbreaking, even by modern standards. All of these campaigns were conducted by the minimal resources the people had at their disposal, and their accomplishments surpassed most African nations at the time. And each of these projects were performed for one reason only: to improve the nation in all aspects, whether they be educational, political, social, economical, environmental, or spiritual. And not once did Sankara claim praise for these accomplishments. As far as dictators go, I can't think of a single one which surpasses his modesty.

Now that I'm done with listing his positive contributions to Burkina Faso, I'm going to list the negative consequences of his leadership.

"Our revolution will be the most authoritarian thing there is; it will be an act through which the people impose their will by all available means, including arms if necessary"

Sankara's regime did not go uncriticized by humanitarian organizations, including Amnesty International and Freedom House. Shortly after the revolution, seven officials from the previous administration were summarily trialed and executed.

As far as dictators go, Sankara would no doubt be among the top "least violent" authoritarian leaders of modern history. Capital punishment was banned and none of his political opponents were executed. Even Sankara's predecessor Ouedraogo is alive and well, running a medical clinic to this day. Sankara's standard punishments of dissent were often job dismissal, community service, or public humiliation. Even the OECD admitted that although violence was not uncommon, killings were remarkably few.

It is difficult to determine whether many of the crimes committed during this period were in accordance with Sankara's instructions or self-serving members of his regime. Many of his comrades were ideological followers of Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, and Enver Hoxha. They were less concerned than Sankara over potential abuses, were intolerant of dissent, and favored coercion. They favored harsher reprisals over Sankara's lenient methods. In 1987, Oxfam recorded the arrest and torture of several trade union leaders.

In addition to the regime's negative aspects, there were also mistakes. As popular as he is today, Sankara did implement a number of failed policies. Among his setbacks were his educational programs to combat the country's 90% illiteracy. In 1987, 2,500 teachers went on strike to protest. Sankara had them dismissed and tried to replace them with volunteers, but their lack of teaching experience did not lead to any improvements. Sankara justified his dismissal of the teachers on the grounds that they were part of a destabilization program funded by foreign governments and that he had invited them for negotiations.

“They were fired for waging a strike that was, in reality, a subversive movement against Burkina Faso. At the time we told them very clearly, “Don’t go ahead with this strike because it’s part of a destabilization plan aimed against both Ghana and our country.” You now that in Burkina Faso strikes have always been used to make and break governments. We made public a certain amount of proof in this instance, but not all of it for fear of exposing certain sources of information. We aren’t against the teachers but against the plot that was using the teachers. We carried out our threat because it seemed extremely serious to us that these teachers, who have enormous responsibilities and yet cannot make decisions for themselves, would allow themselves to be led off like Panurge’s sheep” - 1985 interview with Swiss journalist Jean-Philippe Rapp

Another of his dubious policies was the People's Revolutionary Tribunal, a series of courts he introduced where average citizens could accuse government officials of tax evasion, corruption and "counter-revolutionary" behavior. Although these courts were initially approved by the people for their inclusive process, the trials became increasingly haphazard and sometimes exploited for personal gain. Fortunately, the sentences were lenient and often suspended.

Apart from the Tribunals, Sankara also created Revolutionary Defense Committees, inspired by the Cuban Committees for the Defense of the Revolution founded by Fidel Castro in 1960. Similarly, Sankara's CDR was to promote social and political revolution while opposing counter-revolutionary influences. Unfortunately, many abused these committees for personal gain, behaving no better than armed thugs. At the very least, Sankara himself publicly admitted that the Committees had failed in their original intent.

In the end, the negative results of the Revolutionary Teachers program, the Tribunals and the Defense Committees would lead to a growing discontent towards Sankara. Though still popular among the poor, disdain had been stimulated among the middle class and tribal chieftains, those who gained the least from his leadership. Not to mention that the Ivory Coast and its patron France were growing concerned over Sankara's pan-African activities.

Sankara seated with Blaise Compaore, a member of the trio behind the 1983 coup which brought Sankara to power

On October 15th 1987, Sankara was killed during a coup organized by his closest ally and deputy Blaise Compaore, alongside Zongo and Lengani. Relations between the two had turned sour, and Blaise defended the coup on the grounds that Sankara was deteriorating relations with nations such as the Ivory Coast and France. Some argue that the French were worried that Sankara's revolutionary ideals would spread to other former French colonial holdings, including the Ivory Coast. It's worth noting that Compaore's wife was very close to Felix Houphouet-Boigny, president of the Ivory Coast at the time. Houphouet-Boigny was founder of the term "Françafrique " and opponent to other left-leaning leaders in western Africa such as Ghana's president Kwame Nkrumah, another leader with pan-African views similar to Sankara. When the French magazine JeuneAfrique printed allegations that Houphouet-Boigny was involved in Sankara's assassination, he demanded the French government ban the publications.

The "Communist Officer's Group". Compaore, Lengani and Zongo were the officers who liberated Sankara from prison and installed him as president. Two years after Compaore's coup in 1987, Lengani and Zongo were charged with treason and executed. Compaore would remain in power until 2014

After becoming president, Compaore immediately reversed many of Sankara's policies, and rejoined the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. He took out big loans in order to "repair" the country's economy, yet after 27 years with little improvement, one wonders where all that money really went.

Currently, Burkina Faso is one of the poorest nations in Africa and Compaore would remain president for 27 years before being ousted in a coup in 2014. During the coup, the BBC described Compaore as the strongest ally of the French and Americans in western Africa. Coincidentally, Burkina Faso has also become one of the top producers of gold on the continent, actively mined by the following firms.

Goldrush Resources (Canadian), Gryphon Materials (Australian), Orbis Gold Limited (Australian), Golden Rim Resources (Australian), Cluff Gold (English), Randgold Resources (English), Channel Resources (Canadian), Etruscan Resources (Canadian), Goldbelt Resources (Canadian), High Rivers Gold Mines Limited (Canadian), Orezone Gold Corporation (Canadian), Riverstone Resources (American), Societe Semafo (Canadian)

It's worth pointing out though, that Sankara's legacy can arguably be attributed to the brief period he ruled. Four years is not much of a "dictatorial reign", so there is always the possibility that his passionate committment may have deteriorated over time. There are countless examples of dictators that eventually refuse to back down, regardless of their intentions prior to becoming dictators. A friend of mine once joked, "Thomas Sankara was one of those dictators who was lucky enough to die before he screwed things up." In retrospect, there may be truth to these words, but we will never truly know.

But what we do know is that Sankara's policies were reversed immediately by Compoare, thus reducing the benefits they had provided to the country. Even after almost thirty years, many Burkinabens today describe the 83-87 period as a highlight of their modern history.

Now that Compoare has been ousted from government, it remains to be seen how prominent Sankarist ideals will become in the new Burkina Faso.

What fascinates me about Sankara is how visionary and unique his political views were. He wasn't elected, but he stated he believed in democracy, perhaps not in the form of elections but rather in a "democratic essence". He was a military officer but he encouraged peace and international coexistence. He was critical of capitalism but encouraged free trade within his country and Africa, so perhaps he saw a distinction between capitalism and free market. He criticized the US government but he strongly admired George Washington and the Founding Fathers.

So in conclusion, Sankara was a leader with traits that made him stand out. He was authoritarian, but not corrupt. He had firm, yet not brutal control. He was radical, but also a visionary. He was honest, but sometimes misguided. He also had a sense of humor and personality, almost always smiling in public and using jokes to point out the absurd situation in post-colonial Africa. An interesting combination of leadership traits.

Jazz, rivalry and revolution: Burkina Faso recalls spirit of Sankara

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/05/thomas-sankara-burkina-faso-assassination/

Thomas Sankara's Speech at the United Nations / Discours de Thomas Sankara aux Nations Unies

Why Burkina Faso’s late revolutionary leader Thomas Sankara still inspires young Africans

Pol pot Who forced his vision upon the people of Cambodia in worst possible ways and with that It is estimated that from 1975 to 1979, under the leadership of Pol Pot, the government caused the deaths of more than one million people from forced labour, starvation, disease, torture, or execution while carrying out a program of radical social and agricultural reforms.

Almost 1/3 of the Cambodian population has died as a result of his wicked ways when rolling a country that when he died many we’re glad that he was gone

What you're referring to is technically called a "Benevolent dictatorship", or a dictatorship in which the dictator, dictates based upon what he/she deems to benefits his/her country as a whole. "Unfortunately", many dictators don't act with the interest of their population in mind and would prefer to throw crumbs to keep the population at bay, but in some rare cases the dictator is "good." Though I'm surprised no one has mentioned Lee Kuan Yew, the former Prime Minister of Singapore, we'll discuss my "favorite good dictator" and why he is admired.

Before diving into this interesting guy, lets look at where Singapore is today. According to Wikipedia

• First in Ease of Business, a feat she has accomplished many years consecutively.
• First in IP (Intellectual Property) rights, something critically important to many innovators.
• Tenth place for Foreign Exchange Reserves, an amazing feat considering the population is less than 6 million residents.
• Third for GDP per capita (PPP), and Sixth for GDP per capita (Nominal)
• Less than 2.0% unemployment.
• Boasting a top 100 university, number 21 exactly.
• First in the OECD according to a global education report.
• One of the top places for healthcare on earth.
• Third in technology according to the UN.

And there are many, many more feats that this Asian Tiger has under its belt, and much of this (or at least the ground work) was accomplished by none other than PM Lee Kuan Yew, a "dictator" that many wouldn't have a problem living under. Considering Singapore's lack of resources, and a bit of civil unrest after Britain relinquished control of Singapore, the city-state needed a strong, yet principled leader and Lee Kuan Yew was up for the job. Yes, he was technically "elected" but that doesn't say much considering Kim Jong-un is also elected; but that's besides the point. The point is he quite literally created a culture in Singapore of zero tolerance for corruption, instilled a work ethic like no other in his people, and ultimately investing in his people all without a legislative body to guide him.

He, and the culture he created, quite literally transformed Singapore from this:

To this:

In terms of deaths, there can be only one.

Mao Tse Tung.

The deaths attributed to him were not due to an overall sense of paranoia, or a result of effective leadership, but because of total incompetence and utter stupidity. His policy of shipping grain to the USSR to pay of a debt that wasn’t even called in, as well as his belief in phony agricultural science, and his need to reform land into collectives produced one of the biggest famine in human history. Killing 40 million people. The historian Frank Dikkoter discovered reports wherein mothers and fathers had cannibalized there own offspring to feed there own hunger.

After this, the whole entire party establishment tried to ease him off of power. Reforms led by Deng Xiaoping restored China back to normal. Him breaking up of collective farms and shutting down in inefficient state businesses saw modest economic growth.

However, the jealousy of Mao made him instigate a youth led revolution which saw the murder of intellectuals and the torture of traditional Chinese figures of authority such as teachers. The rich traditions and art of China were destroyed by these youth gangs. Several key political figures, including Deng Xiaoping himself, were beaten and forced to admit treason against the communist party. This killed 3 million people. Finally, after Mao had gotten back to power, he discarded his supporters by sending them to work in villages.

There’s quite a few. If you are from the West, some of these might shock you. If you are not, well, enjoy the ride :)

Number 1: Muammar Gaddafi.

Gaddafi when he was a lot younger. Quite handsome, right?

Gaddafi is often portrayed as a bad guy, and as Ronnie put it “the mad dog of the Middle East”

But that is in fact, not true.

Let’s take a look at some of the luxuries that Libyan citizens had during his rule

1: Free electricity.

2: Free housing.

3: Free healthcare. Not only free healthcare, but the best free healthcare in Africa and the Arab world.

4: A high GDP per capita for two decades before the West started sanctioning Libya.

5: A portion of the money made from oil sales went directly into the bank accounts of Libyan citizens.

6: If healthcare in Libya was not sufficient, the state would finance the entire trip to a foreign hospital.

I could go on and on, but those are just six things.

Also this

Libya had the highest rating on the Human Development Index in Africa while Gaddafi ruled it.

So while he might be portrayed as a bad guy, he was actually a really good leader.

Number 2: Lee Kuan Yew

A young Lee Kuan Yew

Lee. Kuan Yew was the Prime Minister of Singapore for three decades. In those three decades, he transformed the undeveloped city state, which had no natural resources, not much land area and a small army, into a shining example of a developed country. But he did this with many challenges facing him, like the multiculturalism of Singapore. The population was a collection of Malays, Chinese, Englishmen, Frenchmen, Indonesians and many more ethnic groups.

While he did implement dictatorial measures, such as muffling the press, outlawing protests and arbitrarily detaining people, he still holds the title of “The Least Brutal Dictator in History”. He did not kill a single person during his three-decade-long rule. Torture was not implemented either.

Before he took the mantle of leader, Singapore was nothing more than a collection of plastic houses and shanties. Look at Singapore now.

Quite the success story, isn’t it?

Number 3: Park Chung-hee

Park Chung-hee. Slick haircut, right?

Park Chung-hee didn’t exactly come to power by democratic means. He made himself leader in a military coup. But unlike many leaders of military juntas, he was not a selfish blowhard who worked only to enrich himself. Instead, he enriched his country, South Korea.

He developed South Korea’s banking sector, business sector, and enriched the country with a policy of export-oriented industralization.

To give you some perspective, when he came to power, the GDP per capita in South Korea was a miserable 59 dollars. When his rule ended, it was 1,000 dollars.

Unfortunately, he was betrayed and assassinated in 1979, before he could do any more good to South Korea.

And as a bonus, he defended South Korea from communism.

Number 4: Qaboos bin Said al Said, or Sultan of Oman for short.

Looking quite dashing in a military uniform there.

When he took power way back in 1970, Oman was the poorest country in the Arab world. Now, it gained the nickname of “The Switzerland of the Middle East”. All thanks to this man.

Oman, like many other Arab countries, is rich mainly due to oil exports, but added to that, Oman also has a developed banking and finance sector. Hence the nickname. Oman also serves as one big negotiating table, due to its policy of military neutrality.

In 1970, Oman had just three or four schools. Now it has over a thousand, and a few universities, the most famous one being named after him. Also in 1970, the average GDP per capita in Oman was 345 dollars. Now, it is 15,000 dollars. Qaboos still rules Oman, and continues to improve it.

While other Arab countries constantly squabble, Oman quietly sits and looks by, enjoying its wealth.

Number 5: Thomas Sankara

Thomas Sankara. Humble military uniform.

Sankara achieved many great things during his short rule.

He ordered the planting of million upon millions of trees, in order to prevent desertification. He lowered his own salary, and rid the government of most of its corruption, which was a giant problem. He connected the country via roads, and built housing for the citizens of his country. He made it self-sufficient in farming. And he saved the country from French dominance.

He renamed the country from Upper Volta, its colonial name, to Burkina Faso. He composed the national anthem, and designed the flag of Burkina Faso.

Unfortunately, he was killed in a military coup, which was, predictably, sponsored by the French. It installed a brutal dictator who impoverished the country and was a puppet of the French.

So, those were the top five dictators who did their country good.

EDIT: After some research, I came to the conclusion that Lee Kuan Yew had in fact not rigged elections. Even the fiercest critics of his don’t say that he did. I am sorry to spread that misinformation around. THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT!

“He who feeds you controls you.”

Quick quiz, where is Burkina Faso? Is it even a real country or some name I just made up?

Well, Burkina Faso is real (Unlike Canada or Finland) and is a landlocked country in West Africa with a capital city that honestly should be in a spelling bee.

In a coup in the year 1983, a young African visionary by the name of Thomas Sankara, took control of the young nation.

Under the control of Thomas Sankara, the situation within Burkina Faso bettered dramatically.

Here is some of what he did in the span of four years.

• Vaccinated millions of children against Yellow Fever
• Planted thousands of trees to prevent desertification
• Banned female genital mutilation
• Through a series of programs, increased literacy from 13% to 73%
• Saw wheat production per hectare double due to reforming the feudal land system
• Reduced salaries for government officials
• Oversaw the construction of a national road network
• Refused to live luxuriously and even went without Air Conditioning out of principle.
• Opposed foreign aid and promoted self reliance of the nation.

Of course, like every dictator, there are the serious trade offs that come with such rapid progress.

Under Sankara, the press was severely restricted and many “corrupt” government officials were tried.

However, what killed his chances of staying in power for long was his Marxist ideology.

The Soviets sympathized with Sankara who was very anti-West. Being a communist, anti-West dictator never really ended well in Africa; and Sankara was no exception.

In another coup supported by the French, Sankara was assasinated and fell out of power….you know, because he died.

It’s a bit difficult to rule a nation from six feet under.

Would Sankara have made Burkina Faso a better nation had he remained in power?

Its difficult to say, and we don’t have a crystal ball for alternate histories.

However, what we do know is Sankara brought some radical progress to the land of upright men.

A man born out of due season, an anachronism, a throwback to the Tartars of the steppes, a fierce elemental force of a man. With his military genius and his ruthless determination, … in a different age he might well have been a Genghis Khan, conquering empires… ~Noel Barber

Calling him a dictator might not be completely fair, because while he had pretty much absolute control of his country, it was by popular consent. Still, I’ll vote for Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the effective leader of Turkey from 1920 until his death in 1938, and its President for the last 15 years of his life.

I’ve written a few answers about this guy before. He’s basically the George Washington of Turkey, only George Washington had it a lot easier. All he had to do was take a reasonably modern set of 13 British colonies and beat the British with the help of France, Spain and the Netherlands. Atatürk had to take a defeated country which was roughly 200 years behind its enemies, and drive out the British, Italians, Greeks, Armenians and French (Kerem Ulcay pointed out that the latter two were involved as well; the Armenians may have had claim to some land but the others had none) who had occupied his country, at the acquiescence of a worthless Sultan who had put a price on his head!

And he was already the national hero of the Turkish people for what he had done during World War I, when he led his troops in a heroic defense at Gallipoli against fearsome British and ANZAC troops who were trying to take over the Turkish Straits. During the war, he never lost a single battle in which he was in overall command, and he rose in rank from Captain to General. On the day the war ended, he and his army were preventing the British from entering the Turkish homeland with a resolute defensive stand around Aleppo.

Well, needless to say, he wasn’t too impressed when after the war, the Allies imposed a treaty on his country that made Brest-Litovsk look moderate and Versailles positively generous. The Treaty of Sèvres was so vindictive that the Turkish resistance to its terms, and the Greek invasion that accompanied it, is known today as the “Turkish War of Independence.” At one point, the Greeks had advanced to within 30 miles of Ankara. By the time Atatürk was done, he had driven them completely out of Anatolia. His victories compelled the Allies to tear up Sèvres and actually negotiate a fair peace treaty—the only defeated nation in World War I accorded that honor.

Having secured the independence of his people, Atatürk proceeded to fix their country. In 10 years, he pretty much erased nearly all of that two centuries of stagnation under Ottoman rule. Literacy in Turkey went from 10 percent to over 90 percent. He introduced representative government, a new legal code to replace Islamic law, and made massive reforms to Turkish society. He even found time to offer safety to many refugees from some nutcase dictator in Germany. When the German dictator told him to stop, he replied that a Marshal (Atatürk got one more bump in rank after the War of Independence) doesn’t take orders from a corporal.

Unfortunately, years of hard campaigning as a soldier and his work as leader of Turkey in the postwar years made him old before his time, and Atatürk was only 57 years old when he died on 10 November 1938. However, before he died, he left some advice to his successors. He knew another war was coming, and he told them that no matter what happened in that war, don’t side with the Germans against the British again. He anticipated that even if the Germans won many victories, they would again end up facing both the British Empire and the United States aligned against them, and they would lose. They took his advice, sat out World War II as a benevolent neutral, and were rewarded with NATO membership shortly afterward.

There’s a lot more I could say about him, but you get the idea. I don’t think there’s been a greater leader in an Islamic nation since Saladin, who, alas, also died fairly young.

Some people see Mustafa Kamal Ataturk as a dictator. As soon he gained power he immediately abolished Ottoman Empire , which was almost dead by that time, and established a secular government in Turkey. He arrested many orthodox Islamic preachers who objected and allowed freedom of religion in his country. Turkey became the first Muslim country to have religious freedom and secularism.

He was a nationalist and asked his people to focus on nation's growth instead of religious superstitions. He promoted science and also pushed for gender equality. Turkey was one of the first countries to give women voting rights, even before many modern western countries. He encouraged women to come out and participate in nation building. He said-

"To the women: Win for us the battle of education and you will do yet more for your country than we have been able to do. It is to you that I appeal.

To the men: If henceforward the women do not share in the social life of the nation, we shall never attain to our full development. We shall remain irremediably backward, incapable of treating on equal terms with the civilizations of the West."

I really admire this man, who was way ahead of his time. It's because of him Turkey isn't another Saudi Arabia or Iran (after Islamic Revolution).

He abolished sharia law from all parts of life and introduced modern rational law. While India is still struggling to abolish Muslim personal laws which allows polygamy and triple talaq, Turkey did it long ago, thanks to this man. I love Turkey and Turkish people and I hope it will never go back to the dark ages. And I genuinely think we need more Ataturks in this messed up world.

Some of his quotes -

Man, you have requested me to open a can of worms. There’s no way to sort this out, because every part of the political spectrum seems to have a pet dictator. But let’s break down things:

1. Individual dictator, not a regime itself
2. From Latin America
3. That was “bad” in some respect (cruelty, backwardness, stupidity, you weren’t specific)
4. And deserves infamy.

So I have come up with a list of seven (a random number, but a symbolic one, and, according to a Brazilian proverb, “a liar’s counting”), in no particular order.

• Fulgencio Batista (Cuba).
• Augusto Pinochet (Chile).
• Rafael Trujillo (República Dominicana).
• Alfredo Stroessner (Paraguay).
• Solano López (Paraguay).
• Anastasio Somoza (Nicaragua).
• Carlos Castillo Armas (Guatemala).

These are the worst, in my opinion.

You have probably noticed the absence of some high-profile names who do deserve to be dishonorably mentioned, but they are not in my list for reasons like:

• Fidel Castro didn’t kill enough people (though he had many killed) and in much of what he did he simply had limited choices.
• Papa Doc and his son were really cruel, but Haiti was already a mess before them, and they weren’t responsible for that.
• Getúlio Vargas was not actually cruel (though he was an admirer of Mussolini) and his body count is quite low. He was a also an enthusiast of progress and did really help improve the country.
• Hugo Chávez was not a dictator by any accounts (only according to US propaganda and its pundits) and most of the deaths related to him were not caused or ordered by him.
• Manuel Noriega was really a cruel crook, but merely being one does not award you a place in a “worst list”.
• The Brazilian dictatorship was not a personal dictatorship, neither were the Argentine, Salvadoran or Uruguayan ones.
• Bolivian dictators are too many and mostly short-lived, diluting their importance.
• The rest of the Latin American dictators were simply not dictators or were not notable enough. So, on to the list.

Fulgencio Batista

What to think about a man who took a fledging democracy with a fast-growing economy that benefited from closeness to the USA and made it a mess? Rampant incompetence meant that most doctors were in big towns, most infrastructure was only developed in tows, and the standards of living were abysmal. Dissent was suppressed, elections and constitutions imposed and revoked at whim. His best friends were the New York and Las Vegas mobs (Mafia, I mean). The guy once ordered the extraction of the genitals of a prisoner and the eyes of another, to be sent to their fiancées, when he knew they were about to get married. There was no way to fight peacefully against this ogre, whom the USA duly gave amnesty and political asylum.

I strongly suspect that, after Fidel nationalised business, the CIA would have reinstated Batista, so he could “take care” of Cuba for some more years.

Augusto Pinochet

You score more points in my list if, more than merely cruel, you are cruel at unprecedented levels. Chile had been peaceful and stable for many decades and, despite some social unrest and widespread poverty, people were not used to sheer brutality. Then, after the ill-fated Allende term, comes Pinochet, backed by the CIA.

In the beginning he didn’t merely take up power by force, he fucking bombed the seat of the government using fighter jets while the president was still in there, leading to the suicide of Allende, supposedly to spare lives of people who lived across the street.

Then he began rounding up people and taking them to stadia, where they were kept sitting up the bleachers under gunpoint while others were brought infield to be tortured there for the others to see.

Then he began lining up student leaders across the ground and running over their heads with tanks.

And he even took a photo inside the La Moneda palace wearing sunshades, boots and a frown, a totally “bad guy” frown, to show the country who was in charge.

Alzheimer’s was too kind a death for this monster.

Rafael Trujillo

You also score points in my list if your regime is of the kind that no one who is simultaneously intelligent and sane can endure. That was Trujillo.

To begin with, Trujillo was already sending people to prison even before coming to power, which must be a world’s first. Then he demanded every public servant to donate a tenth of their salaries to the treasury to help recover the country from a hurricane. In a true fascist stance, people were required to join the single party and carry the membership card at all times. You could be arrested for vagrancy for not having one on you.

Setting a precedent for other crazy dictators, Trujillo wanted to be everywhere, in effigy or in name. He renamed the capital (San Domingo) to “Ciudad Trujillo” and the country’s highest peak to “Cerro Trujillo”. He set up an industry to mass produce busts, equestrians and full-body statues of himself to be erected in every city of the country. He demanded every newspaper to include a salute to himself (¡Viva Trujillo!) on every frontpage, every day, which is an idea so outrageous that even Hitler was not crazy enough to come up with something similar. And Hitler was Hitler, you know.

He built a huge limelight in Ciudad Trujillo so that people could read “Dios y Trujillo” at night when they looked at the city from the sea. As for the inscription, it is short for “Dios en el Cielo y Trujillo en Tierra” (God in Heaven and Trujillo on Earth), which he ordered be written inside all churches so that law-abiding, god-fearing and torture-adverse citizens could literaly praise him as a part of their religious worship.

Every year from 1937 onwards he was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by his claque of supporters.

He also set precedents, followed by later dictators, to install hand-picked cronies as acting presidents under his discreet tutelage. However, not being president was not a deterrent, and Trujillo commemorated (with stamp issues and special coins) his “25 years in power” while his brother was nominally the president.

At least once Trujillo allowed an opposition party to form and operate for a while, but that was only so he could identify discontents and have them executed. Which is also something that very few dictators were crazy and cruel enough to do. Most would be content with the dissenters being defeated, cowed and sidelined. Only Trujillo would lure them into the light.

Alfredo Stroessner

You also get high points in my list if you become the dictator of a country you have no proper citizenship of. Stroessner was the son of a German immigrant and a poor Paraguayan woman of mixed indigenous ancestry. Reportedly, according to current Paraguayan law, he would not be eligible for the office of president, but he cut his way up the ranks using a bayonet anyway.

Stroessner did his best to achieve a place in my list. He run a mobster economy in Paraguay, changing a poor agricultural country into a den of smugglers and Nazi war criminals—a heavy fame that Paraguay still fights to shake off. During Stroessner’s long reign, counterfeiting money and goods was one of the main sources of national income and the country didn’t almost import cars, but simply stole them across the border (more often in Brazil, but also in Argentina).

While the country became a kleptocracy of the worst kind, the regime arrested and tortured people for the most ridiculous things. A man was arrested because he painted white his house that was formerly red (“colorada”, as the name of Stroessner’s party) and a young man was jailed for singing a serenade to his fiancée.

During his 35 year tenure the wages for school teachers were lower than the average income of housemaids and no new schools were built by the state (some were built and furbished by local communities, and then delivered to the management of the government). Those who knew Stroessner in person claim that he was one of the most ignorant men ever to live, an absolute intellectual nullity, but a determined power seeker.

When his regime fell and he was forced to seek asylum (which he, shamefully, got from Brazil), a Brazilian humorist nailed it saying: “Old Stroessner imported to Brazil is the worst counterfeited whisky we ever got from Paraguay”.

More about his regimen please see this documentary produced by Paraguayan TV: 35 Años del Stronismo Documental Completo

Solano López

You also score points if you selfishly cause the genocide of your people trying to save your ass.

Solano López was stupid enough to think that he could annex two Argentine provinces, half of a Brazilian one and the entire country of Uruguay, in order to secure an outlet to the sea, so he could then import arms and goods (from foreign partners yet to be contacted) to support him in the (predictable) war against three of his four neighbours.

In his mind these things added up. Mysteriously.

In reality, López’s folly managed what had seemed impossible: solved the deep regional divides that threatened the stability of both Brazil and Argentina and the ensuing war cemented national identities in both countries, as well as in Uruguay (nothing like a good old bloody war to rally tribes around their chiefs).

Paraguay had an impressive start, in which the Paraguayan army showed itself capable of running away from the enemy faster than they could recharge their shotguns, owing to the difficult and marshy Paraguayan landscape (which the Brazilians especially hated like hell). But when the Brazilian navy thrashed all war vessels Paraguay had assembled (and they were not many) the fall of Asunción was unavoidable and soon (in 19th century terms) the Paraguayan state ceased to exist.

But López refused to accept a truce and concede defeat, something that the Brazilians were very ready to do, since they didn’t want to annex Paraguay and were sick of killing all moving targets with two legs, which often meant children and women wearing fake beards and wooden contraptions of guns, painted dark with mud. He said that Brazil and Argentina would gut Paraguay and share its land if he wasn’t victorious. The people, for some strange reason, believed him and kept on his side. The war lasted for six years and resulted in the death (by war and famine) of about 60% of the population of Paraguay (including 90% of men of working age), which pretty much sent the country back to the Palaeolithic (that is way, way more ancient than the Greeks who invented the words palaios and lithos).

Anastazio Somoza and his offspring

Father and son, setting another bad example, ruled the tiny nation of Nicaragua as their own personal plantation. In the beginning Luis Somoza helped solve the rivalry between local clans and pacified the nation, then he became a dictator and the laws were void before his will.

Somoza came to power to do the “dirty work” the US Marines had not done. After a six-year civil war the Nicaraguan nationalists leadered by Augusto Sandino accepted a peace truce and returned to civil life, however, after the US forces left, Somoza had Sandino killed, as well as every known former member of his rebel forces.

He was shot by a poet, an event that, in spite of the appropriateness of the circumstances, was not the originator of the “poet’s justice” phrase—but can be considered its epithome.

He was flown to the Panamal Canal Zone to be operated and possibly saved, but reached there already under Lucifer’s caring.

His son was less cruel and methodic, but more inclined to take for himself whatever property and women he fashioned. He was eventually ousted by the FSLN, a left-wing nationalist group that meant to remake Nicaragua into a proper state. Like in the case of Cuba, the Sandinistas (inspired by Sandino) were soon opposed by the USA but the USSR was not as willing to provide them hard cash and support.

It was to defeat the men who ousted the Somoza dinasty that the USA waged a dirty war for years, using Honduran and Salvadoran mercenaries as proxies, paying them with money obtained from illegal sources, incluing armas smuggling (Iran-Contras) and, reportedly, drug trafficking.

A brief Spanish documentary on him can be found here: Asesinato de Anastacio Somoza (VIDEO)

But the Sandinistas were the bad guys, sink this in and move over.

Carlos Castillo Armas

You score lots of points if you overthrow the government of your country using mercenaries and foreign troops, eventually having to defeat the entire Army and Air Force of your country because they were loyal to the regime you want to topple.

That’s what this rascal did: he waged war on his own country using mercenaries and US troops for support. To pay the wages of the war dogs he took loans that indebited his country deeply. And to appease the USA he rolled back an agrarian reform that took lands from the hands of United Fruit Co and gave them to impoverished peasants so they could raise foodstuffs.

The cherry in the cake is to quickstard a genocide against your country’s population so their lands can be declared derelict and then licensed to foreign companies, which will remove the jungle and use them to plant for-export crops.

But if you still think Fidel Castro is the worst, I won’t argue with you. I will only wait until you fact-check what I have written.

Francisco Macias Nguema

Although President of one of the least well known countries in the world, Equatorial Guinea, Nguema is without doubt one of the craziest and frankly evil dictators to ever come to power, becoming responsible for the death or exile of at least a half of Equatorial Guinea’s entire 300,000 population resulting in the nation being bestowed the nickname, the “Dachau of Africa”.

Although democratically elected to power fairly in September 1968, he soon set about cementing his power and making himself dictator. Upon its independence from Spain in 1968, Equatorial Guinea was one of the richest countries in Africa, with the best medical services, the lowest death rate and the second highest per capita income of any sub-Saharan African country. Despite that, under Nguema’s reign, the government was so corrupt and its economy so bad that at one point 90% of its GDP was constituted by foreign aid.

Any dissent was brutally repressed with journalists hacked apart to be cast into the sea to sharks. Nguema’s murderous urges included the dismemberment of his director of statistics for offering figures that displeased him and the murder of all former lovers of his mistresses. When he eventually ran out of money Nguema even kidnapped and ransomed foreigners. Forms of torture and murder he liked to employ included crucifixion, being made to run around a fire until exhaustion before having your skull crushed, being buried up to your head near a red ant hill and perhaps most disturbing of all, a mass execution of 150 opposition members in a football stadium by soldiers dressed up as Santa Claus whilst speakers blared Mary Hopkin’s song “Those Were the Days”.

Nguema’s insanity didn’t stop there. The word intellectual was abolished, all libraries were closed, all people who wore glasses were murdered and formal education was abolished in his anti-intellectual pursuit that far outmatched anything Pol Pot had to offer. Western medicine was banned for being un-african and a legal form of slavery even introduced. Macias eventually banned religious meetings, but not before forcing priests to preach that-

"There is no other God than Macías Nguema" (The Official National Motto of Equatorial Guinea)
“God created Equatorial Guinea, thanks to Papa Macias. Without Macias, Equatorial Guinea would not exist.”

Nguema often used hallucinogenics and went insane as a result, adding to his already ridiculous dictatorship. He would go on to mine the only road out of the country, ban all fishing boats, and declared himself the “Unique Miracle" and "Grand Master of Education, Science, and Culture". Nguema would also build a huge collection of human skulls outside his home that he would use to beat up others as well as hold meetings with “ghosts”. This home was a bamboo hut in his ancestral village of Mongomo, but Nguema made it into his treasury, burying the entire national treasury under his bed after murdering his Central Bank Director when he tried to prevent him from embezzling funds. If this wasn’t enough to convince you this man was batshit insane, electricity would only be switched on in the capital city when Macias paid a rare visit to the city from his country hut since he believed “magic” would keep the power plant running.

Unsurprisingly, according to world bank estimates, 215,284 people fled the country (47% of its population at the time) with some estimates as high as 70% of the population and if you include the approximate 80,000 killed by Macias, the total proportion of those killed or fled as a result of his despotic regime rises to over 60% of the country’s population, something the country has yet to recover from even 40 years after his assassination by his nephew in 1979.

Lee Kuan Yew Benevolent dictator of Singapore for 50 years