PDF Summary:On Tyranny, by Timothy Snyder

Democracy is fragile, and history shows that tyranny can take root even in stable societies. In On Tyranny, historian Timothy Snyder examines how authoritarian regimes gain power and how citizens can resist them. Drawing on lessons from 20th-century Europe, he explains how tyrants manipulate language, exploit crises, and dismantle democratic institutions to consolidate control.

Snyder offers practical guidance for defending democracy, from recognizing propaganda to supporting civil society organizations. He discusses how preemptive obedience enables tyranny, why maintaining professional ethics matters, and how individuals can serve as models of resistance. This guide provides strategies for protecting democratic processes and understanding the intellectual and psychological conditions that allow authoritarianism to flourish.

(continued)...

He argues that post-truth thinking is a precursor to fascist ideology. Fascists abhor facts and favor slogans and myths over journalism and history. They use propaganda to stir emotions before individuals can determine the truth. Nationalism is subjective, with the only reality being the bitterness we experience when considering other people. Nationalists promote our worst qualities while telling us we’re superior.

Is Nationalism Always Bad?

While Snyder argues that nationalism is inherently subjective and divisive, some political philosophers have argued that a form of nationalism can be morally defensible and even necessary for a just society. In her book Liberal Nationalism, Yael Tamir argues that liberalism should not seek to overcome or abolish national attachments but to shape them, because shared national identity provides the motivational and emotional basis for citizens to care about one another’s fate, to sustain democratic solidarity, and to support schemes of social justice that would be unreachable in a purely universalistic, identity-blind political framework. Tamir’s argument suggests that nationalism, when properly channeled, can be a force for good rather than a precursor to tyranny.

Methods of Establishing and Maintaining Tyranny

Conditions for Tyranny's Ascent

Snyder believes that tyranny can rise when people comply preemptively. This means anticipating the desires of an authoritarian government and volunteering of your own accord. By doing this, you show those in power what they can do. It’s a political tragedy, as it involves automatically adjusting to new circumstances without contemplation.

(Shortform note: While Snyder warns against preemptive compliance, it’s important to note that a general suspicion of early cooperation with authorities can also be problematic. In Why People Obey the Law, Tom R. Tyler argues that people are more likely to follow rules, accept decisions, and cooperate with legal authorities when they regard those authorities as legitimate.)

Another condition for tyranny’s ascent is when our systems aren't defended. These structures help us maintain decency in society, but they're unable to defend themselves. Unless they're protected from the outset, they'll fall in succession. We often presume that organizations are able to inherently defend themselves, even from outright aggression. Some German Jews made this very error regarding Hitler and the Nazis after their government was established. It's a mistake to believe that leaders who gained authority via institutions can't alter or dismantle those same systems—even if they've clearly stated their intent to do so.

To counter this, Snyder suggests supporting a favored institution—a judicial body, a news outlet, legislation, or a trade union.

The Pitfalls of Unquestioning Institutional Support

While Snyder’s advice to support a favored institution is well-intentioned, it can backfire if citizens don’t scrutinize how these institutions are run. In Ruling the Void, Peter Mair argues that political parties, once vital to democracy, have become disconnected from society and lack meaningful competition. This disconnect can also apply to other institutions like judicial bodies, news outlets, legislation, and trade unions. If citizens blindly support these institutions without examining their internal workings, they risk entrenching insiders who may be quietly undermining democratic accountability.

Tactics of Tyrannical Seizure and Consolidation

Snyder points out that tyrants use paramilitary groups to intimidate and exert power. These groups might be a party's paramilitary branch, the personal guards of a politician, or a civilian group that a political faction has organized. They generate an atmosphere of intimidation, which enables the tyrant to win elections and seize power over the country.

(Shortform note: Snyder isn’t the first to point out that tyrants use paramilitary groups to generate an atmosphere of intimidation. In Uncivil Movements, Leigh A. Payne describes how right-wing leaders in several Latin American countries used paramilitary groups to skew elections and seize power. For example, in Brazil, the right-wing military government used paramilitary groups to intimidate left-wing voters and ensure that the right-wing candidate won the election.)

Additionally, Snyder says that tyrants exploit crises to solidify their control. They use these situations to justify eliminating the separation of powers, dissolving opposing parties, and suspending fundamental rights. For example, Hitler used the Reichstag fire to foster an atmosphere of terror, which resulted in the deaths of millions. Current authoritarian figures, such as Vladimir Putin, use authentic, dubious, and fabricated terrorism to clear away barriers to complete authority.

To counter this, Snyder advises immediately identifying and opposing the control of fear starting at the time of the incident, exactly when it appears hardest to act.

The Dangers of Immediate Action During a Crisis

Snyder’s advice to immediately resist fear-based narratives during a crisis could have unintended consequences. In the immediate aftermath of a crisis, people often lack accurate information and may inadvertently spread rumors or misinformation. This can intensify public fear and provide authorities with a pretext for harsher crackdowns. For example, the authors argue that during acute crisis events, crowdsourced attempts to “help” by rapidly generating and circulating unverified explanations, suspect lists, and conspiracy narratives often operate as a form of digital vigilantism that amplifies rumors, entrenches false claims, and legitimizes harassment or punitive action against misidentified individuals.

Strategies for Resistance and Defense of Democracy

Snyder emphasizes the importance of defending democracy from internal threats. He warns that democracy must be protected from those who might take advantage of its liberties to destroy it. In the 20th century, many European democracies fell as a lone party took control by blending a coup and election.

Austria’s Self-Coup

In The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes, political scientists Juan J. Linz and Alfred Stepan argue that Austria’s experience in the 1930s is a paradigmatic example of a democratic breakdown produced by a government-led “self-coup” rather than by an overt overthrow of the regime. In 1933, Chancellor Engelbert Dollfuss, who had come to power through parliamentary bargaining, used a technical crisis in the legislature and emergency decrees to shut down parliament, censor the press, and ban rival parties, including the powerful Social Democrats.

He also suggests serving as a role model by resisting the current situation. When you do this, you break the hold of current conditions, and other people will join you.

(Shortform note: In Private Truths, Public Lies, Timur Kuran argues that people often hide their true political preferences, and that even a few people who are willing to speak out can change the perceived distribution of opinion, making it easier for others to join them. This can lead to a cascade effect, where more and more people come forward, and the existing order collapses.)

Next, we’ll explore how you can engage in individual acts of resistance, strengthen democratic institutions, protect democratic processes, and safeguard the bedrock of a liberated community.

Individual Resistance Tactics

Snyder stresses the importance of engaging with people from different backgrounds to create change. To resist tyranny, be prepared to leave your comfort zone and meet new people. While social media can be used to plan demonstrations, real change only happens when people gather to voice their demands face-to-face. Tyrants will only change their behavior if they face tangible consequences.

(Shortform note: Sociologist Zeynep Tufekci disagrees with Snyder’s assertion that real change only happens when people gather to voice their demands face-to-face. In Twitter and Tear Gas, she argues that networked digital technologies can pressure authoritarian governments to make concessions even when large-scale protests are impossible.)

We’ll begin by looking at how individual and intellectual resistance can support our efforts to resist tyranny.

Personal and Intellectual Resistance

Snyder believes that upholding ethical standards in your profession helps resist tyranny. Tyranny relies on professionals to execute its orders, so if these individuals refuse to participate in unethical actions, it becomes much harder for the regime to commit atrocities. It's especially important to maintain professional ethics when we're told the circumstances are unique and that we must obey directives.

Professional Norms as a Bulwark Against Tyranny

In How to Save a Constitutional Democracy, Tom Ginsburg and Aziz Z. Huq argue that the durability of constitutional democracy often depends on whether key actors inside the state—judges, career civil servants, election administrators, and other legal professionals—choose to interpret and enforce the rules in line with their professional norms rather than the short-term interests of incumbent politicians. Their comparative studies of constitutional retrogression demonstrate that when these institutional insiders adhere to standards of legality, procedural regularity, and independent judgment, would-be autocrats often fail to convert temporary political advantages into consolidated authoritarian rule.

Another way to resist tyrannical power is to investigate and challenge propaganda. Snyder defines propaganda as information that is deliberately misleading or biased, often used to advance a particular political cause or point of view. It may be difficult to recognize because it often uses familiar language and symbols. However, it’s important to challenge propaganda because it can lead to the erosion of democratic norms and tyranny gaining ground.

To achieve this, research platforms that examine propaganda efforts, including those originating internationally. Also, be accountable for the information you share with others.

(Shortform note: To help you recognize propaganda, set aside a few minutes each week to play an online game that teaches you to spot propaganda techniques. In a 2019 study, Jon Roozenbeek and Sander van der Linden found that playing a game that simulates the spread of fake news can help people recognize and resist propaganda.)

Strengthening Democratic Institutions

Protecting Democratic Processes

Snyder also emphasizes the need to uphold multiparty democracy and democratic electoral regulations. A political group could alter the system internally if it feels empowered by winning an election or by refusing to accept a loss. The political groups that reshaped governments and repressed opponents weren't initially all-powerful. They took advantage of a pivotal time to obstruct their opponents' political activities.

To counter this, engage in municipal and statewide elections as long as you're able. Consider becoming a candidate.

(Shortform note: Engaging in municipal and statewide elections may not be as effective in countries with competitive authoritarian regimes. In these countries, the ruling party manipulates the political system to maintain power while still holding elections. They control the media, restrict opposition parties, and manipulate vote counting, making it nearly impossible for opposition candidates to win.)

Safeguarding the Foundations of a Free Society

Snyder stresses the importance of engaging in civil society to protect freedom. Civil society includes any group or entity that isn't part of the government, such as charities, clubs, and NGOs. Authoritarian governments oppose civil society because they want to control every part of people's lives. They require all groups to be registered and answerable to the state. Engaging in social and civic groups helps you build trust with people outside your immediate circle and learn from others. This makes life feel more orderly and makes democracy more appealing.

To achieve this, support causes you're passionate about and join organizations that reflect your values.

The Dark Side of Civil Society

While Snyder argues that joining civic groups protects freedom, the political scientist Sheri Berman argues that it can also hasten authoritarian takeover. She points to the example of Germany in the 1930s, where the Nazi party was able to take over the country in part because of the strength of civil society. Berman argues that when voluntary associations are captured by intolerant or anti-democratic forces, they can undermine democracy. In Germany, many civic groups became dominated by right-wing nationalists who opposed the Weimar Republic. These groups provided a ready-made network for the Nazis to mobilize support and spread their ideology.