Rereading this detailed and very real description of the facts of everyday life under a strongman, I am reminded of how some people, without experience of hurricanes, view the coming storm. With excitement they prepare for the party they will enjoy as they ride out the tempest with friends. Expecting exciting moments of chaos and uncertain outcomes. Always imagining the sunny days after the storm as , unscathed, they get back to normal life. It's like an unscheduled holiday to them. For us who've been through a few, we prepare for the storm with dread. We know what it's like to spend days without power, sweating and hoping mold doesn't destroy our damaged homes. Dealing with insurance companies and contractors to put things back together, if they aren't completely destroyed. Spending money we can't afford to spend on essential repairs. Searching for gasoline and an ATM with cash or an open grocery store. Outside, the only sound in the sweltering heat is the drone of generators. It's a true version of Hell. One major difference between the catastrophe of a hurricane and that Dr. Snyder describes here is that the hurricane is likely to bring people together to help one another recover. This one will even drive parents and children apart with distrust. The worst possible world.
Excellent metaphor! I'll try to remember to use this. It can be extended to the way Trump used disaster response resources to favor some regions & starve others.
Thank you Tim. Last night I watched Fateless, 2005, free on TUBI. based on the book by Imre Kertersz, the deportation of Hungarian Jews to Auschwitz and Buchenwald. There is a scene early in the movie when the Jewish Community of Budepest is coralled to stables before transport out of the city and we see a mother who is not in the group shielding her sons eyes from, 'the event." Heart wrenching movie. Regarding your book, "On Tyranny", speaking of the heart it is heartening that I am hearing discussion on the news regarding, Obeyance in Advance. Is it finally sinking in as to what we are up against?
So true. My wife and I talked to a young women in Prague when we visited a few years ago who was a child during the communist rule. She told us as a teenager how fearful her parents were that she would say something in school that would get them in trouble and how they begged her to be careful about what she said to anyone. This brings visions of the book Nineteen Eighty Four.
Cuban dictators on both the right, Fulgencio Bautista, and left, Fidel Castro, fit your description perfectly. During both regimes, extortion and bribery replaced the rule of law. During Castro's rule, neighbor turned against neighbor through The Committee for the Defense of the Revolution. Today that diminished country has poor infrastructure, the electricity is gone and the lights don't come on. My wife and her family lived through the precise experiences you describe. The United States became their refuge from the terrors of totalitarianism but today the US seems to be lurching toward similar decay. We are but a few steps away from the fate of a banana republic.
Thanks for adding a description of life in Cuba to the mix. Reading your comment, and of course having read Tim's essay, I am deeply moved to think how citizens of other countries have suffered under strong man rule, whether that is under the banner of Fascism, Naziism, Communism or the false flag of "Freedom" that is not really free, just a license for the strong to attack their opponents and oppress the weak.
It is humbling to contemplate the sacrifices so many have made for the lives we live in freedom. I know it sounds trite to say this, but when people live within the "bubble" of democracy and civil order, to the extent that we enjoy those things in America, it is so easy to take one's own freedoms for granted as just part of the natural order of things. Breaking down the false assumptions contained in the Strongman Myth, we are reminded that freedom isn't actually free.
These days I am often reminded of Ray Bradbury’s remarkable novel of a dystopian state, Fahrenheit 451. The character of the protagonist Montag's wife, whose whole existence is ruled by her exposure to the single media outlet on the giant screen in their house seems to be descriptive of Trump’s MAGA constituency, solely focused on a bodyguard of lies promulgated by Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, and their ilk.
Montag’s job is as a fireman, burning books because they make people think, which makes them sad, is a stark picture of the world certain Republican governors and others on the right would like to create with their mandate that no child should be made to feel unhappy or uncomfortable by any aspect or their education.
Bradbury saw clearly the worst potential of the internet, long before there was an internet. We would do well to heed him.
Besides amassing as much money as possible and dying “in bed a billionaire”, the strongman’s most significant goal is to remain in power, the nation he has decimated be damned. The history lessons of centuries of autocratic regimes have been sorely overlooked or forgotten by today’s authoritarian fanboys. If they get their wish, they’d better watch out. Strongmen don’t like wanna strongmen anymore than they like dissidents.
I’ve been thinking today about the supporters of Trump. Not the wealthy elite but the working people who feel disenfranchised, perhaps thinking this is their chance. If Trump’s past history of loyalty is a measure, as soon as he is elected they will be abandoned to fend for themselves. No ACA, Social Security, or other entitlements. If they think that the their current existence is bleak, think about trying to exist without a social safety net, few prospects, and diminishing life expectancy. To me, this is the ultimate tragedy.
Thank you Dr. Snyder, for this honest and detailed information. Although I never experienced this first hand I remember hearing similar stories from immigrants following WW2 in Canada, This was the real life experiences for Europeans emigrating to Canada.
We’d be a much more united nation if this essay, or “On Tyranny” were required reading, no books were banned, and both were civilly talked about. The Return on Investment (ROI) would shatter records!
While Trumps threatens ("enemy within”?) Liz Cheney with a firing squad, the convicted fraudster/rapist & proud predator then says "whether the women like it or not, I'm going to protect them”... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IVjc-p4jt4
I'm glad you did a recording of this essay, as it is one of your best and most disturbing. When one of my sisters visited me a few days ago, we read it together. I just forwarded the recording to her. She's a Democrat but I've been trying to get her used to what a dictatorship will be like, slowly, over the last year, so she'll know what to expect.
On the subject of mass violence, several months ago I pre-ordered a new book by Christian Gerlach, "Conditions of Violence." I imagine you already know about it. Just received an email telling me that it's been shipped. The reason I bring it up is because of a Substack essay you wrote in Oct 2021, "Killing parents in bad faith: How historians will remember this pandemic." The Table of Contents isn't available, but included in the description is "COVID-19 as mass violence." Also note: "some people claim a freedom to kill as a political right," which seems especially relevant now.
Here is the description:
"Mass violence comes not only from states, but also from people. By analyzing mass violence as social interaction through survivor accounts and other sources, this book presents understudied agents, aims and practices of direct violence and ways of action of those under persecution. Sound history – examining the noises of mass violence and persecution – is particularly telling about such practices. This volume shows that violence can become socially hegemonic, and some people claim a freedom to kill as a political right. To scrutinize indirect violence, which is often imperialist in character and claims many victims, the book proposes the concept of conditions of violence. These conditions are produced by definable groups of actors and foreseeably harm definable groups (which differs from the anonymous and static ‘structural violence’). This is exemplified in a case study concerning famines in World War II and another on COVID-19 as mass violence. Less global in character, other case studies in this volume deal with Rwanda, Bangladesh/East Pakistan and the Soviet Union."
A couple of things occur to me now that didn't on first reading. (You and Ruth Ben-Ghiat have enhanced my understanding of these matters!) One is how much of this is already happening in certain Republican-run states. Even in the blue or purple areas of these states, my friends and colleagues are often reluctant to speak up, and they certainly don't put Democratic stickers on their car or signs on their lawn. It's obeying in advance but it's also "go along to get along" or "picking your battles." The line between them is indistinct and shifty.
The other thing is "In a democracy, elected representatives listen to constituents. We take this for granted . . ." But in many places we can't take this for granted because it doesn't happen. Our elected representatives listen more closely to big donors and special interests than they do to us, if they listen to us at all. Where this is the case, the fantasy that a strongman will listen to us, or already knows what we want, could be even more compelling.
Susanna: You correctly observe that "the line between (obeying in advance and 'picking one's battles' ) is indistinct and shifty." Like you, I wonder where is the tipping point beyond which democratic norms cannot hold back an inevitable slide into full-blown autocracy?
I am not an Eastern Europe specialist like Tim Snyder, but I think we have seen a fine example of this slow slide in Hungary, as Orban used democratic institutions, along with a traditionalist, ill-informed bloc of the rural electorate to allow his party power to dismantle democratic and free-market institutions (media, courts, and opposition parties) and reform government in conformity with his authoritarian rule. Lessons to be learned.
Rereading this detailed and very real description of the facts of everyday life under a strongman, I am reminded of how some people, without experience of hurricanes, view the coming storm. With excitement they prepare for the party they will enjoy as they ride out the tempest with friends. Expecting exciting moments of chaos and uncertain outcomes. Always imagining the sunny days after the storm as , unscathed, they get back to normal life. It's like an unscheduled holiday to them. For us who've been through a few, we prepare for the storm with dread. We know what it's like to spend days without power, sweating and hoping mold doesn't destroy our damaged homes. Dealing with insurance companies and contractors to put things back together, if they aren't completely destroyed. Spending money we can't afford to spend on essential repairs. Searching for gasoline and an ATM with cash or an open grocery store. Outside, the only sound in the sweltering heat is the drone of generators. It's a true version of Hell. One major difference between the catastrophe of a hurricane and that Dr. Snyder describes here is that the hurricane is likely to bring people together to help one another recover. This one will even drive parents and children apart with distrust. The worst possible world.
Excellent metaphor! I'll try to remember to use this. It can be extended to the way Trump used disaster response resources to favor some regions & starve others.
Absolutely. Hurricanes will be exponentially harder to recover from with a strongman in control.
Thank you Tim. Last night I watched Fateless, 2005, free on TUBI. based on the book by Imre Kertersz, the deportation of Hungarian Jews to Auschwitz and Buchenwald. There is a scene early in the movie when the Jewish Community of Budepest is coralled to stables before transport out of the city and we see a mother who is not in the group shielding her sons eyes from, 'the event." Heart wrenching movie. Regarding your book, "On Tyranny", speaking of the heart it is heartening that I am hearing discussion on the news regarding, Obeyance in Advance. Is it finally sinking in as to what we are up against?
So true. My wife and I talked to a young women in Prague when we visited a few years ago who was a child during the communist rule. She told us as a teenager how fearful her parents were that she would say something in school that would get them in trouble and how they begged her to be careful about what she said to anyone. This brings visions of the book Nineteen Eighty Four.
Cuban dictators on both the right, Fulgencio Bautista, and left, Fidel Castro, fit your description perfectly. During both regimes, extortion and bribery replaced the rule of law. During Castro's rule, neighbor turned against neighbor through The Committee for the Defense of the Revolution. Today that diminished country has poor infrastructure, the electricity is gone and the lights don't come on. My wife and her family lived through the precise experiences you describe. The United States became their refuge from the terrors of totalitarianism but today the US seems to be lurching toward similar decay. We are but a few steps away from the fate of a banana republic.
Thanks for adding a description of life in Cuba to the mix. Reading your comment, and of course having read Tim's essay, I am deeply moved to think how citizens of other countries have suffered under strong man rule, whether that is under the banner of Fascism, Naziism, Communism or the false flag of "Freedom" that is not really free, just a license for the strong to attack their opponents and oppress the weak.
It is humbling to contemplate the sacrifices so many have made for the lives we live in freedom. I know it sounds trite to say this, but when people live within the "bubble" of democracy and civil order, to the extent that we enjoy those things in America, it is so easy to take one's own freedoms for granted as just part of the natural order of things. Breaking down the false assumptions contained in the Strongman Myth, we are reminded that freedom isn't actually free.
These days I am often reminded of Ray Bradbury’s remarkable novel of a dystopian state, Fahrenheit 451. The character of the protagonist Montag's wife, whose whole existence is ruled by her exposure to the single media outlet on the giant screen in their house seems to be descriptive of Trump’s MAGA constituency, solely focused on a bodyguard of lies promulgated by Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, and their ilk.
Montag’s job is as a fireman, burning books because they make people think, which makes them sad, is a stark picture of the world certain Republican governors and others on the right would like to create with their mandate that no child should be made to feel unhappy or uncomfortable by any aspect or their education.
Bradbury saw clearly the worst potential of the internet, long before there was an internet. We would do well to heed him.
Thank you, Tim. I have forwarded this powerful writing to a number of friends. How to send it to those who need to read it, is my dilemma.
Besides amassing as much money as possible and dying “in bed a billionaire”, the strongman’s most significant goal is to remain in power, the nation he has decimated be damned. The history lessons of centuries of autocratic regimes have been sorely overlooked or forgotten by today’s authoritarian fanboys. If they get their wish, they’d better watch out. Strongmen don’t like wanna strongmen anymore than they like dissidents.
‘The strongman is really the weak man: his secret is that he makes everyone else weaker.’
Time to let the old, lying weakling out to golf pasture as he’s not even capable of climbing onto a truck 🤠 #Loser
I’ve been thinking today about the supporters of Trump. Not the wealthy elite but the working people who feel disenfranchised, perhaps thinking this is their chance. If Trump’s past history of loyalty is a measure, as soon as he is elected they will be abandoned to fend for themselves. No ACA, Social Security, or other entitlements. If they think that the their current existence is bleak, think about trying to exist without a social safety net, few prospects, and diminishing life expectancy. To me, this is the ultimate tragedy.
D. Trump wearing the Proud Boys colors on his hat, instead of the MAGA colors, IS A CALL TO ARMS. And S. Bannon is out of jail.
Bob: If - God forbid - Trump is installed as Supreme Overlord, what sort of response do you have in mind?
Honestly, I don't know.
Thank you Dr. Snyder, for this honest and detailed information. Although I never experienced this first hand I remember hearing similar stories from immigrants following WW2 in Canada, This was the real life experiences for Europeans emigrating to Canada.
We’d be a much more united nation if this essay, or “On Tyranny” were required reading, no books were banned, and both were civilly talked about. The Return on Investment (ROI) would shatter records!
And D. Trump is now wearing the colors of The Proud Boys, rather than those of MAGA. Boy, is that sending a signal!
WSJ 10/3//24: "The Next President Inherits a Remarkable Economy" then envy of the world. #VoteBlue https://www.wsj.com/economy/the-next-president-inherits-a-remarkable-economy-7be2d059
While Trumps threatens ("enemy within”?) Liz Cheney with a firing squad, the convicted fraudster/rapist & proud predator then says "whether the women like it or not, I'm going to protect them”... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IVjc-p4jt4
I'm glad you did a recording of this essay, as it is one of your best and most disturbing. When one of my sisters visited me a few days ago, we read it together. I just forwarded the recording to her. She's a Democrat but I've been trying to get her used to what a dictatorship will be like, slowly, over the last year, so she'll know what to expect.
On the subject of mass violence, several months ago I pre-ordered a new book by Christian Gerlach, "Conditions of Violence." I imagine you already know about it. Just received an email telling me that it's been shipped. The reason I bring it up is because of a Substack essay you wrote in Oct 2021, "Killing parents in bad faith: How historians will remember this pandemic." The Table of Contents isn't available, but included in the description is "COVID-19 as mass violence." Also note: "some people claim a freedom to kill as a political right," which seems especially relevant now.
Here is the description:
"Mass violence comes not only from states, but also from people. By analyzing mass violence as social interaction through survivor accounts and other sources, this book presents understudied agents, aims and practices of direct violence and ways of action of those under persecution. Sound history – examining the noises of mass violence and persecution – is particularly telling about such practices. This volume shows that violence can become socially hegemonic, and some people claim a freedom to kill as a political right. To scrutinize indirect violence, which is often imperialist in character and claims many victims, the book proposes the concept of conditions of violence. These conditions are produced by definable groups of actors and foreseeably harm definable groups (which differs from the anonymous and static ‘structural violence’). This is exemplified in a case study concerning famines in World War II and another on COVID-19 as mass violence. Less global in character, other case studies in this volume deal with Rwanda, Bangladesh/East Pakistan and the Soviet Union."
A couple of things occur to me now that didn't on first reading. (You and Ruth Ben-Ghiat have enhanced my understanding of these matters!) One is how much of this is already happening in certain Republican-run states. Even in the blue or purple areas of these states, my friends and colleagues are often reluctant to speak up, and they certainly don't put Democratic stickers on their car or signs on their lawn. It's obeying in advance but it's also "go along to get along" or "picking your battles." The line between them is indistinct and shifty.
The other thing is "In a democracy, elected representatives listen to constituents. We take this for granted . . ." But in many places we can't take this for granted because it doesn't happen. Our elected representatives listen more closely to big donors and special interests than they do to us, if they listen to us at all. Where this is the case, the fantasy that a strongman will listen to us, or already knows what we want, could be even more compelling.
Susanna: You correctly observe that "the line between (obeying in advance and 'picking one's battles' ) is indistinct and shifty." Like you, I wonder where is the tipping point beyond which democratic norms cannot hold back an inevitable slide into full-blown autocracy?
I am not an Eastern Europe specialist like Tim Snyder, but I think we have seen a fine example of this slow slide in Hungary, as Orban used democratic institutions, along with a traditionalist, ill-informed bloc of the rural electorate to allow his party power to dismantle democratic and free-market institutions (media, courts, and opposition parties) and reform government in conformity with his authoritarian rule. Lessons to be learned.