USSR and PRC had really bad checks and balances since they let dictators consolidate power and form cults of personality. You really think those are good examples of your point? Have you read entirely different histories than I have? Which books do you recommend then?
The USSR and PRC did not have dictatorships, this is a misunderstanding of the Soviet structure and the concept of the Mass Line. Not even the CIA believed the USSR to be a dictatorship. The USSR had a more democratic structure than the US:
Soviet Russia and China were nominally a democracies, but both were controlled by individuals without checks. Stallin and Mau respectively. Again, what history books are you reading that is saying otherwise?
But they don’t actually put it in place because of the pressures during a revolution.
Pressures on the system from destabilization are threats of revolution, hence revolutionary pressure.
Do you think a democratic bureaucratic fully checked and balanced revolution would succeed in overthrowing the structure?
Has before and will again.
Examples?
USSR, Cuba, PRC, etc. Read theory and read history books. You’re interested in neither though.
USSR and PRC had really bad checks and balances since they let dictators consolidate power and form cults of personality. You really think those are good examples of your point? Have you read entirely different histories than I have? Which books do you recommend then?
The USSR and PRC did not have dictatorships, this is a misunderstanding of the Soviet structure and the concept of the Mass Line. Not even the CIA believed the USSR to be a dictatorship. The USSR had a more democratic structure than the US:
I recommend reading, among the other books linked, Blackshirts and Reds.
Soviet Russia and China were nominally a democracies, but both were controlled by individuals without checks. Stallin and Mau respectively. Again, what history books are you reading that is saying otherwise?