Achievements of Marcos: More from the history report

Achievements:

1. His leadership was as excellent as always, and he dealt out justice to outlaws and established unimpeachable personalities in positions of command.
2. He liberalized trade with the free world, hastening the industrialization of the Philippines.
3. He improved agricultural production to make the country self-sufficient in food, especially in rice.
4. He tried to strengthen the foreign relations of the Philippines.
5. He played a large part in developing a new conscience in the lower house, which was a comment in regards to his integrity during the time of carpetbaggers.

History Essay: Does authoritarian rule usually benefit a nation? If so, why? If not, why not?

I'm posting our "group" essay in History here just for convenience’s sake, so there. I think I'm perfectly justified do so, don't you think?

An authoritarian rule can be beneficial for a state when there is a competent leader on top. Based on the research and analysis we conducted, obviously a dictatorship is not all bad. An iron-fisted ruler doesn’t necessarily mean an iron fist in the stomach. But although this kind of rule does not mean confirmed development for a nation, neither does it assure you of a peaceful rule and nation.

There are more incompetent and immoral rulers in this world than there are decent and moral ones, so logic would dictate that it is more likely for a dictator to be detrimental to the nation. The ones we researched on were generally good dictators, they did great things in their prime, but none of these came without a detriment of some sort.