{"id":7012,"date":"2026-07-22T13:27:48","date_gmt":"2026-07-22T13:27:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/myanmarmuslim.news\/en\/?p=7012"},"modified":"2026-07-22T13:27:48","modified_gmt":"2026-07-22T13:27:48","slug":"why-the-burmese-regarded-tyrant-kings-as-one-of-the-five-enemies-and-why-a-power-vacuum-is-worse","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/myanmarmuslim.news\/en\/2026\/07\/22\/why-the-burmese-regarded-tyrant-kings-as-one-of-the-five-enemies-and-why-a-power-vacuum-is-worse\/","title":{"rendered":"Why the Burmese Regarded Tyrant-Kings as One of the “Five Enemies” \u2014 And Why a Power Vacuum Is Worse"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

\u25a0 Burmese tradition lists tyrannical, wicked kings among the “Five Great Enemies” (yan-thu-myo-nga-par) \u2014 because the people had no choice but to endure whatever cruelty a bad ruler inflicted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Note: There is a notorious coincidence as present President Senior General Min (Min=King) Aung Hlain is also t TYRANT MIN (King).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

But is anything more destructive than a tyrant? Yes: the absence of governance altogether. A state with no ruler at all (Min-mae<\/em> \u2014 “kingless”) can cause far greater, more limitless devastation than the cruelty of a single despot.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The same is true when rival kings compete without end \u2014 ordinary people, caught between warring factions, live in fear of whichever warlord’s territory they happen to be standing in, unable to work or build a livelihood in peace under anyone’s protection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bad governance, at least, is predictable. You can guess how a given general or ruler will behave. But once there is no ruler at all, no one can predict which commander, which faction, will do what, or when. Life, property, and security lose any guarantee whatsoever.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u25a0 This is why, when trying to remove a tyrant, it’s essential that the administrative machinery to fill the resulting power vacuum is already in place before<\/em> the tyrant falls \u2014 so no vacuum forms in the first place. That’s the reason for building bureaucratic\/administrative structures in parallel with armed revolution, not after it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I don’t believe that, left ungoverned, people will naturally organize themselves into a harmonious society. It isn’t in human nature. Without structure, societies revert to something closer to the Stone Age.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The international community shares this instinct \u2014 it rejects vacuums and fears chaos. Both the US and China fear it too. Even they only want to negotiate and make deals with parties capable of building real governing structures \u2014 not with scattered individuals who hold no real authority.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u25a0 In Myanmar’s post-Spring future, I don’t want to see Che Guevara\u2013style figures. Charismatic, dramatic personalities can energize young activists in the short term, but they are a serious liability for long-term state-building \u2014 difficult to rein in or hold accountable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What’s needed instead is a body resembling America’s “Founding Fathers” \u2014 statesmen capable of managing both domestic and foreign affairs competently, beyond the battlefield. Civilian leadership \u2014 political actors without<\/em> guns \u2014 guiding those who carry guns, is the very essence of democracy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It’s possible for a victorious military commander to transform into a political leader at the top. But if so, military habits and mindsets must stay behind in the barracks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u25a0 Competing centers of power are just as dangerous \u2014 they lead straight toward a “Warlord Era.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Once the military government is removed, there must already be a single armed force, under one unified command, with firepower not inferior to that of the old military \u2014 ready to take its place. Other armed groups may continue to exist, but this central force must carry enough weight to enforce order over them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u25a0 It must function as a single hegemonic authority, not merely a coalition fighting a common enemy. Without that, the result is “all against all” \u2014 factions turning on one another in endless cycles. We’ve already seen this in northern Shan State, where allied ethnic groups turned against each other over control of just four or five townships. It’s not surprising \u2014 it’s the natural outcome of a vacuum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rivals for power tend not to sit down at a round table. They settle disputes blade to blade, spear to spear, bullet to bullet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u25a0 Building a single, hegemon-level force to succeed the military government is necessary \u2014 but that’s exactly where the harder, messier problem begins. The collapse of the army does not by itself produce a “happy ending.” What happens after<\/em> that collapse is what will actually determine the foundation of the new nation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If future generations read this “Romance of the Myanmar Spring” as an epic, the real question is: what should this generation actually do?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u25a0 Myanmar has historically lacked a strong, unifying state ideology. Since independence, the country’s borders have been held together mainly through large-scale coercive force. In any country like this, once that coercive capacity weakens, cohesion breaks down \u2014 every man becomes his own ruler, and the state fragments. We’ve seen this pattern before: the fall of the Qing (Manchu) dynasty, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and Libya after Gaddafi all followed the same trajectory. Myanmar is no exception.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We need to think ahead to avoid repeating this pattern. The goal should be to replace dictatorship with a genuinely different, democratic political system \u2014 but that doesn’t mean weakening hard power. Changing the political system doesn’t require a “soft” state. Rather than a country left fragile and depleted \u2014 a broken-down military and a weakened state apparatus, as under the current junta (however brutal) \u2014 I want to see a stronger “Greater Myanmar” emerge from this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u25a0 Hate the tyrant.<\/strong>
Fear the vacuum.<\/strong>
Be wary of rival rulers.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the first year, we should look to the French Revolution as a model.
Beyond the first year, the aim should shift toward something closer to the American Revolution \u2014 a war of independence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

#Augustus_Linn<\/strong>
22 July 2026<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

A few brief reference notes<\/strong>, since you asked:<\/p>\n\n\n\n