| Intros |
Guardian Review |
The 3 Periods |
Fascism & Media |
ChatGPT |
| Virile Man |
Interview - LA Review of Books |
Interview - Kirkus Reviews |
sexual, and other predators. Covering a century of tyranny, this book examines
how authoritarians use propaganda,
virility, corruption, and violence to stay
in power, and how they can be opposed.
https://ruthbenghiat.com | https://lucid.substack.com
What Modern Authoritarian Leaders Have in Common
(and how they can be stopped).
Ruth Ben-Ghiat is the expert on the "strongman" playbook employed by authoritarian demagogues from Mussolini to Putin―enabling her to predict with uncanny accuracy the recent experience in America and Europe. In Strongmen, she lays bare the blueprint these leaders have followed over the past 100 years, and empowers us to recognize, resist, and prevent their disastrous rule in the future.
For ours is the age of authoritarian rulers: self-proclaimed saviors of the nation who evade accountability while robbing their people of truth, treasure, and the protections of democracy. They promise law and order, then legitimize lawbreaking by financial, sexual, and other predators.
They use masculinity as a symbol of strength and a political weapon. Taking what you want, and getting away with it, becomes proof of male authority. They use propaganda, corruption, and violence to stay in power.
Vladimir Putin and Mobutu Sese Seko’s kleptocracies, Augusto Pinochet’s torture sites, Benito Mussolini and Muammar Gaddafi’s systems of sexual exploitation, and Silvio Berlusconi and Donald Trump’s relentless misinformation: all show how authoritarian rule, far from ensuring stability, is marked by destructive chaos.
No other type of leader is so transparent about prioritizing self-interest over the public good. As one country after another has discovered, the strongman is at his worst when true guidance is most needed by his country.
Recounting the acts of solidarity and dignity that have undone strongmen over the past 100 years, Ben-Ghiat makes vividly clear that only by seeing the strongman for what he is―and by valuing one another as he is unable to do―can we stop him, now and in the future.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1324001542
Strongmen: Chilling History for One Nation no Longer Under Trump
Ruth Ben-Ghiat delivers a superb examination of how close the US came
to
fascism – and how it has propped it up before -
by
Charles Kaiser
This terrific history of strongmen since Mussolini makes it clear that despite a horrific pandemic and massive economic disruption, ordinary democratic Americans have more to be thankful for this Thanksgiving than ever before.
Comparing the gruesome, granular details of the reigns of Mussolini, Franco, Hitler, Gaddafi, Pinochet, Mobuto, Berlusconi and Erdoğan to the acts and aspirations of Donald Trump, New York University professor Ruth Ben-Ghiat makes a powerful argument that on the scary road to fascism, America just came perilously close to the point of no return.
Almost everything Trump has done has come straight from the authoritarian playbook. Every dictator, for example, has built on the accomplishments of his predecessors.
“Just as Hitler watched Mussolini’s actions carefully,” Ben-Ghiat writes, “so did Gaddafi learn from Lt Col Gamal Abdul Nasser’s 1952 overthrow of the monarchy in Egypt.” Then in the 1980s and 90s, Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich served as models for Europeans looking for “a more radical form of conservatism”. Gingrich’s 1994 Contract with America was echoed a year later by the Front National, with its “contract for France with the French”. Berlusconi’s Contract with Italians followed six years later.
In Egypt, Nasser hired “former Nazi propagandists for their expertise in antisemitic messaging”. In Zaire, from 1965, Mobutu Sese Seko’s media handlers reimagined Leni Riefenstahl’s image of Hitler descending from the sky by opening the television news each night with a picture of the dictator’s face, hovering up in the clouds.
The parallels between Trump and his role models are endless. Ben-Ghiat writes of “watching Trump retweet neo-Nazi propaganda, call for the imprisonment [of Hillary Clinton] and lead his followers in loyalty oaths at rallies seemed all too familiar”– and how it filled her “with dread”.
Before the Putin-Trump bromance there was Putin and Berlusconi, grinning at each other from Zavidovo to Sardinia. The way Trump talked about Mexicans was hardly different from Hitler’s words about the Jews or Berlusconi’s about Africans. The Italian media mogul and prime minister was himself just a pale imitation of Mussolini. In the pre-war period, he was responsible for the deaths of 700,000 Libyans, Eritreans, Somalis and Ethiopians.
Every authoritarian regime has seen a crucial alliance between big business and the dictator, from Putin and his oligarchs to Hitler and German industrialists and Trump and the Wall Street elite. The German businessman Ernst von Hanfstaengl, Ben-Ghiat writes, introduced a “cleaned-up Hitler to the moneyed social circles that mattered” – just as Blackstone chief executive Stephen Schwarzman helped legitimize Trump with tens of millions in campaign contributions to him and his Republican allies.
Like all his role models, Ben-Ghiat sees in Trump a “drive to control and exploit everyone and everything for personal gain. The men, women and children he governs have value in his eyes only insofar as they … fight his enemies and adulate him publicly. Propaganda lets him monopolize the nation’s attention, and virility comes into play as he poses as the ideal take-charge man.”
The US has done so much to promote authoritarianism abroad during the last 100 years, it’s actually surprising it took so long before we had to confront it at home.
When Mussolini desperately needed international legitimacy and economic aid in 1926, it was a fascist proselytizer and JP Morgan partner Thomas Lamont who rescued him, brokering a $100m US government loan. Fifty years later, Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger told CIA director Richard Helms to make Chile’s “economy scream”, so Gen Augusto Pinochet could overthrow the socialist Salvador Allende. Kissinger and William F Buckley became fervent Pinochet apologists, even as thousands were tortured and disappeared.
In our own time, Trump has never criticized Putin for poisoning his enemies or even putting bounties on US soldiers in Afghanistan. He has privately boasted about saving the skin of Mohammed bin Salman, after the CIA concluded the Saudi prince had ordered the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, a columnist for the Washington Post.
To Ben-Ghiat, the forced separation of nearly 70,000 children from their parents at the Mexican border “brings Trump’s practices in line with states like Hitler’s Germany and Pinochet’s Chile, where children were taken from Jewish, leftist and indigenous parents to be raised by more ‘appropriate’ individuals … Citing freezing temperatures, 24-hour lights, and lack of hygiene and medical care, Dr Dolly Lucio Sevier compared conditions” in camps in Texas “to those of ‘torture facilities’”.
We can be grateful that the assorted criminals and white supremacists Trump chose to fill so many of the highest positions were too incompetent to keep this descent into fascism going any longer.
But most of all we owe gigantic thanks to the 80 million decent Americans who voted for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. It is because of their courage and determination that our badly corroded but still functioning democratic apparatus has proved able to survive. As Ruth Ben-Ghiat makes all too clear, if we had gone any deeper into this four-year tunnel of doom, none might have escaped it.
Three Main Periods in the History of Strongmen:
-
The Fascism of the 1930s:
The first period is characterized by fascism, which involved the destruction of democracy and the affirmation of totalitarian rule, with total war and genocide being the major outcomes.
-
The Dictatorships of the Cold War era:
After 1945, strongmen had to reformulate their ways for a world in which fascism had lost its mass appeal. Whereas Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini are the primary examples of the fascist period, Francisco Franco and Augusto Pinochet are perfect examples of dictators who could not be as fascist as they wanted to be. In order to mask his old fascism under the new circumstances of the Cold War, Franco even organized fake elections in 1947 to confirm himself as leader for life. Strongmen like Franco, Pinochet, Zaire’s Mobutu Sese Seko, and Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi came to power via coup. They were often identified with a defense of the West (Franco, Pinochet), and they were usually supported by Western democracies, but at times, as in the case of Qaddafi, they were strongly opposed to them.
-
The Resurgence of Right-wing Populists like Viktor Orbán, Rodrigo Duterte, and Trump, among others in the present.
The third period is really different from the others in the sense that strongmen like Trump, Jair Bolsonaro, Viktor Orbán, and Rodrigo Duterte have not managed to fully destroy democracy (at least so far). Coming to power in a period marked by the end of the Cold War and a subsequent crisis of liberalism, they are postfascist leaders who make democracy more illiberal, downgrading it to the limit but without reaching (so far) the dictatorial stage of the previous periods.
Across all three periods, the strongman relies on the same set of tools—
extreme nationalism, propaganda, corruption, an extremist ideal of masculinity and violence—although each of these elements appears with variations over time.
Extreme nationalism permeates a nostalgia for a better past that never actually existed. In fascist Italy, Benito Mussolini presented his regime as a return to the times of the Roman Empire. In Nazi Germany, Adolf Hitler promoted a racist fantasy of a Germany without Jews. In the United States, Trump’s “Make America Great Again” propaganda idealizes and seeks a return to the segregationist era before the gains of the civil rights movement.
Propaganda is affirmed through the cult of the leader and violent repression. In the name of the leader, who is presented as the embodiment of the people and the nation, and as its ultimate protector, violence becomes legitimate and even desired. Violence and repression are presented as the way to create transcendental changes in the history of humanity. Hitler exterminated millions of European Jews because he believed it would bring about a new historical era for the Aryan race. Pinochet tortured, imprisoned, and killed thousands of his opponents in Chile, arguing that these acts of extreme repression were at the service of saving civilization.
Both propaganda and repression have changed in our new century, becoming less conspicuous and more overt. If raw violence was the mark of dictators in the eras of fascism and the Cold War, the new-era strongmen like Bolsonaro and Trump have adopted more selective forms of repression and violence. Violence becomes more targeted, and less organized, than in the past (no mass killings or summary executions in the thousands). Deeply repressive acts such as the operation of detention camps in the U.S., the policy of child separation, and the enabling and celebrating of police brutality become structural dimensions of strongman rule. Although state violence is more difficult in a country with a free press, in the new media landscape populist leaders can bypass the press and communicate directly with their followers without scrutiny. In this sense, media and context change but not the patterns of strongman behavior. As Ben-Ghiat observes, “Twitter is for Trump what newsreels were for the fascists: a direct channel to the people that keep him constantly in the news.”
Notably, the strongman’s ultranationalist idea of the past always involves what Ben-Ghiat defines as a “state-assisted machine of libidinal gratification.” The strongman needs to control bodies, and sexual violence and the denigration of women are central to his rule. Machismo is a “strategy of political legitimation and a central component of authoritarian rule.” Strongman regimes put forward a reactionary model of masculinity that starts with the misogynistic monsters at the top. Mussolini was a sex addict who created a “state-assisted machine” to have intercourse with thousands of women, many of whom had just attended his rallies. After these sexual encounters—of which, Ben-Ghiat tells us, there were on average 15 to 20 per week—the women became persons of interest to the state security apparatus:
(violence) His fixers and secret police stood ready to force an abortion, pay for silence, or make life difficult for the women’s boyfriends and husbands. One thing was certain: once Mussolini entered your life and your vagina, you were never free of him again.
Qaddafi used the state security apparatus to create a system of sexual violence where young women were kidnapped and imprisoned as sexual slaves of the leader. Trump’s style of masculinity—his talk of grabbing women by the pussy—reproduces the obsessions and tendencies of his dictatorial predecessors, though in a different form.
Last but not least among the tools of the strongman is corruption. Mussolini, Qaddafi, Mobutu, and Pinochet used their power to build or keep their fortunes afloat. Mussolini set the template for corruption, shutting down investigations of war profiteering to please conservatives and industrialists who had supported him. As in Nazi Germany, racial persecution created big opportunities for his supporters and friends, as well as for state enrichment. Hitler’s funds were exempt from any accounting as “he ordered the Gestapo to destroy his records to hide evidence that he never paid taxes.” Mobutu and Qaddafi created a kleptocracy where it was difficult to distinguish between the leader’s personal finances and those of the state.
From military coups to the “new authoritarian ascents,” these leaders never consider the possibility of an ending to their rule. The “authoritarian playbook,” Ben-Ghiat observes, “has no chapter on failure.” This doesn’t mean strongmen don’t fail: The leader’s insistence on his intuition and personal genius over expertise often leads to crisis, mismanagement, and eventually disenchantment even among some of the most fanatical followers. Hitler trusted his gut to win what eventually became an unwinnable war that destroyed his nation and led to his suicide. The same applies to Mussolini. Trump and Bolsonaro minimized a global pandemic, promising miracle cures and ignoring the advice of scientists. None of them could see that an order built on lies and propaganda around their messianic leadership was not destined to last.
It’s Already Happening Here | The New Republic
https://newrepublic.com/article/160026/its-already-happening-strongmen-maga-book-review
Building a Lasting Personality Cult with 1900s Electronic Media
"From Mussolini’s use of newsreels to Trump’s use of Twitter - authoritarians have had direct communications channels with the public - allowing them to pose as authentic interpreters of the popular will."
--Strongmen
It’s no accident that - modern personality cults first developed in the 1920s, along with the Hollywood star system - since they share an important quality of celebrity: The object of fascination must seem accessible but also be remote and untouchable.
In the political sphere, this translates into leaders who are acclaimed both as men of the people and as men above all other men — the only ones who have a divine mandate to bring the nation to greatness. Former White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders’ statement that God “wanted Donald Trump to become president” is in this tradition.
Nor it is surprising that many strongmen entered office with experience in the art of mass communication or dissimulation, allowing them to exploit the new media of their day.- Benito Mussolini and Zaire’s Mobutu Sese Seko had been professional print journalists, but both excelled at visual communication.
- Adolf Hitler took voice and hypnotism lessons in the 1920s that served him well during the verbal tirades that made him famous.
- Italy’s Silvio Berlusconi and Trump had long experience with marketing and television.
While authoritarian rulers are often weak and paranoid characters, their personality cults depict them as men possessed of uncommon physical vigor and toughness.
Mussolini, the first to use mass media to build his cult, became a divo for his skill at showing off his often shirtless body on camera. He threshed wheat alongside peasants, wrestled a lion cub and straddled horses and heavy machinery.
Russia’s Vladimir Putin has replicated the formula. Trump, less fit, borrows other men’s bodies to make the same point. In November 2019 he tweeted an image of his head photoshopped onto the torso of Sylvester Stallone’s character from the 1982 film “Rocky III.”
Having a direct communication channel with the public is key to maintaining personality cults. The propaganda strategies used, like rallies, have stayed remarkably the same, even as information mediums have changed.
- Mussolini used newsreels,
- Hitler used radio,
- Berlusconi and Libya’s Moammar Kadafi used television,
- India’s Narendra Modi uses Instagram and holograms to appear simultaneously at many rallies,
- Trump uses Twitter, with his misspelled words and grade-school vocabulary playing into his “everyman” persona.
Over a century, a paradoxical truth holds: The more skilled the leader is at mediacentric politics, the more his admirers see him as authentic...
Op-Ed: Trump's formula for building a lasting personality cult https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-12-09/donald-trump-strongman-personality-cultContents - book summary and section names made up by ChatGPT and me.
Check to show only chapter summaries (no section summaries)
Protagonists
Idi Amin: President of Uganda, 1971–1979. He entered office through a military coup and was forced into exile by opposition forces.
Mohamed Siad Barre: President of the Somali Democratic Republic, 1969–1991. He entered office through a military coup and was forced into exile by opposition forces.
Silvio Berlusconi: Prime minister of Italy, May–December 1994, 2001–2006, 2008–2011. He came to power each time through elections. His 1994 government fell due to corruption charges. He was voted out in 2006 and resigned in 2011 during the eurozone crisis.
Jair Bolsonaro: Brazilian president, 2019 to the present. He came into office through elections.
Rodrigo Duterte: President of the Philippines, 2016 to the present. He came into office through elections.
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan: President of Turkey, 2014 to the present. Prime minister of Turkey, 2003–2014 and 2018 to the present. He came into office through elections.
Francisco Franco Bahamonde: El Caudillo (The Leader) of Spain, 1939–1975. He came to power through a military coup and led Nationalist forces during the Spanish civil war (1936–1939). He died in office, of natural causes.
Muammar Gaddafi: Brotherly Leader and Guide of the Revolution of Libya, 1969–2011. He came to power through a military coup and was executed by opposition forces during the 2011 revolution.
Adolf Hitler: Chancellor of Germany, 1933–1945; Führer (Leader) of Germany, 1934–1945. President Paul von Hindenburg appointed him chancellor. Hitler committed suicide in April 1945.
Saddam Hussein: President of Iraq, 1979–2003. He came to power via military coup. Imprisoned in 2003 by American occupation forces, he was tried by the Iraqi Special Tribunal for crimes against humanity. In 2006 he was sentenced to death by hanging and executed that year.
Nahrendra Modi: Prime minister of India, 2014 to the present. He came into office through elections.
Benito Mussolini: Prime minister of Italy, 1922–1925; Head of State and Il Duce of Italy, 1925–1943; Head of State and Il Duce of the Republic of Salò, 1943–1945. King Victor Emmanuel III appointed him prime minister. The Fascist Grand Council removed him from power in July 1943 and imprisoned him. In September 1943, Adolf Hitler had him freed and placed him at the head of the Republic of Salò, a Nazi client state. Italian partisans executed him in April 1945.
Victor Orbán: Hungarian prime minister, 2010 to the present. He came into office through elections. As of April 2020, he rules by decree.
Augusto Pinochet Ugarte: President of the Governing Junta of Chile, 1973–1990; president of Chile, 1974–1990. He came into office through a military coup and was voted out of office by a 1988 plebiscite.
Vladimir Putin: President of Russia, 2000–2008, 2012 to the present. Prime minister, 2008–2012. He came into office both times through elections.
Mobutu Sese Seko: President of Zaire, 1965–1997. He came into office through a military coup. Born Joseph-Désiré Mobutu, in 1972 he changed his name to Mobutu Sese Seko Kuku Ngbendu Wa Za Banga, which translates as “the all-powerful warrior who, because of his endurance and inflexible will to win, goes from conquest to conquest, leaving fire in his wake.” He was forced into exile in 1997 by opposition forces.
Donald J. Trump: President of the United States of America, 2016 to the present. He came to power through elections. In 2019 he was impeached by the House for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. The Senate acquitted him on both counts in 2020.
Introduction
The introduction sets the stage for the book's exploration of authoritarian leaders throughout history. The author delves into the concept of "strongman," emphasizing its global and timeless relevance, and explains the importance of studying their rise to power in times of uncertainty and transition.
Striking Anecdote about Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi
In the Introduction Ruth Ben-Ghiat opens with a striking anecdote about Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi on the day of the American presidential election in 2008. While the world awaited the election results, Berlusconi was reportedly occupied in his Roman residence, preparing to engage in sexual activities. This captivating and provocative opening sets the stage for the exploration of the lives and actions of strongman leaders throughout history.
The author uses this anecdote to draw attention to the contrasting behaviors and responsibilities of world leaders. While many leaders would be closely monitoring international affairs and election outcomes, Berlusconi's alleged focus on personal pleasure suggests a disregard for the gravity of his position and the importance of global events. This vignette serves as a symbol of the self-indulgence and lack of seriousness that can be characteristic of some strongman rulers.
By starting with this attention-grabbing story, Ben-Ghiat effectively captures the reader's interest and introduces the theme of the book: the examination of strongman leadership from Mussolini to contemporary figures. It lays the foundation for an exploration of the personalities, ideologies, and methods of powerful leaders who have left a lasting impact on their nations and the world at large. Throughout the book, the author delves into the psychological, political, and cultural factors that have allowed strongmen to rise to power and maintain their authority.
Overall, this opening anecdote in the Introduction serves as a compelling and thought-provoking entry point into the book's exploration of strongman rule, prompting readers to reflect on the behavior and actions of powerful leaders and their consequences for societies and individuals alike.
The Representation of Masculinity Becomes Part of their Political Brand
Next the author asserts that the contemporary era is marked by the rise of strongman leaders who wield their authority to undermine democratic principles while also employing a specific brand of masculinity to consolidate their power. She points to figures like Silvio Berlusconi and Vladimir Putin as examples of such leaders, who employ tactics that erode democratic institutions and norms.
Ben-Ghiat argues that these strongmen utilize their positions to damage or even dismantle democratic structures, concentrating power in their own hands and weakening checks and balances. They often exploit political and economic systems to their advantage, silencing dissent and limiting the influence of opposition. In the process, they present themselves as the sole protectors of their nations, using their political legitimacy to appeal to a certain idea of masculinity that portrays strength and authority.
The author highlights the correlation between the rise of strongman rule and the resurgence of a hypermasculine leadership style. She argues that these leaders rely on a performative display of traditional masculinity to project power and control. This representation of masculinity becomes part of their political brand, appealing to segments of the population seeking a strong and decisive leader in times of uncertainty.
Furthermore, Ben-Ghiat points out that the appeal of strongman leadership transcends geographical and cultural boundaries. It is not limited to specific regions or historical periods but has manifested in various forms throughout history. From Mussolini's Italy to contemporary leaders like Berlusconi and Putin, these figures leverage charisma and populist rhetoric to foster a sense of national identity and pride, often at the expense of democratic values.
The Introduction sets the stage for the rest of the book, inviting readers to explore the patterns and dynamics of strongman rule and the ways in which these leaders navigate political landscapes while exploiting the allure of masculinity to sustain their grip on power. Throughout the book, Ben-Ghiat delves into the historical contexts and tactics employed by strongmen to shed light on the dangers they pose to democratic societies and the challenges they present for the future of democracy worldwide.
Factors Contributing to the Contemporary Shift away from Democracy
In the next section Ben-Ghiat examines the factors contributing to the contemporary shift away from democracy. She notes that several studies have pointed to recent historical events that have played significant roles in this transformation. The 2008 global recession is highlighted as one such event that had far-reaching consequences on political systems worldwide. The economic downturn created widespread discontent and disillusionment with traditional democratic institutions, leading many citizens to seek alternative solutions and turn to populist leaders who promised quick fixes and a restoration of national pride.
Additionally, the rise in global migration has been cited as another factor that has heightened racist sentiments and contributed to the appeal of strongman leaders. The influx of migrants has sparked fears and anxieties among certain segments of the population, leading to the rise of far-right movements that promote anti-immigrant policies and ideologies. Strongman leaders often capitalize on these fears, using them to fuel nationalist and xenophobic sentiments, positioning themselves as the protectors of national identity and culture.
Ben-Ghiat suggests that strongman leaders skillfully exploit these socio-economic and cultural anxieties to build support and consolidate power. By capitalizing on public frustration and appealing to nostalgic notions of the past, these leaders present themselves as strong and decisive figures who will restore order and stability to society. They harness discontent with traditional politics and institutions, tapping into a growing sense of disillusionment with the establishment, and offer themselves as an alternative, promising to address the concerns of their constituents effectively.
Throughout the book, the author delves into the historical context and examines the rise of past strongman leaders like Mussolini, Hitler, Pinochet, and others, drawing parallels to contemporary figures like Berlusconi and Putin. She highlights how these leaders use fear, nationalism, and a hypermasculine image to rally support and erode democratic values. By analyzing these historical patterns, Ben-Ghiat aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon of strongman rule and its impact on democratic societies today.
Authoritarianism - Inadequately Defined and Understood
Next Ben-Ghiat addresses the concept of authoritarianism and its ambiguity. She observes that despite being a political system that profoundly impacts the lives of countless individuals, the term "authoritarianism" remains inadequately defined and understood. Ben-Ghiat contends that authoritarianism is often mistakenly equated with totalitarianism, which was the hallmark of regimes like Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia. However, she asserts that this oversimplified view overlooks the nuances and variations within authoritarian rule.
The author emphasizes the need for a more comprehensive understanding of authoritarianism, which encompasses a spectrum of leaders and regimes that display characteristics of control, dominance, and a disregard for democratic norms. Ben-Ghiat argues that to comprehend the phenomenon of strongman rule, one must acknowledge its multifaceted nature and recognize its historical roots, tracing back to figures like Mussolini and others who exerted authoritarian tendencies.
The author examines the elements that define authoritarian leaders, such as their charismatic personalities, relentless pursuit of power, and the use of violence and repression to silence dissent. She also notes the significant role that masculinity plays in the legitimization of strongman leaders, as they project an image of strength and toughness, appealing to traditional notions of leadership and power.
Throughout the book, Ben-Ghiat delves into the historical context and the rise of past strongman rulers, drawing parallels to contemporary figures who exhibit authoritarian traits. By shedding light on the multifaceted nature of authoritarianism and its impact on modern democracies, she aims to provide a deeper understanding of the complex and evolving phenomenon of strongman rule.
Enduring Appeal of Charismatic Leaders over the Past Century
Next Ben-Ghiat highlights the enduring appeal of charismatic leaders over the past century, especially during times of uncertainty and societal transition. She notes that throughout history, charismatic figures have risen to power, captivating the masses and exploiting their appeal during periods of upheaval and change.
Ben-Ghiat argues that these charismatic leaders have capitalized on the fears and anxieties of their constituents, promising stability and a return to the perceived glory of the past. They often present themselves as the saviors of their nations, providing simple solutions to complex problems and promising to restore order and national greatness.
The author explores how charismatic leaders, such as Mussolini in the 1920s, utilized their oratory skills and charismatic personalities to garner support and exert control over their followers. These leaders often tap into nationalistic sentiments, promoting a strong sense of identity and belonging among their supporters while scapegoating minority groups or external forces as the source of their nation's problems.
Furthermore, the book examines how modern technology and media have enabled contemporary strongmen to reach broader audiences and consolidate their power. With the rise of social media and digital communication, charismatic leaders can directly engage with their followers, shaping narratives and promoting their ideologies unfiltered by traditional media channels.
Overall, this part of the Introduction establishes the enduring allure of charismatic leaders in moments of social and political upheaval. It sets the stage for the exploration of various strongman rulers throughout history and their impact on modern democracies, providing valuable insights into the complex dynamics that contribute to the rise of authoritarianism in the contemporary world.
Curzio Malaparte's Warning about the Dangerous Nature of Charismatic Leaders
Next Ben-Ghiat introduces Curzio Malaparte's warning about the dangerous nature of charismatic leaders, particularly Mussolini and the rising Adolf Hitler. Malaparte, an Italian-Austrian journalist and writer, published "The Technique of the Coup d'Etat" in 1931, where he analyzed the methods and tactics employed by authoritarian figures to seize and consolidate power.
Malaparte characterized Mussolini as a "modern man," possessing coldness, audacity, violence, and strategic calculation. By 1931, Mussolini had already been in power for a decade and demonstrated his authoritarian tendencies. Malaparte's assessment serves as a cautionary tale about the allure and dangers of charismatic leaders who exploit crises and uncertainties to cement their authority.
Furthermore, Malaparte's work also sounded the alarm about the rise of Adolf Hitler, whose popularity was growing due to the impact of the Great Depression on German society. Malaparte predicted that Hitler, with his fervent nationalism and manipulative tactics, would be even more ruthless and dangerous than Mussolini.
The introduction draws attention to the parallels between the historical context of Malaparte's time and the present, highlighting how charismatic leaders continue to emerge in periods of uncertainty and societal upheaval. Ben-Ghiat points out that Malaparte's warnings about Mussolini and Hitler's authoritarian tendencies are relevant today, as similar dynamics can be observed in modern strongmen who exploit fear and insecurity to amass power.
By referencing Malaparte's insights, the author sets the stage for the exploration of various strongman rulers throughout history and their methods of seizing and maintaining control over their respective nations. This context provides readers with a framework to understand the recurring patterns and dangers associated with charismatic leadership and authoritarianism in the contemporary world.
Charlie Chaplin's 1939 Authoritarian Leader-follower Dynamic.
Next Ben-Ghiat cites Charlie Chaplin's astute observation from 1939, which encapsulates the authoritarian leader-follower dynamic. Chaplin's statement characterizes a dictator as an individual who emerges from a lower social status, only to plunge deeper into a metaphorical hole, captivating the world's attention as they follow him into the abyss.
Chaplin's description highlights the dangerous allure and mesmerizing effect that strongmen have on their followers. These leaders often exploit their charisma and populist rhetoric to gain support from disenfranchised or disillusioned segments of society. They project themselves as saviors, promising to address grievances and bring about radical change, thereby gaining the allegiance of a substantial following.
However, as Chaplin warns, this blind loyalty often leads to catastrophic consequences, as the followers willingly plunge into the void created by the authoritarian leader's actions. The world watches in both fascination and horror as these strongmen manipulate the masses and seize power, only to lead them further into peril and suffering.
Ben-Ghiat uses Chaplin's words to emphasize the dangerous allure of authoritarian leaders throughout history. From Mussolini to Hitler and beyond, these strongmen have exploited societal unrest, economic crises, and political disillusionment to gain popularity and control over their nations. By analyzing this leader-follower dynamic, the author sets the stage for examining the rise and fall of various strongman rulers and how their actions have shaped the course of history.
Rise and Fall of Charismatic Leaders, Lasting Impact on their Nations and World
Finally in this section of the Introduction Ben-Ghiat acknowledges that delving into the history of strongmen can be unsettling and challenging. The narrative explores the rise and fall of charismatic leaders who have wielded immense power throughout the past century, leaving a lasting impact on their nations and the world at large.
The history of strongmen is replete with stories of authoritarian leaders who manipulate and exploit their way to power. These charismatic figures often gain popularity by capitalizing on the fears, insecurities, and frustrations of their constituents. They present themselves as saviors, promising to restore national greatness and provide solutions to complex problems, thereby captivating the hearts and minds of their followers.
However, beneath the veneer of charisma and supposed strength lies a dark reality of violence, corruption, and manipulation. Strongmen often create cults of personality, crushing dissent and silencing opposition to maintain their grip on power. The tactics they employ range from propaganda and censorship to torture and repression, perpetuating a cycle of fear and obedience.
Throughout the ages, the world has witnessed strongmen from different nations and time periods, each with their own unique traits and methods of governance. From Mussolini and Hitler to Franco, Pinochet, and more contemporary figures like Berlusconi and Putin, their actions have shaped the course of history and left a legacy of authoritarianism and destruction in their wake.
By examining the history of strongmen, Ben-Ghiat aims to shed light on the dangers of unchecked power and the allure of charismatic leadership. The book explores how strongmen use fear, violence, and propaganda to manipulate the masses and maintain their rule. It also delves into the different contexts in which these leaders emerge and how they exploit societal upheavals to rise to power. Through an analysis of the past, the author seeks to understand and perhaps prevent the recurrence of such perilous episodes in the future.
Part I: GETTING TO POWER
Part I examines the paths taken by authoritarian leaders to ascend to power. The first chapter "Fascist Takeovers" delves into the rise of Fascist leaders, exploring their tactics and strategies during takeovers. The second chapter "Military Coups" delves into military coups and how they have been utilized by strongmen to seize control. Lastly, the third chapter "New Authoritarian Ascents" explores the emergence of new authoritarians and their unique methods of gaining power. This part offers a comprehensive analysis of the diverse routes taken by these leaders to establish their dominance and influence over their respective nations.
Chapter One - Fascist Takeovers
Chapter one delves into the rise of Benito Mussolini and the birth of fascism in Italy. The author examines how Mussolini utilized violence, propaganda, and manipulation to consolidate power and create a cult of personality, whose legacy continues to impact Italy's politics.
Benito Mussolini and the Origins of Strongmen in the 20th and 21st Centuries
The first section of chapter one delves into the origins of strongmen in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, with a particular focus on the first man who transformed a democracy into a dictatorship. From an early age, this man exhibited the quintessential traits that would come to define dictators of the modern era: a violent temperament, opportunism, and exceptional oratory skills.
The section begins by shedding light on the formative years of this enigmatic figure. Even as a young individual, it became apparent that he possessed a volatile and aggressive disposition. His propensity for violence and aggression would later become instrumental in his rise to power, as he effectively used fear and intimidation as tools to gain control over those around him.
Opportunism was another key aspect of this strongman's character. He astutely seized every opportunity that presented itself, exploiting moments of crisis and discontent within the democratic system to further his own ambitions. This opportunistic nature allowed him to capitalize on the weaknesses and divisions in the existing political landscape, eventually paving the way for his ascent to the pinnacle of power.
Perhaps the most potent weapon in this strongman's arsenal was his unparalleled skill with words. A masterful orator, he possessed the uncanny ability to sway the masses with his impassioned speeches and rhetoric. His words could evoke intense emotions, rally support, and manipulate public opinion. Through his charismatic oratory, he could convince the people that he alone held the solutions to their problems and that dissent against him was tantamount to betrayal.
As the chapter progresses, Ruth Ben-Ghiat draws intriguing parallels between the first dictator's rise to power and those of subsequent strongmen in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. The traits that defined this individual became recurring themes in the playbook of dictators across different cultures and time periods. By exploring the origins of these strongmen, the chapter sets the stage for a comprehensive analysis of their impact on the world throughout history.
In conclusion this section begins with an examination of the formative years of the first man to transform a democracy into a dictatorship. From his early life, it becomes evident that he possessed the traits that would become hallmarks of dictators in the years to come. His violent temperament, opportunistic approach, and exceptional oratory skills were the building blocks of his ascent to power. As the section unfolds, it generally establishes a foundation for understanding the rise and influence of strongmen in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, painting a compelling picture of their impact on societies and governments worldwide.
Roots of Mussolini's Rise and Birth of Fascist Combat Leagues in 1919
In this section Ben-Ghiat delves into the roots of Mussolini's rise to power and the birth of the Fascist Combat Leagues in 1919. During this period, Italy was grappling with the aftermath of a severe postwar economic crisis, and the formation of these leagues served as a manifestation of the country's extreme polarization.
The Fascist Combat Leagues, founded by Mussolini, emerged as a response to the widespread discontent and disillusionment that prevailed in Italy after World War I. The nation was reeling from the impacts of the conflict, with economic hardships and political turmoil exacerbating the sense of despair among the population. In such a climate, Mussolini capitalized on the people's growing frustrations, presenting himself as a strong and decisive leader who could restore order and national pride.
The establishment of the Fascist Combat Leagues was an intentional move to harness and channel the collective discontent into a unified and forceful movement. Mussolini's charisma and skillful rhetoric helped him attract a broad base of followers, comprising disillusioned veterans, disenchanted workers, and fervent nationalists. Together, they formed a formidable force that aimed to counter the perceived threats posed by the left-wing socialists and communists, who were also vying for influence in the volatile political landscape.
The polarization in Italy during this period was marked by a sharp divide between the left-wing and right-wing factions. Mussolini, with his Fascist Combat Leagues, exploited this polarization to his advantage. The violent clashes between the opposing groups further deepened societal divisions, enabling Mussolini's movement to gain more support from conservative circles and some elements of the ruling elite who sought stability and protection against leftist revolutionary movements.
In summary this section explores the origins of Mussolini's rise to power and the birth of the Fascist Combat Leagues in Italy during a severe postwar economic crisis. Mussolini capitalized on the country's extreme polarization, using his charisma and rhetoric to attract a diverse following that sought a strong leader to address their grievances. The formation of the Fascist Combat Leagues represented a deliberate effort to unify the discontent and discontented segments of society, ultimately paving the way for Mussolini's ascent to power and the establishment of the fascist regime in Italy.
Adolph Hitler and the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich
Ben-Ghiat next provides a compelling analysis of the rise and fall of the Third Reich, underlining its tumultuous journey that began and ended in flames.
The section opens with a powerful statement: "The Third Reich began the way it would end: in flames." This imagery sets the tone for the depiction of Nazi Germany's trajectory, emphasizing the destructive nature of the regime from its inception to its ultimate downfall. The chapter delves into the circumstances surrounding Hitler's rise to power and how he strategically manipulated political instability and economic turmoil to establish the totalitarian regime.
The initial stages of the Third Reich were marked by Hitler's ascendancy to the position of Chancellor in January 1933. However, this was not the culmination of his ambitions, but merely the beginning of a systematic consolidation of power. Through a series of manipulative tactics and ruthless suppression of opposition, Hitler and the Nazi Party swiftly dismantled democratic institutions, silencing dissenting voices and undermining the rule of law.
Ben-Ghiat explores how the regime's early years were characterized by escalating aggression and the imposition of oppressive policies against minority groups, particularly targeting Jews, as a means of solidifying a unified national identity. The regime's extreme nationalist and racist ideologies fueled a fervent sense of loyalty and support from certain segments of the population, while others were subjected to systematic discrimination and violence.
As the narrative unfolds, the author emphasizes how the Third Reich's path to destruction mirrored its violent beginnings. The regime's expansionist ambitions and aggressive foreign policies eventually culminated in the outbreak of World War II. The horrors of the Holocaust, with the implementation of the "Final Solution," exemplified the depths of the regime's depravity and cruelty.
In conclusion, this section provides a gripping overview of the Third Reich's trajectory, highlighting its inception in flames and eventual demise in even greater destruction. Ruth Ben-Ghiat's analysis offers profound insights into the manipulative tactics and ideologies employed by Adolf Hitler to ascend to power and establish a totalitarian regime. It also sheds light on the catastrophic consequences of the regime's policies, which led to unparalleled suffering and destruction during World War II. By examining the rise and fall of the Third Reich, the chapter sets the stage for a broader exploration of other fascist takeovers and strongmen in history and their lasting impact on the world.
Unlikely Rise to Power of Francisco Franco and Leader Longevity
Next Ben-Ghiat delves into the fascinating and unlikely rise to power of Francisco Franco, a figure who defied expectations and demonstrated remarkable leader longevity. Despite his unassuming appearance, characterized by a high-pitched voice and a modest 5-foot 3-inch frame, Franco proved to be a resilient and enduring leader in Spain's tumultuous history.
The author paints a vivid portrait of Franco's unremarkable physical presence, which could have easily led one to underestimate his potential as a formidable leader. However, as the chapter unravels, it becomes evident that Franco's power lay not in his physical stature but in his cunning political acumen and unwavering determination.
Franco's ascent to power occurred against the backdrop of Spain's deeply divided political landscape, marked by social unrest and ideological clashes. He capitalized on this turmoil, positioning himself as a strongman capable of restoring order and stability to the nation. Through a combination of tactical alliances, ruthless suppression of opposition, and strategic propaganda campaigns, Franco managed to gain the support of conservative factions, the military, and powerful interests.
Once in power, Franco demonstrated an iron grip on the Spanish state, using authoritarian measures to consolidate his control and silence dissenting voices. His regime sought to impose strict conservative values, stifling opposing ideologies and dissent while promoting a nationalistic and traditionalist agenda. Despite being isolated internationally due to his fascist leanings, Franco managed to maintain a tight grip on power, which endured for almost four decades until his death in 1975.
In conclusion, this section highlights the unexpected rise to power and the extraordinary leader longevity of Francisco Franco, a man who defied physical appearances and emerged as a dominant figure in Spain's history. Ruth Ben-Ghiat expertly illustrates Franco's cunning political maneuvering and ruthless tactics that enabled him to consolidate power and maintain an authoritarian regime for nearly forty years. Franco's legacy serves as a powerful example of how strongmen can exploit social divisions, manipulate the political landscape, and wield power with an iron fist, leaving a lasting impact on the nation and its people.
Chapter Two - Military Coups
Chapter two explores military coups as a means of seizing power. It highlights the tactics employed by authoritarian leaders like Augusto Pinochet, who orchestrated a violent coup in Chile, using repression, torture, and censorship to maintain his regime.
Mobutu Sese Seko "the Leopard of Zaire" Dynamics of Power and Survival
This first section of chapter two explores the dynamics of power and survival through the lens of Mobutu Sese Seko, known as "the leopard of Zaire" due to his distinctive leopard-skin hats. Ruth Ben-Ghiat introduces Mobutu as a striking example of a leader who adapted to please his patrons, following in the footsteps of Francisco Franco. This section delves into Mobutu's thirty-two-year rule in Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of Congo), highlighting his ability to navigate the treacherous waters of politics and maintain his grip on power.
The saying "A leopard never changes its spots" alludes to the idea that human nature remains consistent and unchanging. However, Mobutu's long-lasting rule defied this notion, showcasing his remarkable adaptability as a strongman. The leopard-skin hats he donned symbolized his persona as a cunning and resilient leader, able to survive and thrive in a complex and often volatile political landscape.
Mobutu's rise to power came through a military coup in 1965. Once in control, he quickly consolidated his authority, centralizing power in his hands and cultivating a cult of personality around himself. His mastery of political maneuvering allowed him to navigate shifting alliances and allegiances, making sure to please those who held influence and resources. In this manner, Mobutu followed the playbook of Franco, using strategic alliances to ensure his survival and dominance.
Throughout his rule, Mobutu maintained a firm grip on the country, using authoritarian tactics and widespread corruption to suppress opposition and maintain control. Despite presenting himself as a nationalistic leader, he was notorious for embezzling vast amounts of wealth, further entrenching his position while leaving the nation impoverished. His adaptability and willingness to please those who could support him enabled him to withstand numerous challenges, both internal and external, for over three decades.
In conclusion, this section examines the enduring rule of Mobutu Sese Seko in Zaire, drawing parallels between his adaptability and survival instincts with those of Francisco Franco. The section highlights Mobutu's ability to please his patrons and skillfully navigate the complexities of politics and power, ensuring his dominance for over thirty-two years. Despite his reputation for corruption and authoritarianism, Mobutu's rule serves as a compelling example of how strongmen can maintain power by adapting to changing circumstances and placating those who hold influence.
Surprise and Shock Surrounding Gaddafi's Overthrow of King Idris I in Libya
This section delves into the nature of surprise and shock surrounding Muammar Gaddafi's overthrow of King Idris I in Libya. Ruth Ben-Ghiat points out that coups are inherently unexpected events, but Gaddafi's rise to power was particularly astonishing due to his relative obscurity in the corridors of influence. The section explores the circumstances surrounding Gaddafi's coup, shedding light on the unique nature of his ascent to power.
Gaddafi's overthrow of King Idris I took place in 1969 and was marked by an aura of surprise and incredulity among those in positions of authority. The coup itself was initially conducted with a relatively low level of violence, making it all the more astonishing given the dramatic power shift it brought about. While coups often involve bloodshed and chaos, Gaddafi managed to seize power with relative ease, catching many off guard.
Prior to the coup, Gaddafi had remained virtually unknown to the political elite and foreign powers. He had concealed his ambitions and intentions from the public eye, operating in the shadows until the opportune moment to strike. His lack of presence in the corridors of power made his swift ascent to the throne all the more astounding, as he emerged from obscurity to become Libya's ruler.
Gaddafi's coup represented a radical departure from the status quo, as he quickly dismantled the existing political structure and established himself as the country's authoritarian leader. With a strong focus on pan-Arab nationalism and anti-Western sentiment, Gaddafi's rule challenged the established order and reshaped Libya's domestic and foreign policies.
In conclusion, this section analyzes the shocking and unexpected nature of Muammar Gaddafi's overthrow of King Idris I in Libya. The coup's initial bloodlessness and Gaddafi's relative anonymity in political circles added to the astonishment surrounding his rise to power. Gaddafi's ability to remain hidden from the public eye until the opportune moment allowed him to take the reins of the nation swiftly and radically alter Libya's political landscape. The section generally highlights how the unpredictability of coups can reshape nations and global politics, leaving lasting impacts on the world stage.
Pinochet and the Pivotal Moment of the Military Coup in Chile 1973
This section delves into the dramatic and pivotal moment of the military coup in Chile on September 11, 1973. Ruth Ben-Ghiat paints a vivid picture of the events surrounding the coup, with General Augusto Pinochet at the center of the tumultuous power shift.
As the coup unfolded, Pinochet, a high-ranking military official, barked orders over the phone to Vice Admiral Patricio Carvajal, insisting on "unconditional surrender" and "no negotiation." The target of their relentless pursuit was President Salvador Allende, a socialist leader, who was barricaded in the La Moneda Presidential Palace. The coup attempt encountered fierce resistance in Santiago, as loyalists to President Allende fought desperately to defend the government.
Pinochet's decisive and ruthless approach reflected his determination to seize control of Chile. The coup represented a significant shift away from democratic governance, and Pinochet was intent on eradicating any opposition to his authority. The attack on the presidential palace was a pivotal moment that showcased the brutal force employed by the military to overthrow the elected government.
As the coup unfolded, President Allende remained defiant, refusing to yield to the demands of Pinochet and his forces. He remained holed up in the La Moneda Presidential Palace, determined to protect the democratic system and his vision for Chile. However, in the face of overwhelming military might and fierce opposition, Allende's resistance was ultimately in vain.
The section offers a gripping account of the September 11, 1973 coup in Chile, highlighting the tumultuous and violent nature of the event. Pinochet's unyielding demand for "unconditional surrender" and the intense resistance from Allende's supporters reveal the stark contrast in ideologies and the lengths to which both sides were willing to go in pursuit of power. The coup represented a turning point in Chile's history, as Pinochet's rise to power marked the beginning of a brutal and repressive dictatorship that would have a lasting impact on the nation's political landscape.
Pinochet Destined and Guided by Higher Power to Lead and Save Chili
This section delves into the mindset of Augusto Pinochet, the military strongman who orchestrated the infamous coup in Chile on September 11, 1973. Like many other strongmen in history, Pinochet firmly believed that he was destined and guided by a higher power to lead his country and save it from perceived threats.
Pinochet's conviction that he had been chosen by a higher power to save Chile reflects a common theme among strongmen throughout history. This messianic belief in his own divine mission served as a powerful driving force behind his actions and decision-making. Pinochet saw himself as the savior of his nation, driven by a sense of duty and righteousness to protect Chile from what he perceived as the dangers of socialism and communism.
This belief in his divine mission also justified Pinochet's implementation of authoritarian measures and repressive policies. He felt compelled to take drastic actions to preserve the stability and order he believed Chile needed, even if it meant employing violence and suppressing dissent. The coup against President Salvador Allende and the subsequent establishment of a military dictatorship were all justified in Pinochet's mind as necessary steps in fulfilling his ordained role as the nation's protector.
Pinochet's messianic self-perception contributed to the cult of personality that he cultivated during his rule. As a strongman, he sought to project an image of authority and infallibility, relying on propaganda and a carefully crafted narrative to present himself as the country's savior. This self-aggrandizement allowed him to maintain a tight grip on power, instilling fear in dissenters and cultivating unwavering loyalty among his supporters.
In conclusion, this section examines the psychological aspect of strongman rule, using Augusto Pinochet as a case study. Pinochet's firm belief that he was chosen by a higher power to save Chile played a significant role in shaping his authoritarian rule and justifying the drastic actions taken during the coup and subsequent dictatorship. His messianic self-perception contributed to the cult of personality surrounding him, ultimately reinforcing his grip on power and the suppression of opposition. The section generally sheds light on the powerful influence of self-belief and divine purpose in shaping the actions and ideologies of strongmen throughout history.
Chapter Three - New Authoritarian Ascents
Chapter three delves into the ascent of new authoritarian leaders like Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey. The author analyzes how these leaders leverage populist rhetoric, propaganda, and repression to gain and sustain power, with far-reaching consequences for their societies.
Rise of Silvio Berlusconi to Power in Italy; Wealth, Media Influence and Charisma
This section of chapter three explores the rise of Silvio Berlusconi, a flamboyant billionaire, to power in Italy. It starts with a significant moment on January 26, 1994, when Italians were taken aback by unexpected news coverage of Berlusconi, the media tycoon and owner of a vast media empire.
Berlusconi's ascent to political prominence was an unprecedented phenomenon, shaped by his vast wealth, media influence, and charismatic persona. As the owner of various media outlets, he wielded considerable control over the narrative surrounding him, using his platforms to shape public opinion and present himself as the solution to Italy's political and economic woes.
His foray into politics and eventual election as Prime Minister marked a remarkable shift in Italy's political landscape. As a wealthy businessman, Berlusconi positioned himself as a political outsider, promising to bring his business acumen to bear on Italy's challenges. His approach, however, came under scrutiny as questions arose about potential conflicts of interest between his political office and his extensive business holdings.
Despite controversies and scandals that accompanied his tenure, Berlusconi's magnetic charm and media prowess enabled him to retain a loyal base of supporters. His ability to control the narrative through his media outlets allowed him to deflect criticism and maintain a positive image among his followers.
The section sheds light on the unique nature of Berlusconi's ascent, driven by media manipulation, personal charisma, and vast wealth. His rise to power exemplifies how new-age strongmen can leverage media influence to shape public perception and solidify their positions in politics. The section generally provides valuable insights into the changing dynamics of authoritarian leadership in the modern era, where media control and charisma play crucial roles in the rise of strongmen to positions of power.
As Military Coups Declined, Elections Became Method for Coming to Power.
This section explores the evolving dynamics of strongman rule, as military coups became less common by the time Augusto Pinochet left office in 1990. With this shift, elections emerged as the preferred method for a new generation of strongmen to come to power.
The section highlights how military coups, once a prevalent means of seizing power, gave way to a more subtle and manipulative approach. Strongmen in the modern era realized that overt military interventions could attract international scrutiny and condemnation, making elections a more politically palatable route to consolidate power.
By utilizing elections, these aspiring strongmen could present themselves as legitimate leaders, following democratic norms and seeking public support. However, the reality was often quite different, as these leaders employed various tactics to manipulate the electoral process in their favor, ranging from media control and disinformation to suppressing opposition and restricting the activities of independent watchdog organizations.
Vladimir Putin in Russia serves as a prime example of a new-age strongman who came to power through elections. By projecting an image of stability and strength, Putin capitalized on the disillusionment and chaos that followed the fall of the Soviet Union. He skillfully manipulated the political landscape, consolidating power and ensuring his continued dominance through a combination of electoral victories and constitutional changes that extended his rule.
The section highlights the transformation of strongman tactics from overt military interventions to more subtle and deceptive methods, centered around electoral processes. By navigating elections and exploiting democratic systems, the new generation of strongmen could maintain a facade of legitimacy while consolidating their grip on power through manipulation and control. The section generally underscores the adaptability of strongmen in the face of changing political landscapes and the persistent threat they pose to democratic governance.
Putin Contrasted with Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin
This section delves into the unlikely rise of Vladimir Putin to power in Russia. It begins by highlighting the stark contrast between Putin and the iconic figures of Russian history, such as Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin. Unlike his predecessors, Putin did not possess the same intellectual brilliance or commanding presence, making him an improbable political idol.
Before ascending to power, Putin did not exhibit the qualities typically associated with strongmen. He was not known for possessing a charismatic or magnetic personality that could draw people to him. However, as the chapter unfolds, it becomes evident that Putin's strengths lay in his pragmatic and calculating approach to politics.
During the tumultuous period following the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia was mired in chaos and instability. In such a context, Putin presented himself as a strong and decisive leader who could restore order and stability to the nation. His background in the KGB and his firm stance against terrorism resonated with a Russian population yearning for a return to security and stability.
The chapter underscores how Putin effectively harnessed media and propaganda to shape his image as a resolute and capable leader. Through a carefully crafted narrative, he projected an image of a decisive and strong leader, despite lacking the towering charisma of his predecessors. His calculated political moves, combined with an assertive foreign policy, bolstered his popularity and solidified his position as a dominant figure in Russian politics.
In conclusion the section provides a nuanced exploration of Vladimir Putin's ascent to power in Russia. Despite not possessing the charismatic traits typically associated with strongmen, Putin strategically leveraged the chaos and insecurity in post-Soviet Russia to project an image of strength and stability. By skillfully utilizing media control and a calculated political approach, he managed to cultivate an aura of leadership, establishing himself as a prominent figure in Russian politics and the global stage. The section generally serves as a valuable study of how strongmen can rise to power through cunning and pragmatism, even in the absence of traditional charismatic attributes.
Unconventional Rise of Donald Trump to Power and his Impact, Some Weird Shit
This section examines the unconventional rise of Donald Trump to power in the United States and the impact of his presidency. It begins with a striking quote from former President George W. Bush, who expressed bewilderment at Trump's inaugural address on January 20, 2017, remarking, "That's some weird shit."
The section highlights Trump's unorthodox and polarizing leadership style, which deviated significantly from the norms and traditions of previous U.S. presidents. Throughout his presidency, Trump demonstrated a penchant for controversy and unpredictability, which often left political leaders, both domestic and international, at a loss.
Trump's ascent to power was characterized by his exploitation of social media and his ability to harness populist sentiments. His rhetoric and promises to "drain the swamp" and put "America first" resonated with a significant portion of the American electorate who felt disenfranchised and disillusioned with the political establishment.
However, his presidency was marked by a series of unprecedented actions, including the firing of FBI Director James Comey, frequent and inflammatory tweets, and policy decisions that challenged established norms and international agreements. His leadership style further contributed to the polarizing atmosphere in the United States and strained diplomatic relations with traditional allies.
The section emphasizes how Trump's presidency represented a departure from traditional notions of presidential leadership, with his unconventional behavior often causing concern among political leaders and experts. His "America first" approach and penchant for prioritizing personal interests over diplomatic norms sparked debates about the erosion of democratic principles and the rise of authoritarian tendencies in American politics.
In conclusion, the section provides an insightful analysis of the unconventional rise of Donald Trump to the presidency and his impact on American politics. It captures the bewilderment expressed by former President George W. Bush at Trump's inaugural address, highlighting the unconventional and polarizing nature of his leadership style. Trump's presidency sparked debates about the state of American democracy and raised questions about the potential risks of authoritarianism in the modern political landscape. The section generally serves as a thought-provoking exploration of the challenges posed by new-age strongmen in the realm of democratic governance.
Part II: TOOLS OF RULE
Part II delves into the various strategies and techniques employed by authoritarian leaders to consolidate and maintain their power. Chapter four "A Greater Nation," explores the use of nationalist ideologies and expansionist ambitions; Chapter five "Propaganda " is an examination of propaganda and its manipulation of mass persuasion. Chapter six "Virility" delves into the significance of virility and its portrayal in politics; Chapter seven "Corruption" delves into the pervasive issue of corruption and how it is utilized as a means of control. Lastly, chapter eight "Violence" explores the brutal and repressive tactics employed by strongmen to suppress dissent and enforce their rule. This part provides an insightful analysis of the tools employed by authoritarian rulers to exert their authority and perpetuate their dominance over their nations.
Chapter Four - A Greater Nation
Chapter four examines how strongmen cultivate a sense of nationalistic pride, using appeals to nationalism and creating a myth of a greater nation to bolster their rule. This chapter explores the impact of such narratives on shaping authoritarian regimes.
Psychological Impact of Living Under Authoritarian Rule - Herr S.'s Nightmare
This section delves into the psychological impact of living under authoritarian rule, as exemplified by a chilling anecdote about a factory owner named Herr S. in Hitler's Germany. It begins by recounting Herr S.'s terrifying dream, wherein Goebbels, the infamous Nazi propaganda minister, visits his workplace, and Herr S. is unable to perform the mandatory Nazi salute.
The dream reflects the pervasive fear and psychological coercion that prevailed during Hitler's regime. As an employer, Herr S. faced the pressure to conform to Nazi ideology and demonstrate unwavering loyalty to the regime. The inability to raise his arm for the Nazi salute in his dream symbolizes the internal conflict and the fear of punishment or repercussions that dissidents and non-conformists faced in a totalitarian state.
Throughout the chapter, Ruth Ben-Ghiat delves into the techniques used by authoritarian leaders like Hitler to manipulate and control their citizens' minds. Propaganda, fear, and indoctrination were pervasive tools employed to mold public opinion and suppress dissent. Individuals like Herr S. experienced the constant threat of surveillance and betrayal, further amplifying the pervasive atmosphere of fear.
Ben-Ghiat also examines the psychological toll on those who became enablers or collaborators with the regime, like Herr S. The constant struggle to balance personal values with the expectations of the state created immense psychological pressure, leading some individuals to rationalize their actions as a means of survival or self-preservation.
In conclusion, this section offers a chilling insight into the psychological impact of living under authoritarian rule, using Herr S.'s dream as a poignant example. It highlights the pervasive fear and manipulation that characterized totalitarian states, where individuals faced the constant dilemma of choosing between loyalty to the regime or facing dire consequences. The section generally serves as a haunting reminder of the psychological coercion and the immense power that strongmen can wield over their populations, leaving lasting scars on the collective psyche of a nation.
Strongman's Pursuit of National Greatness, Central Narrative, Justification of Power
In this section Ruth Ben-Ghiat delves into the core element that underpins a strongman's rule: the project of national greatness. She explores how the strongman's pursuit of national greatness serves as the central narrative that justifies their claims of absolute power and authoritarian governance.
The strongman's project of national greatness is a powerful tool used to consolidate and legitimize their authority. By framing their rule as essential to achieving greatness for the nation, they appeal to the collective aspirations and desires of the populace. The promise of a stronger, more prosperous nation can resonate deeply with citizens who may feel disillusioned or disempowered by existing political structures.
Through skillful use of propaganda and manipulation of public sentiment, the strongman fosters a sense of national unity and purpose. They present themselves as the sole capable leader who can steer the nation towards greatness, often portraying themselves as indispensable saviors in times of crisis or instability. This narrative of indispensability is used to justify their concentration of power and rejection of democratic checks and balances.
Ben-Ghiat's analysis spans across different historical periods and strongmen figures, illustrating how this project of national greatness is a recurring theme in authoritarian governance. From Mussolini's vision of the new Roman Empire to Hitler's ambition to establish a racially pure Greater Germany, and from Stalin's pursuit of a socialist utopia to contemporary strongmen like Putin and Erdogan seeking to restore their nations' former glory, the desire to achieve national greatness remains a central theme.
In conclusion, this section sheds light on the common thread among strongman rulers: their use of the project of national greatness to legitimize their authority and claims of absolute power. The narrative of a stronger, more prosperous nation serves as a unifying force, appealing to the hopes and aspirations of the populace. By cultivating this image of indispensability, strongmen justify their concentration of power and perpetuate a culture of fear and adulation. This section generally provides valuable insights into the psychological and propagandistic tactics employed by strongmen to maintain their grip on power and control the narrative of their nations' destinies.
Strategies to Expand Nation's Power - Mussolini, Population Growth and Empire
This section delves into the strategies employed by strongman rulers to project and expand their nation's power. It begins with a quote from Mussolini, where he emphasizes the significance of population growth in creating and maintaining the Italian Empire in 1927.
Mussolini's call to action reflects the importance he placed on demographic expansion to strengthen the nation. By framing the issue as a matter of national survival and independence, he rallied his supporters to prioritize population growth as a means to project Italy's strength on the international stage.
The emphasis on demographic duty highlights how strongmen often seek to instill a sense of nationalistic pride and obligation among their followers. This appeal to collective duty serves to consolidate the ruler's authority and foster a sense of unity among the populace, even at the cost of individual freedoms and rights.
Throughout history, strongman rulers like Mussolini have relied on propagandistic narratives to promote their vision of national greatness. By portraying demographic growth as a strategic imperative, Mussolini sought to justify his authoritarian rule and position himself as the indispensable leader capable of realizing Italy's imperial ambitions.
The section underscores the recurring theme of population expansion as a tool of power consolidation among strongman rulers. This tactic is not limited to historical figures like Mussolini, as contemporary strongmen also employ similar strategies to project their nation's strength and assert their dominance on the world stage.
In conclusion, this section offers a glimpse into the psychology and strategies of strongman rulers, as exemplified by Mussolini's emphasis on demographic growth. By framing population expansion as a matter of national survival and greatness, strongmen seek to consolidate their power, foster nationalistic sentiments, and justify their authoritarian rule. This section generally provides valuable insights into the manipulative tactics employed by strongmen to achieve their visions of national grandeur, leaving lasting impacts on the people and the trajectory of their nations.
Nazi Germany, Fusion of Fascist Ideology with National Greatness and Racial Purity
This section explores how in Nazi Germany, the fusion of fascist ideology with the concept of national greatness and racial purity reached its chilling culmination. It highlights how the pursuit of national greatness was intertwined with the belief in racial superiority and the geopolitical imperative to expand and acquire resources.
Under Adolf Hitler's leadership, Nazi Germany became a prime example of how strongman rulers used the notion of national greatness to justify horrifying atrocities. The Nazi regime's ideology revolved around the concept of a racially pure and superior Aryan nation. This twisted notion of racial purity served as the driving force behind their genocidal policies and the Holocaust.
The pursuit of national greatness was intrinsically linked to territorial expansion and acquiring resources. Hitler sought to expand Germany's borders to create "living space" for the Aryan population and to secure access to vital resources needed for military and economic power.
The section also examines the psychological tactics used by the Nazi regime to manipulate and control the German population. Through propaganda, indoctrination, and the cultivation of a cult of personality around Hitler, the Nazis effectively brainwashed the masses into believing in their grand vision of a racially pure and dominant nation.
The section underscores how the pursuit of national greatness can be perverted and exploited by strongman leaders to justify heinous actions. The Nazi regime's tragic legacy serves as a stark reminder of the dangerous consequences of unchecked authoritarian rule and the exploitation of nationalist sentiments for destructive ends.
In conclusion, this section provides a chilling account of how the fascist linkage of national greatness and racial purity reached its peak in Nazi Germany. It highlights the toxic mix of expansionist ambitions, racial superiority, and the manipulation of nationalistic sentiments to perpetrate atrocities and create an oppressive regime. The section generally serves as a crucial reminder of the devastating impact strongman rulers can have when they harness the concept of national greatness to advance their dangerous ideologies and consolidate their power.
Deception Projects Image of Normalcy and Healing while Consolidating Power
This section examines the deceptive rhetoric and manipulation employed by strongman rulers to project an image of normalcy and healing while consolidating their power. It starts with a quote from Augusto Pinochet, the leader of the military junta that seized power in Chile on September 11, 1973.
Pinochet's statement, where he claimed the junta's aim was to "normalize and heal the country," serves as a prime example of the disingenuous language used by strongmen to justify their actions. Despite the veneer of benevolence and stability, the reality was far different, as Pinochet's regime was responsible for gross human rights violations and brutal suppression of dissent.
By presenting the state of emergency as temporary and evading a clear timeframe for its end, Pinochet sought to pacify the international community and downplay the extent of the junta's authoritarian rule. In truth, the state of emergency was prolonged, allowing the regime to maintain a stranglehold on power and crush opposition.
The section highlights the double-edged sword of strongman rhetoric, which is often veiled in promises of normalcy and unity but conceals a ruthless pursuit of control. Pinochet's deceptive language exemplifies how strongmen can manipulate public perception and the media to perpetuate their hold on power and avoid accountability for their actions.
In conclusion, this section provides a compelling analysis of the deceptive language and manipulation employed by strongman rulers like Augusto Pinochet. By projecting an image of normalcy and healing, Pinochet aimed to portray the junta's rule as benevolent and necessary for the nation's stability. However, beneath the veneer of normalcy lay a harsh reality of human rights abuses and authoritarian suppression of dissent. The section generally serves as a cautionary tale of how strongmen can exploit rhetoric and media to maintain power and evade accountability for their actions, revealing the dangerous consequences of unchecked authoritarianism.
Twisted and Destructive Path Gaddafi Took in Quest for Power and Dominance.
This section examines the trajectory of Muammar Gaddafi's pursuit of national greatness in Libya. This section highlights the twisted and destructive path Gaddafi took in his quest for power and dominance.
Gaddafi's vision of national greatness was marked by a mix of populism, anti-colonial rhetoric, and an authoritarian grip on Libya. He presented himself as a champion of the people and a revolutionary leader, aiming to unite the Arab world under his rule and challenge Western influence in the region. However, as the section unfolds, it becomes evident that Gaddafi's pursuit of greatness took a dark and oppressive turn.
Gaddafi's rule was characterized by widespread human rights abuses, suppression of dissent, and the establishment of a totalitarian regime. He maintained power through a brutal security apparatus, including secret police and paramilitary forces, which silenced any opposition to his rule. Dissenters faced torture, imprisonment, and execution, creating an atmosphere of fear and terror across the nation.
Despite his grandiose claims of revolution and progress, Gaddafi's rule was marked by corruption and mismanagement of Libya's vast oil wealth. The nation's resources were squandered, and its infrastructure was neglected, leaving the population to suffer from poverty and lack of basic services.
The section also delves into Gaddafi's erratic foreign policy, which included supporting terrorism, sponsoring insurgency movements, and engaging in wars with neighboring countries. His aggressive and unpredictable actions led to international isolation and sanctions, further isolating Libya from the global community.
In conclusion, this section provides a sobering account of Muammar Gaddafi's twisted pursuit of national greatness in Libya. Despite his claims of being a revolutionary leader, Gaddafi's rule was marked by oppression, corruption, and instability. His quest for dominance and power led to widespread suffering and international isolation, ultimately revealing the dangerous and destructive consequences of strongman rule. The section generally serves as a stark reminder of the devastating impact strongmen can have on their nations and the world at large, leaving behind a legacy of suffering and chaos.
Berlusconi's Rise to Power in Italy - Catholic Faith, Nation, Patria, Family, Order
This section delves into Silvio Berlusconi's rise to power in Italy and the core values of his political party, Forza Italia. It begins with a quote from Berlusconi's right-hand man, Dell'Utri, who succinctly summarizes the party's central tenets in 2002: "Catholic Faith, Nation, Patria, Family, Order."
Berlusconi's political project was built on a platform that appealed to traditional Italian values and sought to portray him as a defender of the nation's identity and culture. By invoking the concepts of Catholic faith, national pride, patriotism, family values, and social order, Forza Italia aimed to rally conservative voters and present Berlusconi as the guardian of Italy's traditions and heritage.
The party's emphasis on Catholic faith and family values also aligned with the deeply rooted religious and cultural sentiments of many Italians. This appeal to traditionalism resonated with a significant portion of the electorate, allowing Berlusconi to gain support and consolidate his position in Italian politics.
However, beneath the veneer of national pride and traditional values, Berlusconi's rule was marked by controversies and allegations of corruption and abuse of power. His vast media empire further contributed to his dominance in the political landscape, allowing him to control the narrative and shape public opinion in his favor.
The section provides valuable insights into the political strategy employed by Berlusconi and Forza Italia. By appealing to conservative values and promoting a sense of national identity, Berlusconi was able to maintain his grip on power, despite facing numerous scandals and controversies during his time in office.
In conclusion, this section offers a nuanced exploration of Silvio Berlusconi's political rise and the core values of his party, Forza Italia. It sheds light on how Berlusconi's appeal to traditional Italian values and national identity contributed to his political success, while also examining the controversies and criticism surrounding his leadership. The section generally serves as a thought-provoking analysis of how strongmen leaders can leverage ideological appeals to consolidate power and maintain their influence in the political landscape.
Putin's Messianic Self-perception and Russia's Predestined Role in the World
This section delves into the ideology and vision of Vladimir Putin's leadership in Russia. It starts with a powerful quote from Putin, where he asserts that Russia is not merely a project but a destiny. This statement encapsulates Putin's messianic self-perception and his firm belief in Russia's predestined role in the world.
Putin's leadership style is characterized by a strongman persona, projecting an image of strength, decisiveness, and assertiveness. His statements and actions often emphasize Russia's historical greatness and its inherent destiny as a global power.
The section examines how Putin's vision of national greatness is rooted in a sense of historical exceptionalism and a desire to restore Russia's past glory. This includes reclaiming territories lost after the collapse of the Soviet Union and reasserting Russia's influence on the global stage.
Under Putin's leadership, the Kremlin has implemented policies aimed at centralizing power, stifling dissent, and suppressing opposition. The manipulation of the media and the control of information have been instrumental in shaping a narrative of Russia as a strong and united nation, standing against Western influence.
Putin's leadership is marked by a combination of domestic repression and assertive foreign policy. He presents himself as a defender of traditional values, championing conservative ideologies and opposing liberal democracy, which he perceives as a threat to Russia's identity and sovereignty.
In conclusion, this section provides an insightful analysis of Vladimir Putin's leadership in Russia and his vision of national greatness. It highlights Putin's messianic self-perception and his belief in Russia's predestined role in the world. His approach to leadership, characterized by centralization of power and a assertive foreign policy, reflects his desire to restore Russia's past glory and assert its influence in the international arena. The section generally serves as a valuable study of the complex interplay between ideology, power, and nationalism in the context of contemporary strongman rule.
USA Populists use Rhetoric to Galvanize Base, Create us/them Mentality, Demonize
This section delves into the rise of populist leaders and the dangerous impact of their rhetoric on society. It starts with a chilling scene from July 2019 at East Carolina University in North Carolina, where a majority-white crowd chanted, "Send her back! Send her back!" in reference to Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, a Somali-American and one of the first Muslim women elected to the U.S. Congress.
The scene exemplifies the power of populist rhetoric in mobilizing and energizing a particular base of supporters. The crowd's chant reflects a disturbing manifestation of xenophobia, nativism, and racism, which are often fueled by strongman leaders to exploit divisions in society for political gain.
The section explores how populist leaders, like Donald Trump in the United States, leverage divisive and inflammatory rhetoric to galvanize their base and create an "us vs. them" mentality. By demonizing certain groups or individuals, they foster a sense of nationalistic fervor and present themselves as the protectors of the nation against perceived threats.
The section also underscores how this type of rhetoric can have lasting effects on social cohesion and democratic norms. The normalization of hate speech and intolerance in political discourse can erode the fabric of society, fostering an environment where violence and discrimination against marginalized groups become more prevalent.
In conclusion, this section provides a sobering examination of the impact of populist rhetoric on society. It's depiction of the crowd's chant, "Send her back! Send her back!" serves as a stark reminder of the dangerous consequences of divisive rhetoric and its potential to sow seeds of hatred and intolerance. The section generally serves as a thought-provoking analysis of the responsibility of leaders in shaping public discourse and the importance of safeguarding democratic values and principles in the face of rising populism and strongman rule.
Erdoğan Exception, Appealing to Religious, Conservative and Democratic Values
This section delves into the unique approach of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the leader of Turkey, amidst a world of strongman rulers who often perceive Muslims as a threat to national purity. Erdoğan stands out as an exception to this trend, and the section explores his political strategy and how it differs from that of other strongmen.
Unlike many of his counterparts, Erdoğan's rise to power was not based on the demonization of Muslims or the promotion of Islamophobia. Instead, he garnered support from a significant portion of the Turkish population by appealing to religious and conservative values while advocating for democratic governance.
Erdoğan's Justice and Development Party (AKP) presents itself as a party of religious and social conservatism, seeking to uphold the values of Islam while promoting economic growth and development. This has allowed Erdoğan to consolidate power and maintain support among conservative Turks who see him as a defender of their religious and cultural identity.
The section examines how Erdoğan has managed to navigate the complexities of Turkish politics, which is characterized by a history of secularism and military influence. He has strategically capitalized on public discontent with the previous secularist establishment and positioned himself as a populist leader who represents the voice of the people against entrenched elites.
In conclusion, this section provides a fascinating analysis of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's leadership style in contrast to other strongman rulers. Erdoğan's ability to appeal to religious and conservative values without stoking Islamophobia sets him apart from many of his counterparts in the global strongman landscape. His approach to governance in Turkey underscores the complexity and diversity of strongman rule and the varied strategies employed by leaders to consolidate power and maintain support among their respective bases. The section generally serves as a thought-provoking exploration of the intricacies of strongman leadership and its manifestations across different cultural and political contexts.
Chapter Five - Propaganda
Chapter five investigates the role of propaganda in the rule of strongmen. Drawing parallels between Hitler's use of radio and Mussolini's nonfiction films, the author demonstrates how these tools of mass persuasion were used to control public opinion and create unified narratives.
Gaddafi Agrees to Interview by Italian Journalist, Reaches Western Audience
Chapter five generally explores the ways in which strongman rulers use media and communication to shape public perception and control the narrative about their leadership. This section starts with an intriguing incident in 1979, where Muammar Gaddafi agreed to be interviewed by Italian journalist Oriana Fallaci, who had personal experience living under Mussolini's rule and had an anti-Fascist father.
Gaddafi's decision to grant an interview to Fallaci was a strategic move aimed at bolstering his image and reaching a Western audience. Fallaci's reputation as a renowned journalist with a history of opposition to Fascism provided Gaddafi with an opportunity to present himself as a statesman and engage in a dialogue with the West.
During the interview, Gaddafi sought to present a carefully curated image of himself as a charismatic and visionary leader. He used the platform to promote his ideology and criticize Western policies, presenting himself as a revolutionary and anti-imperialist figure.
The section examines how strongman rulers like Gaddafi leverage media and propaganda to cultivate a cult of personality and advance their political agendas. Through control of state media and manipulation of information, Gaddafi was able to present a distorted version of reality, suppressing dissent and dissenting voices.
In conclusion, this section provides a fascinating analysis of how strongman rulers use propaganda and media to shape public perception and control the narrative about their leadership. It's focus on Gaddafi's interview with Oriana Fallaci underscores the strategic nature of such interactions and how leaders seek to exploit media opportunities to promote their image and ideology. The section generally serves as a thought-provoking exploration of the power of propaganda and its role in advancing the narratives of strongman rule, shedding light on the tactics used by autocratic leaders to maintain their grip on power and shape the perception of their rule.
Powerful Role Propaganda Plays in Shaping Public Opinion and Consolidating Power
This section delves into the powerful role of propaganda in shaping public opinion and consolidating the power of strongman rulers. It starts with a quote from Nazi minister Joseph Goebbels, who infamously stated, "In propaganda as in love, anything is permissible which is successful." Goebbels, along with Hitler, orchestrated one of the most extensive and manipulative campaigns of mass persuasion in history.
The section examines how propaganda was employed by the Nazi regime to manipulate public sentiment and create a cult of personality around Adolf Hitler. The Nazis used various forms of media, including newspapers, radio, films, and public speeches, to disseminate their propaganda and promote their racist and anti-Semitic ideologies.
Goebbels's statement underscores the ruthless and deceptive nature of Nazi propaganda. The regime used every means available to indoctrinate the German population, portraying Hitler as a savior and the only capable leader who could restore Germany's greatness. The propaganda machine played a crucial role in cultivating loyalty, suppressing dissent, and creating a sense of national unity under Hitler's rule.
The section also explores the lasting impact of Nazi propaganda on the German psyche. The manipulation of information and the portrayal of an alternate reality contributed to a widespread acceptance of Hitler's leadership and facilitated the implementation of genocidal policies during the Holocaust.
In conclusion, this section provides a chilling analysis of the power and impact of propaganda in strongman rule, exemplified by the Nazi regime's manipulation of public sentiment and the cult of personality around Hitler. Goebbels's statement captures the unscrupulous nature of propaganda in the pursuit of political goals, regardless of its moral implications. The section generally serves as a stark reminder of the dangers of unchecked propaganda and the devastating consequences it can have on society when wielded by authoritarian leaders. It underscores the importance of critical thinking and media literacy in safeguarding democratic values and countering the influence of propaganda in the modern world.
Strongmen Utilize Different Media, Manipulate Opinion, Consolidate Power.
This section explores how strongman rulers throughout history have utilized different forms of media to manipulate public opinion and consolidate their power. It begins by noting that each era introduces new media, and during the interwar period, both Mussolini and Hitler harnessed specific mediums for their propaganda campaigns.
Mussolini's regime effectively employed nonfiction films to glorify his image and promote fascist ideologies. The Italian government heavily controlled the film industry, ensuring that only content aligned with fascist propaganda was allowed. Documentaries were crafted to depict Mussolini as a charismatic leader, showcasing his speeches and public appearances to cultivate a cult of personality. These films were instrumental in creating a sense of national unity and fostering a perception of Mussolini as a symbol of Italy's greatness.
Similarly, Hitler's regime skillfully utilized radio as a powerful propaganda tool. By monopolizing the broadcasting industry, the Nazis gained control over the information disseminated to the German population. Hitler's impassioned speeches, delivered with mastery over the airwaves, captured the imagination of the masses and instilled a sense of devotion to the Führer. The widespread distribution of radios also ensured that Nazi propaganda could reach every corner of Germany, allowing for the indoctrination of citizens and the suppression of dissenting voices.
The section underscores the critical role of media in shaping public perception and controlling the narrative in authoritarian regimes. Both Mussolini and Hitler recognized the immense power of media and its ability to sway public opinion. By monopolizing these channels of communication, they effectively manipulated information and portrayed themselves as the sole champions of their respective nations, thereby consolidating their power and suppressing opposition.
In conclusion, this section provides an insightful analysis of how strongman rulers strategically leverage different forms of media to advance their propaganda campaigns. Mussolini's use of nonfiction film and Hitler's mastery of radio during the interwar period demonstrate the central role of media in shaping public opinion and consolidating power. The section generally serves as a powerful reminder of the far-reaching influence of propaganda and the vital importance of media freedom and critical thinking in safeguarding democratic values and countering the manipulation of information by authoritarian leaders.
Nazis Monopolized Radio Industry, Hitler Messianic Figure, Suppressing Dissent
This section delves into the propaganda techniques employed by Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels in Nazi Germany. It begins by acknowledging that Hitler had certain advantages over Mussolini in his efforts to shape and control public opinion, as Goebbels termed it as "one public opinion."
One advantage was the more advanced state of radio broadcasting in Germany compared to Italy. The Nazis effectively monopolized the radio industry, ensuring that only their propaganda was disseminated to the masses. Hitler's powerful oratory skills, coupled with the widespread availability of radios in German households, allowed his speeches to reach millions, creating a sense of unity and devotion among the German population.
Another advantage was the highly coordinated and comprehensive nature of Nazi propaganda. Goebbels and his team systematically crafted a narrative that portrayed Hitler as a messianic figure and the embodiment of Germany's national destiny. The Nazis used a variety of media, including posters, newspapers, films, and rallies, to reinforce their propaganda messages, instilling fear and reverence for the Führer in the minds of the people.
Additionally, the Nazi regime effectively utilized intimidation and repression to suppress dissenting voices and control public discourse. Those who dared to challenge Hitler's ideology or question the regime's actions faced severe consequences, including imprisonment, torture, or death. This created an atmosphere of fear and self-censorship, ensuring that the majority of Germans conformed to the party's propaganda.
In conclusion, this section provides a compelling analysis of the propaganda techniques employed by Hitler and Goebbels in Nazi Germany. Hitler's advantages in radio broadcasting, the comprehensive nature of Nazi propaganda, and the use of intimidation to control public opinion all contributed to the success of the regime's manipulation of information. The section generally serves as a stark reminder of the dangerous consequences of unchecked propaganda and the importance of safeguarding media freedom and critical thinking to protect democratic values. It highlights the enduring impact of propaganda on society and underscores the need to remain vigilant against attempts by strongman rulers to control the narrative and consolidate power.
Postwar Propaganda Techniques, Emergence of Television, Potent Propaganda Tool
This section delves into the evolution of propaganda techniques employed by postwar strongman rulers, with a particular focus on the emergence of television as a potent tool in their propaganda arsenal.
Television provided postwar strongmen with a new and powerful means of shaping public opinion. With its visual and auditory appeal, television allowed leaders to directly address and influence the masses, reaching into the private spaces of people's homes and leaving a lasting impact on their minds.
The section explores how strongman rulers such as Francisco Franco in Spain and Saddam Hussein in Iraq harnessed television to project an image of themselves as charismatic and benevolent leaders. They used carefully staged appearances and scripted speeches to craft a persona of authority and omnipotence, aiming to instill fear and admiration among the populace.
Television was also utilized to disseminate propaganda that glorified the regime and its ideology, depicting the leader as the embodiment of the nation's greatness. State-controlled media ensured that only positive narratives about the regime were broadcast, effectively censoring dissenting voices and critical perspectives.
Despite the rise of television as a powerful propaganda tool, the section highlights the limitations it posed for some strongman rulers. For instance, Nicolae Ceaușescu in Romania faced difficulties in manipulating television as the medium became more sophisticated and challenging to control. Ultimately, television played a role in his downfall as it exposed the stark reality of his oppressive rule, leading to public unrest and his eventual ousting.
In conclusion, this section provides a captivating analysis of how postwar strongman rulers effectively used television to shape public perception and consolidate their power. Television's visual impact allowed leaders to craft a carefully curated image of authority and strength, reinforcing the cult of personality surrounding them. However, the section also highlights how television's increasing sophistication posed challenges for some rulers, making it harder to maintain complete control over the narrative. The section generally serves as a reminder of the enduring power of propaganda and the importance of media freedom and critical thinking in countering the manipulation of information by authoritarian leaders.
Pinochet, Torture, Execution, Dissent, Country as Stable Law-abiding
This section examines how strongman rulers like Augusto Pinochet of Chile continued the tradition of employing propaganda to consolidate power and shape public perception. It highlights Pinochet's double-faced approach, wherein he used brutal tactics of torture and execution to suppress dissent within Chile while simultaneously deploying a sophisticated communications operation to portray the country as a stable and law-abiding nation to foreign investors.
Pinochet's regime relied on a repressive security apparatus to quell opposition and maintain control. Dissenters were subjected to torture, imprisonment, and even extrajudicial killings. This reign of terror was instrumental in silencing dissent and instilling fear among the population, allowing Pinochet to wield absolute authority.
However, despite the brutality of his rule, Pinochet understood the importance of projecting an image of stability and lawfulness to the international community. He employed an elaborate propaganda campaign that aimed to paint Chile as an attractive destination for foreign investors. Through carefully orchestrated media campaigns, Pinochet and his government presented Chile as a nation open for business, emphasizing its economic potential and purportedly strong institutions.
The section delves into how Pinochet's propaganda machine skillfully manipulated information to create a narrative of economic success and political stability. International media coverage often focused on Chile's economic growth and relatively low levels of violence, overshadowing the human rights abuses and repression that occurred under Pinochet's rule.
In conclusion, this section provides a thought-provoking analysis of Augusto Pinochet's use of propaganda to maintain power in Chile. Pinochet's double-faced approach, employing brutal tactics to suppress dissent while projecting an image of stability and openness to foreign investors, underscores the complex and manipulative nature of strongman rule. The section generally serves as a reminder of the importance of media freedom and independent journalism in uncovering the truth behind the carefully crafted propaganda narratives and shedding light on the human rights abuses and atrocities committed under authoritarian regimes. It also highlights the critical role of international scrutiny and accountability in holding strongman rulers accountable for their actions.
Similarities between Gaddafi's and Mussolini's Rise, Population was Illiterate
This section explores how strongman rulers like Muammar Gaddafi of Libya utilized propaganda to consolidate power and control public perception. It starts by highlighting the similarities between Gaddafi's situation upon coming to power in 1969 and Mussolini's rise to power. In both cases, the majority of the population was illiterate, presenting an opportunity for the leaders to manipulate information and shape the narrative to their advantage.
Gaddafi's regime focused on using propaganda to cultivate a personality cult around the leader. He presented himself as a revolutionary and pan-Arab hero, drawing on nationalist and anti-colonial sentiments to bolster his image as a champion of the Libyan people. The section delves into how Gaddafi used elaborate ceremonies and staged appearances to portray himself as a charismatic and omnipotent figure, further fueling the myth of his leadership.
To counter the illiteracy of the population, Gaddafi's regime utilized oral propaganda, leveraging the power of radio and public speeches. State-controlled media broadcast his speeches and messages, which were disseminated through public squares and mosques, ensuring that his messages reached even the most remote areas of Libya.
Additionally, the section highlights how Gaddafi's regime maintained strict control over information and suppressed dissent through fear and intimidation. The regime created a pervasive atmosphere of surveillance and paranoia, making it hazardous for anyone to express opposition or challenge Gaddafi's rule.
In conclusion, this section provides a compelling analysis of Muammar Gaddafi's use of propaganda to solidify his grip on power in Libya. Gaddafi's exploitation of illiteracy, coupled with the deployment of oral propaganda through radio and public speeches, allowed him to shape the narrative and foster a cult of personality around himself. The section generally underscores the manipulative nature of propaganda in strongman rule and highlights the importance of media literacy and access to independent information in countering the influence of propaganda. It serves as a reminder of the profound impact of information control on the perceptions and actions of the population under authoritarian regimes.
Internet Revolutionized Information Creating Opportunities for Propaganda.
This section explores how the use of propaganda evolved and adapted under new authoritarian rulers, particularly in the context of Muammar Gaddafi's regime in Libya. By the time Gaddafi's regime fell in 2011, a new generation of strongman rulers had emerged, leaving their own distinct mark on the history of propaganda.
The section delves into how Gaddafi's regime heavily relied on propaganda to cultivate a personality cult around the leader and maintain control over the population. However, as the world entered the 21st century, technological advancements and the widespread use of the internet revolutionized the dissemination of information and created new challenges and opportunities for propaganda.
The section examines how new authoritarian rulers, like Vladimir Putin in Russia and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Turkey, capitalized on digital media and social networking platforms to project their images and ideologies. These leaders recognized the power of social media in shaping public opinion and utilized it to create a narrative that portrayed themselves as strong and decisive leaders, while simultaneously suppressing dissent and opposition.
The rise of digital propaganda also enabled new authoritarian rulers to spread misinformation and disinformation, sowing confusion and undermining trust in traditional media and democratic institutions. The section highlights how these leaders used targeted online campaigns to manipulate public sentiment, manufacture false narratives, and amplify their messages.
In conclusion, this section provides an insightful analysis of the changing landscape of propaganda under new authoritarian rulers. It's examination of Gaddafi's regime and its reliance on traditional propaganda methods offers a historical context for understanding the adaptation of propaganda to the digital age. The section generally serves as a reminder of the ever-evolving nature of propaganda and its powerful role in shaping public perception and consolidating power in the hands of strongman rulers. It emphasizes the importance of media literacy, critical thinking, and safeguarding media freedom in countering the influence of propaganda and protecting democratic values in the modern world.
Putin Took Advantage of Broader Media landscape to Reach a Wider Audience
This section examines the evolution of propaganda in different historical contexts, including the era of Soviet rule in Russia. It starts with a humorous quip from comedian Yakov Smirnoff, who reminisces about the limited media landscape during the days of Soviet rule, where there were only two TV channels available.
The section explores how the Soviet regime tightly controlled the media to serve its propaganda purposes. With only two state-controlled TV channels, the government effectively monopolized information and shaped the narrative to portray the Communist Party and its leaders in a positive light. This control over media allowed the regime to suppress dissent and criticism, reinforcing the ideology of the ruling party.
The section goes on to analyze how the landscape of propaganda changed after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the rise of Vladimir Putin to power in Russia. Putin's regime embraced a more sophisticated approach to propaganda, leveraging digital media and the internet to disseminate its messages. The section highlights how Putin's government took advantage of the broader media landscape to reach a wider audience and control the narrative domestically and internationally.
Furthermore, the section explores how the modern media landscape has created challenges and opportunities for propaganda. The proliferation of online platforms and social media has allowed new authoritarian rulers to spread disinformation and propaganda to manipulate public sentiment and sow division.
In conclusion, this section offers an insightful analysis of the role of propaganda in different historical contexts. The section's reference to the limited TV channels in the Soviet era serves as a reminder of the strict control over information during that time. The section generally highlights the importance of media freedom and the need for critical thinking to counter the influence of propaganda and misinformation in the digital age. It underscores the power of media in shaping public perception and the responsibility of individuals to stay informed and discern truth from manipulation in the modern media landscape.
Role of Media in Shaping Public Perception in Early 21st Century, Silvio Berlusconi
This section delves into the role of television and media in shaping public perception during the early twenty-first century, with a particular focus on the case of Silvio Berlusconi in Italy. It starts with a quote from Berlusconi himself, who famously said, "If something doesn't appear on television, it doesn't exist," highlighting his recognition of the immense power of television in controlling the narrative and influencing public opinion.
The section then explores how Berlusconi, a media tycoon and wealthy businessman, leveraged his control over television networks to further his political ambitions. As the owner of several major TV channels, he had significant influence over the content that reached millions of Italian households, effectively shaping the information that the public consumed.
Berlusconi's media empire allowed him to craft a carefully curated public image, presenting himself as a successful entrepreneur and a man of the people. He used his media outlets to promote positive coverage of his political activities and downplay or ignore any negative news or scandals.
The section also delves into how Berlusconi's dominance in the media created a climate of self-censorship among other media outlets. Many journalists and media organizations feared repercussions if they reported negatively on Berlusconi or his government, leading to a lack of critical coverage and scrutiny of his actions and policies.
In conclusion, this section offers a compelling analysis of the influence of television and media in the political landscape, as exemplified by Silvio Berlusconi's control over Italy's media. Berlusconi's quote about the importance of television speaks to the central role of media in shaping public perception and the power it bestows on those who control it. The section generally serves as a reminder of the importance of media freedom and independent journalism in holding leaders accountable and countering the manipulation of information by strongman rulers. It underscores the vital role of critical thinking and media literacy in safeguarding democratic values and ensuring an informed and engaged citizenry in the face of media manipulation and propaganda.
Fake Media, Trump's Media Attacks Fit Pattern of Propaganda Used by Strongmen
This section examines the role of propaganda in the modern era, with a particular focus on the rise of strongman rulers who seek to manipulate public perception. It starts with a quote from former U.S. President Donald Trump, known for his frequent attacks on the media and his use of the term "fake news" to dismiss unfavorable coverage.
The section explores how Trump's rhetoric and attacks on the media fit into a broader pattern of propaganda used by strongman rulers. By discrediting the media as purveyors of "fake news," Trump sought to undermine the credibility of independent journalism and create a narrative that cast doubt on the accuracy of critical reporting.
This tactic of delegitimizing the media is not unique to Trump; other strongman rulers have employed similar strategies to control the narrative and suppress dissent. By dismissing negative news as "fake," they attempt to shape public opinion, sow confusion, and maintain a loyal following among their supporters.
The section also discusses how the rise of social media and online platforms has provided a fertile ground for the spread of disinformation and propaganda. The proliferation of fake news stories and conspiracy theories on social media has further blurred the lines between truth and falsehood, making it increasingly challenging for the public to discern accurate information.
In conclusion, this section provides a thought-provoking analysis of the role of propaganda in the modern era, exemplified by Donald Trump's attacks on the media and use of the term "fake news." The section generally highlights the dangers of propaganda and disinformation in shaping public perception and undermining democratic values. It emphasizes the importance of media literacy and critical thinking in countering the influence of propaganda and misinformation. Additionally, the chapter serves as a reminder of the crucial role of a free and independent media in holding leaders accountable and safeguarding democratic principles in the face of propaganda and attacks on truth.
Chapter Six - Virility
Chapter six delves into the connection between virility and strongman rule in chapter six. It explores how leaders like Mussolini and Hitler projected images of masculinity, and how this portrayal of virility played a role in their political legitimacy.
Strongman's Masculine Authoritarian Image, Bolsters Authority, Maintains Power.
The first section of chapter six delves into how strongman rulers like Benito Mussolini in Italy cultivated a masculine and authoritarian image to bolster their authority and maintain power. It starts with a letter from a supporter named Michela C. of Siena, written in December 1925, where she expresses her admiration for Mussolini's strong and tumultuous visit to her city.
The section explores how Mussolini intentionally crafted a virile and dominant persona to appeal to the Italian public. He presented himself as a strong and charismatic leader, embodying the image of the "Duce" (the leader) who could steer the nation towards greatness and restore Italy's past glory.
Mussolini's virility was also portrayed through his physical appearance and demeanor. He often appeared in military uniforms, projecting an image of power and authority, while his strong and assertive speaking style further reinforced his leadership image.
The section further discusses how Mussolini's propaganda machine carefully cultivated the perception of his virility and prowess. The regime's media apparatus actively promoted images and narratives that glorified the Duce's strong leadership and depicted him as a symbol of national strength and unity.
Additionally, Mussolini's emphasis on virility extended to his promotion of fascist youth organizations that aimed to instill a sense of martial discipline and nationalistic fervor among the younger generation. The cultivation of a strong and disciplined youth was seen as vital to the regime's long-term goals of building a powerful and aggressive nation.
In conclusion, this section offers an insightful analysis of how strongman rulers like Mussolini used the concept of virility to establish and maintain their authority. It highlights the strategic cultivation of a masculine and authoritarian image, which resonated with the public and bolstered the leader's perceived strength and charisma. It serves as a reminder of the power of persona and imagery in politics and underlines the manipulation of public perception by strongman rulers to consolidate their power and shape the national narrative.
Strongman Rulers Use Violence Coercion, Subjugate Opponents, Suppress Dissent
This section explores how strongman rulers rely on controlling bodies and exerting physical power to maintain their authority and perpetuate their regime. It starts with a powerful assertion: "The strongman would be nothing without bodies to control," drawing attention to the central role of physical dominance in the strongman's rule.
The section discusses how strongman rulers like Benito Mussolini in Italy and other authoritarian leaders have used violence and coercion to subjugate their opponents and suppress dissent. Mussolini's regime, for instance, employed a paramilitary organization known as the Blackshirts to intimidate and attack political opponents, journalists, and anyone perceived as a threat to the regime.
The control of bodies is not limited to violence; it also encompasses the regulation of public behavior and personal choices. The section explores how strongman rulers seek to mold their citizens into obedient and conforming subjects, promoting a culture of submission and loyalty to the regime.
The chapter also delves into the cult of masculinity that strongman rulers often foster, where physical strength and aggression are valorized. These leaders promote an image of themselves as virile and powerful figures, projecting a sense of dominance and authority over their subjects.
In conclusion, this section offers a thought-provoking analysis of how strongman rulers exert control over bodies to perpetuate their authority. It highlights the use of violence and coercion as tools of intimidation and repression, emphasizing the high cost of resistance for those who challenge the regime. It also underscores the dangerous cult of masculinity that often accompanies strongman rule, perpetuating a culture of physical dominance and submission. The section serves as a cautionary reminder of the profound consequences of unchecked power and the importance of safeguarding human rights and democratic values to protect against the abuse of authority by strongman rulers.
Some Women Find Strongmen Appealing Despite Misogyny and Authoritarianism
This section explores the paradoxical phenomenon of some women supporting and loving strongman rulers, despite the often misogynistic and authoritarian nature of their regimes. It begins by posing a compelling question: "If strongmen are such misogynist monsters, why do some women love them?"
The section delves into the complexities of this phenomenon and examines the reasons why some women may find strongman rulers attractive or appealing. It highlights how the strongman's projection of virility and masculinity can create a sense of security and stability for some individuals, including some women, especially in times of perceived crisis or instability.
Moreover, the section discusses how strongman propaganda often includes elements that appeal to traditional gender roles and family values, reinforcing the image of the leader as a protector of the nation and its people. This narrative can resonate with individuals who prioritize stability and traditional values in their lives.
The section also explores how strongman rulers may strategically employ women in their propaganda to create the illusion of support and validation. Female figures who align themselves with the regime may be promoted as symbols of the leader's benevolence and inclusivity, deflecting attention from the regime's more oppressive aspects.
In conclusion, this section offers a nuanced examination of why some women may support and even love strongman rulers despite their misogynistic and authoritarian nature. It highlights the complexities of human psychology and how factors like perceptions of stability, traditional values, and strategic propaganda can shape individuals' perceptions and allegiances. It serves as a reminder of the importance of critically analyzing propaganda and understanding the psychological underpinnings of support for strongman rulers. Additionally, it underscores the significance of promoting gender equality and empowering women to ensure a more inclusive and just society.
Men and Women Experienced Mussolini's Charismatic Appeal Differently
This section delves into the gender dynamics surrounding the strongman cult of personality, particularly concerning the relationship between male leaders and their male followers. It starts with a hypothetical scenario, imagining if a male journalist, Montanelli, had been female, suggesting that he might have experienced Mussolini's charismatic appeal differently, but may not have perceived evidence of the leader's humanity.
The section explores how strongman rulers often cultivate an aura of masculinity and virility to project an image of power and authority. This presentation may have a profound impact on male followers, who may be drawn to the strongman's leadership style and identify with the portrayed traits of strength and decisiveness.
While male followers might be more likely to perceive the strongman as a figure of charisma and humanity, the section suggests that female followers may not have experienced the same connection. The cult of virility and masculinity may not have resonated with them in the same way, given the inherent misogyny and oppressive nature of many strongman regimes.
Additionally, the section discusses how strongman leaders tend to perpetuate traditional gender roles and view women as subordinate to men. This perspective may have further alienated female followers, as they might not have found evidence of the leader's humanity or understanding of their experiences as women.
In conclusion, this section provides an intriguing exploration of the gender dynamics surrounding the strongman cult of personality. It highlights the specific appeal of strongman leaders to their male followers, particularly in projecting an image of virility and strength. Simultaneously, it suggests that female followers might not have experienced the same connection, given the prevalent misogyny and oppressive gender norms perpetuated by these regimes. The section serves as a reminder of the gendered nature of strongman rule and its impact on both male and female followers. It underscores the importance of examining the complex dynamics of power, gender, and identity in understanding the appeal and impact of strongman rulers on society.
Volatile Temperament Role in Leadership to Maintained Authority, Loyalty
This section delves into the personalities and behaviors of strongman rulers, with a particular focus on the similarities between Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini. It starts by noting that Hitler shared Mussolini's volatile temperament and his desire to dominate both men and women in his inner circle.
The section explores how Hitler, like Mussolini, exhibited a temperament characterized by impulsivity and aggression. Both leaders were known for their explosive outbursts and the use of fear and intimidation to control those around them. This volatile temperament played a significant role in their leadership styles and the way they maintained their authority.
Additionally, the section discusses how both Hitler and Mussolini sought to dominate and control those in their inner circle, including women. They surrounded themselves with loyal followers and yes-men who would unquestioningly obey their commands and reinforce their authority.
The section also highlights the gendered dynamics of their leadership, as both Hitler and Mussolini adhered to traditional gender roles and sought to assert their dominance over both male and female subordinates. They expected absolute loyalty and submission from those in their inner circle, regardless of gender.
In conclusion, this section provides an insightful comparison of the personalities and behaviors of strongman rulers, focusing on the similarities between Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini. It highlights the shared volatile temperaments and the need to dominate both men and women in their inner circles. It underscores the gendered nature of their leadership, where traditional gender roles were reinforced, and absolute loyalty and submission were expected from their followers. The section serves as a reminder of the dangerous consequences of unchecked power and the importance of understanding the psychological underpinnings of strongman rule to safeguard against the rise of authoritarian leaders.
Gaddafi Projected Image of Progressivism, Gender Equality, Consolidating Power
This section explores the gender dynamics and the ways strongman rulers have attempted to control and manipulate gender roles in their societies. It begins with a quote from Muammar Gaddafi, the leader of Libya, announcing the establishment of a military academy for women in September 1981. He proudly declared that the era of harems and slaves was coming to an end as he presented the first graduating class of female cadets.
The section delves into Gaddafi's efforts to project an image of progressivism and gender equality while simultaneously consolidating his own power. By establishing a military academy for women, Gaddafi sought to challenge traditional gender roles in Libya and create a narrative of progress and modernity.
However, the section also discusses the contradictions in Gaddafi's approach to gender equality. Despite his rhetoric, his regime still maintained a highly authoritarian and oppressive system, where dissent and political opposition were harshly suppressed.
Furthermore, the section examines how Gaddafi used women's rights as a tool of propaganda to enhance his image on the international stage. By presenting the military academy for women, he aimed to portray himself as a progressive leader and a champion of women's rights, effectively deflecting attention from his regime's human rights abuses and oppressive practices.
In conclusion, this section offers a thought-provoking analysis of the complex relationship between strongman rule and gender dynamics. It highlights how some strongman rulers have attempted to manipulate gender roles to create a narrative of progress and modernity while maintaining their authoritarian grip on power. It underscores the importance of critically examining the intentions and actions of leaders who claim to promote gender equality and women's rights, as their rhetoric may be used as a tool of propaganda to distract from their oppressive practices. The section serves as a reminder of the complexities of power and the need to scrutinize the actions and policies of strongman rulers to safeguard human rights and promote genuine gender equality.
Sexist Leaders Have Detrimental Effects on Women's Rights and Gender Equality
This section examines the impact of electing leaders with misogynistic tendencies on the status and rights of women in their countries. It begins with a quote from journalist Annalisa Merelli, who draws attention to the consequences of electing a sexist leader, using the example of Italy to warn Americans about the potential implications of electing an outspoken misogynist.
The section delves into how the election of sexist leaders can have detrimental effects on women's rights and gender equality. It highlights the importance of political leadership in shaping societal norms and attitudes towards women.
The example of Italy is presented, where certain leaders in recent history have perpetuated sexist attitudes and policies that have negatively impacted women. These leaders may promote traditional gender roles and reinforce harmful stereotypes, leading to a regression in women's rights and opportunities.
The section also discusses the broader implications of electing leaders with misogynistic tendencies. It raises concerns about the normalization of sexist behavior in society, where leaders who exhibit such attitudes may serve as role models for others, perpetuating discrimination and gender inequality.
In conclusion, this section offers a critical examination of the consequences of electing leaders with misogynistic tendencies. It highlights the potential setbacks in women's rights and gender equality that can arise when such leaders are in power. It serves as a reminder of the importance of promoting gender equality and electing leaders who champion women's rights and inclusivity. The section emphasizes the role of leadership in shaping societal attitudes and norms, underscoring the need to be vigilant in safeguarding women's rights and ensuring a more equitable and just society for all.
Trump's Lewd Comments About Women on Groping and Kissing Them
This section addresses the issue of sexism and the behavior of strongman leaders towards women, focusing on an infamous incident involving former U.S. President Donald Trump. It starts with a quote from Trump in 2005, where he made lewd comments about women, including remarks about groping and kissing them, during a conversation with Billy Bush, the producer of the Access Hollywood television program.
The section explores how Trump's comments reflect a pattern of misogynistic behavior and attitudes towards women. The incident, where Trump seemed to boast about his ability to act inappropriately towards women due to his fame and status, sparked widespread outrage and raised serious questions about his character and fitness for public office.
The section delves into how Trump's behavior towards women exemplifies the toxic masculinity often associated with strongman rulers. Trump's statements not only objectified women but also perpetuated harmful stereotypes that undermine the dignity and rights of women.
Additionally, the section discusses how Trump's election to the highest office in the United States sent a troubling message about the tolerance of sexism and misogyny in society. His behavior and rhetoric may have normalized sexist attitudes, potentially emboldening others to engage in similar behavior.
In conclusion, this section offers a critical analysis of how strongman leaders' behavior towards women can perpetuate a culture of sexism and toxic masculinity. It highlights the significance of holding leaders accountable for their actions and rhetoric concerning women's rights and gender equality. It serves as a reminder of the importance of electing leaders who promote respect and inclusivity, and it underscores the role of leadership in shaping societal attitudes towards women. The section emphasizes the need to challenge and resist the normalization of sexist behavior and attitudes, both in politics and society at large, to advance gender equality and ensure a more just and equitable world for all.
Chapter Seven - Corruption
Chapter seven exposes the corrupt practices of strongmen in power. The author examines cases like Silvio Berlusconi's alleged bribery and explores how corruption and abuse of public power for personal gain characterize authoritarian regimes.
Strongmen and Associates Indulge in Luxurious Lifestyles at Expense of Citizens
This section explores the prevalence of corruption among strongman rulers and their inner circles. It begins with a description of an extravagant dinner, featuring lavish dishes and exquisite wines served on Limoges china. This opulent event serves as a metaphor for the corruption that often permeates the regimes of strongman leaders.
The section delves into how strongman rulers and their associates indulge in luxurious and lavish lifestyles at the expense of their countries and citizens. They exploit their positions of power to accumulate vast wealth, often through corrupt practices and embezzlement of public funds.
The description of the fine dining experience symbolizes the excesses and indulgences enjoyed by these leaders, which contrast sharply with the economic struggles and poverty experienced by many in their countries.
Additionally, the section discusses how corruption extends beyond personal enrichment to include nepotism and cronyism. Strongman rulers often appoint family members, close friends, and loyal supporters to key positions of power, further entrenching their control and consolidating their authority.
In conclusion this section provides a critical examination of corruption within the regimes of strongman rulers. It highlights how these leaders and their inner circles indulge in opulence and extravagance while their citizens suffer the consequences of corruption and economic mismanagement. It serves as a stark reminder of the profound impact of corruption on societies and the urgent need for transparency, accountability, and good governance. The section underscores the importance of combating corruption to ensure that public resources are used for the benefit of the people, rather than serving the interests of a select few in positions of power.
Corruption in Governance, Strongmen Amass Fortunes Exploiting Authority
This section delves into the pervasive issue of corruption within the regimes of strongman leaders. It begins with a comprehensive definition of corruption as the abuse of public power for personal gain, encompassing various illicit practices such as bribery, conflicts of interest, and plunder of state resources.
The section explores how corruption becomes deeply entrenched in the governance of strongman rulers, allowing them and their inner circles to amass vast fortunes while exploiting their positions of authority. The abuse of public power for personal enrichment is not only morally reprehensible but also has severe consequences for the overall well-being of the nation and its citizens.
Bribery is one of the most common forms of corruption, where officials accept illicit payments to influence decisions in favor of specific individuals or companies. This practice undermines the fairness and transparency of governmental processes, eroding public trust in the institutions meant to serve the people.
Conflicts of interest further contribute to corruption as strongman rulers often use their political positions to benefit their personal businesses or those of their close associates. This type of corruption blurs the lines between public and private interests, allowing rulers to prioritize their own financial gains over the welfare of the nation.
Plundering state resources and profiting from privatization or nationalization are also detrimental forms of corruption. Strongman rulers may misuse state assets and funds for personal purposes, leading to economic instability and a loss of public resources that could otherwise be used for the greater good of the country.
In conclusion this section provides an in-depth examination of corruption within the regimes of strongman leaders. It highlights the multifaceted nature of corruption, encompassing various practices that enable rulers to abuse their power for personal gain. It serves as a stark reminder of the devastating impact of corruption on society, undermining trust in public institutions and hindering social and economic development. The section emphasizes the need for robust systems of accountability, transparency, and good governance to combat corruption effectively and promote ethical leadership that prioritizes the well-being of the people over personal enrichment.
Mussolini's Deceptive Strategy, Maintain Grip on Power, Perpetuating Corruption
This section examines the origins and patterns of strongman corruption, with Benito Mussolini serving as an illustrative example. It starts by highlighting Mussolini's role in setting the template for strongman corruption activities during his rule as the leader of Fascist Italy.
Mussolini employed a deceptive strategy to maintain his grip on power while perpetuating corruption. He initially presented Fascism as a means to cleanse Italy of war profiteers, garnering public support for his regime. However, this portrayal was merely a facade, as behind the scenes, Mussolini was actively involved in corrupt practices to consolidate his authority and enrich himself and his inner circle.
Rather than rooting out corruption, Mussolini strategically shut down investigations into corrupt activities that involved his allies and supporters. This allowed him to protect those loyal to him while maintaining the facade of a strong and authoritative leader committed to the well-being of the nation.
Furthermore, the section explores how Mussolini's corruption was not limited to bribery and financial misconduct. He manipulated the legal system and used state institutions to suppress dissent and maintain control, further solidifying his power and shielding himself from accountability.
In conclusion this section uses the example of Mussolini to illustrate the template for strongman corruption activities. It highlights how leaders like Mussolini exploit public sentiments to mask their corrupt practices while undermining democratic principles and the rule of law. It serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of unchecked power and the need for strong institutions, transparency, and accountability to combat corruption and protect the interests of the people. The section underscores the importance of recognizing and resisting corruption in all its forms to ensure the establishment of ethical and just governance.
Strongmen Not Omnipresent, Individuals Exploit Gaps for Personal Gain
This section delves into the issue of corruption within strongman regimes and explores the dynamics of how leaders like Adolf Hitler navigate the complexities of power and corruption. It begins with a quote acknowledging that while Hitler's level of involvement may impact certain aspects, he cannot personally oversee every detail of his regime.
The quote illustrates how strongman rulers, including Hitler, face limitations in their ability to micromanage every aspect of their governance. Despite their authoritarian control, they cannot be omnipresent, leading to the emergence of corruption within their regimes as certain individuals exploit opportunities for personal gain.
The section goes on to discuss how this dynamic opens the door for corruption to thrive in the power vacuum created by the strongman's inability to oversee every facet of governance. It highlights how corrupt officials and opportunistic allies may take advantage of their positions to enrich themselves without immediate oversight.
Furthermore, the section explores how Hitler's regime, like many others, was marked by the existence of a corrupt inner circle. As strongman leaders surround themselves with loyal supporters, they may inadvertently create an environment conducive to corruption, where sycophantic associates feel entitled to exploit their positions of influence.
In conclusion this section provides an insightful analysis of corruption within strongman regimes, using Hitler as a case study. The section emphasizes how even authoritarian leaders face limitations in their control, leading to opportunities for corruption to flourish within their regimes. It serves as a reminder that unchecked power can breed corruption, and the existence of a corrupt inner circle can further exacerbate the issue. The section underscores the importance of promoting transparency, accountability, and the rule of law to combat corruption and ensure that leaders prioritize the well-being of their citizens over personal gain.
Military Coups High-risk, Potential Rewards Demonstrated by Chile and Libya
This section explores the role of military coups as a means for strongman rulers to come to power and the subsequent risks and rewards associated with such operations. It begins by highlighting that military coups are high-risk endeavors with the potential for significant rewards for those involved, as demonstrated by the experiences in Chile and Libya.
The section delves into the Chilean military coup of September 11, 1973, which brought General Augusto Pinochet to power. Pinochet and his fellow officers believed that by overthrowing the democratically elected socialist president Salvador Allende, they could protect Chile from communism and initiate a new era of stability and prosperity. However, the coup also paved the way for corruption to flourish under Pinochet's regime.
In Libya, Muammar Gaddafi's military coup in 1969 brought him to power, promising to usher in a new era of prosperity and liberation for the Libyan people. However, like Pinochet, Gaddafi's rule was marred by corruption and the plundering of state resources for personal gain.
The section explores how military coups, while presenting opportunities for change, often lead to the concentration of power in the hands of a single individual or a small group of military officers. This concentration of power can create an environment conducive to corruption, as the new rulers may prioritize their own interests over the welfare of the nation.
Furthermore, the section discusses how strongman rulers who come to power through military coups often view corruption as a means to consolidate their authority and reward their loyal supporters. They may engage in corrupt practices, such as embezzlement and bribery, to maintain the loyalty of key military figures and other influential allies.
In conclusion this section offers a critical examination of the risks and rewards associated with military coups, using the examples of Chile and Libya. It highlights how such coups can pave the way for corruption to thrive, as strongman rulers consolidate power and prioritize their interests over the welfare of their citizens. It serves as a reminder of the importance of democratic governance, transparency, and accountability in safeguarding against corruption and promoting the well-being of the people. The section underscores the need for responsible and ethical leadership to ensure that power is used to serve the greater good, rather than for personal gain and self-preservation.
Gaddafi's Ascent to Power, No Support of Foreign Powers Like Pinochet, Mobutu
This section explores the rise of self-made strongman Muammar Gaddafi and the significant role of oil wealth in his authoritarian rule. It begins by highlighting how Gaddafi's ascent to power was unlike that of other strongmen, as he did not enjoy the support and largesse of foreign powers like Pinochet and Mobutu did.
Unlike Pinochet in Chile and Mobutu in Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of Congo), who received substantial support from the United States, Gaddafi's regime was largely self-sustained. His authority was not bolstered by foreign backing, but rather by his strategic management of Libya's vast oil reserves, which granted him significant financial resources and prolonged his grip on power.
The section explores how oil wealth can act as a double-edged sword for authoritarian rulers. On one hand, abundant oil reserves provide the means to consolidate power, maintain a loyal support base, and quell dissent through patronage and economic incentives. This, in turn, can prolong their time in power and deter them from implementing democratic reforms.
On the other hand, the abundance of oil revenue can create a dependency on natural resources, leading to neglect of other economic sectors and a lack of diversification. This dependency can leave a country vulnerable to economic fluctuations and global oil price shocks, potentially causing social unrest and challenging the ruler's authority.
Furthermore, the section delves into how Gaddafi's control over Libya's oil wealth contributed to corruption within his regime. As a self-made strongman, he had little accountability to external powers, enabling him to use the oil revenue to reward loyalists and perpetuate his rule through patronage and repression.
In conclusion this section offers a critical analysis of the self-made strongman Muammar Gaddafi and the role of oil wealth in his authoritarian regime. It highlights the complexities of governing a country rich in natural resources and underscores how oil revenue can both sustain and undermine authoritarian rule. It serves as a reminder of the importance of diversifying economies and promoting transparency and accountability to mitigate the risk of corruption and ensure sustainable governance. The section emphasizes the need for responsible leadership that prioritizes the welfare of the nation and its people over personal gain and self-preservation.
Democratic Norms, International Pressure Compel Subtler Forms of Repression
This section examines how new authoritarian leaders in the twenty-first century exhibit similarities with their predecessors from the twentieth century, particularly in their pursuit of personal enrichment at the expense of the public. However, the methods and tactics employed by these contemporary strongmen have evolved, reflecting the changing global landscape and shifting dynamics of power.
The section starts by acknowledging that while one-party rule and mass killings were common among strongman leaders in the twentieth century, such practices have become less prevalent in the twenty-first century. Instead, new authoritarian leaders have adapted their strategies to navigate the complexities of modern politics and international relations, while maintaining their focus on personal enrichment and consolidation of power.
The section discusses how the emergence of democratic norms and international pressure has compelled contemporary strongmen to adopt subtler forms of repression and control. Rather than overtly suppressing dissent or establishing one-party rule, they often rely on co-optation, media manipulation, and legal measures to silence critics and maintain a facade of legitimacy.
While twentieth-century strongmen like Mussolini and Hitler pursued grandiose projects to boost national pride and assert dominance, contemporary autocrats focus on projecting an image of economic prosperity and stability to justify their rule. However, beneath this veneer lies a reality of corruption, cronyism, and the siphoning of public funds for personal gain.
Furthermore, the section explores how technological advancements and the rise of social media have altered the landscape of propaganda and misinformation, allowing new authoritarian leaders to exploit these platforms for their benefit. They use these tools to shape public opinion, suppress dissent, and control narratives, maintaining a tight grip on information and limiting the exposure of their corrupt practices to the outside world.
In conclusion this section provides an insightful analysis of how new authoritarian leaders in the twenty-first century follow in the footsteps of their twentieth-century peers in seeking personal enrichment at the public's expense. It highlights the evolution of tactics used by contemporary strongmen, as they adapt to the challenges of a changing global landscape while perpetuating corruption and consolidating power. It serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding democratic values, promoting transparency, and holding leaders accountable to safeguard against corruption and abuse of power. The section underscores the need for continued vigilance in addressing the tactics and practices of new authoritarian leaders and upholding democratic principles to ensure the well-being and prosperity of nations and their citizens.
Putin's History in KGB Shaped his Style, Skills in Manipulation Surveillance Control
This section examines the governing style of Vladimir Putin, the Russian leader often likened to a strongman. It starts by highlighting Putin's self-perception as a specialist in human relations and someone skilled at working with people. However, it delves deeper into his past as a KGB case officer, which influences his governing approach and informs his tactics as a contemporary strongman.
Putin's background in the KGB, the Soviet Union's intelligence agency, plays a significant role in shaping his governing style. His training as a case officer honed his skills in manipulation, surveillance, and control, which are evident in the way he governs Russia.
The section explores how Putin's governing style is characterized by an emphasis on consolidating power, maintaining strict control over the media and political opposition, and suppressing dissent. He strategically uses state institutions, including law enforcement and the judiciary, to silence critics and eliminate potential threats to his authority.
Moreover, the section discusses how Putin's regime is marked by rampant corruption, with powerful elites close to him amassing enormous wealth and influence at the expense of the broader population. State resources are often channeled to enrich his inner circle, leading to a concentration of economic power and an erosion of public trust in the government.
In addition, the section highlights Putin's adept use of propaganda and information warfare to manipulate public opinion and shape narratives to his advantage. He controls the media landscape, ensuring that only favorable portrayals of his leadership are disseminated, while dissenting voices and critical reporting are suppressed.
In conclusion this section offers an insightful analysis of Vladimir Putin's governing style and its connection to his past as a KGB case officer. It underscores how Putin's background in intelligence informs his tactics as a strongman leader, enabling him to maintain control, suppress opposition, and perpetuate corruption. It serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding democratic values, promoting transparency, and holding leaders accountable to safeguard against abuses of power and corruption. The section emphasizes the need for continued vigilance in addressing the tactics and practices of contemporary strongmen, like Putin, and upholding democratic principles to ensure the well-being and prosperity of nations and their citizens.
Berlusconi's Corruption Charges, Used Media Empire to Manipulate Perception
This section delves into the case of Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian Prime Minister, and media mogul, who faced allegations of corruption and bribery. It begins by recounting a specific incident in 2003 when Berlusconi was accused of paying a massive bribe of 500 million euros to a Roman judge in 1991 through his holding company Fininvest. In response to these allegations, Berlusconi took to one of his television networks to present himself as a victim of a witch hunt, attempting to divert attention from the accusations against him.
The section explores Berlusconi's approach to handling corruption charges and how he used his media empire to manipulate public perception in his favor. By painting himself as the victim of a conspiracy, he sought to discredit the allegations and undermine public trust in the judicial system, portraying himself as a martyr fighting against political enemies.
Berlusconi's case serves as a prime example of how strongman leaders use their control over media and propaganda to shape narratives that support their interests and deflect attention from potentially damaging scandals. His actions exemplify the intertwining of political power and media ownership, enabling him to wield significant influence over public discourse and perception.
Moreover, the section discusses how Berlusconi's time in power was marked by numerous allegations of corruption and conflicts of interest. His extensive business empire and political influence created ample opportunities for conflicts between private and public interests, raising questions about the integrity of his leadership and the potential misuse of power for personal gain.
In conclusion this section provides an insightful analysis of Silvio Berlusconi's handling of corruption charges and the interplay between his media ownership and political power. It highlights how strongman leaders like Berlusconi can use their control over media to shape narratives that support their interests and discredit allegations against them. It serves as a reminder of the importance of promoting transparency, accountability, and the rule of law to combat corruption and ensure responsible governance. The section underscores the need for independent and robust institutions to hold leaders accountable and prevent the misuse of power for personal gain.
Controversies and Scandals Surroundeding Trump Administration During Tenure
This section examines the allegations of corruption and dysfunction within the Trump White House. It starts by quoting journalist Olivia Nuzzi's observation in March 2018, describing the White House as a place where a certain "sickness" seemed to infect everyone who entered its corridors. Nuzzi's characterization implies that the administration's culture fostered an environment of corruption and questionable ethics.
The section explores the controversies and scandals that surrounded the Trump administration during its tenure, with various individuals facing allegations of corruption, conflicts of interest, and unethical behavior. These allegations ranged from improper use of government resources to benefit private business interests to questionable relationships with foreign entities.
Moreover, the section highlights how the revolving door of staff within the Trump White House contributed to the perception of a dysfunctional and chaotic administration. High staff turnover and constant internal turmoil hindered effective governance and raised concerns about the administration's ability to effectively address pressing national issues.
The section also discusses how President Donald Trump himself faced numerous allegations related to potential violations of campaign finance laws, business conflicts, and financial improprieties. The president's refusal to fully divest from his business empire raised questions about possible conflicts of interest and the extent to which personal financial gain influenced policy decisions.
In conclusion this section provides a critical analysis of the controversies and allegations of corruption within the Trump White House. It highlights the challenges of transparency, ethics, and accountability that arose during the administration's tenure. It serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding democratic values, promoting transparency, and ensuring responsible governance to safeguard against corruption and abuses of power. The section underscores the need for robust and independent institutions to hold leaders accountable and prevent the erosion of public trust in government.
Chapter Eight - Violence
Chapter eight explores the use of violence by strongmen to maintain control. Drawing comparisons between Franco's Spain and other dictators, the author shows how violence and repression became central to their rule.
Violence, Tool for Fear, Control Over Population, Silence Opposition, Deterence
This section delves into the brutal tactics employed by authoritarian regimes to suppress opposition and maintain their grip on power. It begins with the harrowing account of Cristina Godoy-Navarrete, a student and opposition activist arrested by Pinochet's forces in 1974. She recalls enduring daily torture during her captivity, providing a firsthand glimpse into the extreme violence and human rights abuses carried out under the Chilean dictatorship.
The section explores how violence becomes an integral tool for strongman leaders like Pinochet to instill fear and control over the population. By subjecting dissenters and opposition figures to torture and brutality, these leaders seek to silence any opposition and deter others from challenging their rule. The widespread use of torture serves as a potent means of psychological and physical coercion, instilling a climate of terror and compliance.
Furthermore, the section delves into the systematic nature of violence under Pinochet's regime, where human rights abuses were not isolated incidents but rather part of a calculated strategy to consolidate power. Enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and arbitrary arrests were common occurrences, leaving families and communities devastated by the loss of loved ones and the constant threat of state-sanctioned violence.
The section also highlights the role of the military and security forces in perpetuating violence and repression. Pinochet's forces operated with impunity, shielded from accountability by the regime's authoritarian structure. The loyalty of these armed forces to the dictator, coupled with their ruthlessness in carrying out orders, reinforced the regime's iron grip on power and its capacity for extreme violence.
In conclusion, this section offers a chilling examination of the use of violence as a tool of control by strongman leaders like Pinochet. It underscores the devastating impact of state-sponsored violence on individuals and communities, as well as the erosion of basic human rights and freedoms under such regimes. It serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding the rule of law, promoting human rights, and holding accountable those responsible for perpetrating violence and abuses against their own citizens. The section emphasizes the need for international solidarity and advocacy to challenge and combat the atrocities committed by authoritarian regimes and to support the quest for justice and accountability for their victims.
Violence and Intimidation in Mussolini's Italy, Crush Opposition Assert Dominance
This section delves into the violent nature of fascist regimes, with a specific focus on Benito Mussolini's Italy. It begins with a quote from Mussolini himself in 1932, in which he warned that the fascist state was wide awake and possessed a will of its own. This quote captures the essence of the chapter's exploration of the brutality and repression that became synonymous with fascist rule.
The section examines how violence and intimidation became pervasive in Mussolini's Italy, as the fascist state sought to crush opposition and assert its dominance. Physical aggression and intimidation tactics were employed to instill fear and suppress dissent, effectively silencing any opposition to the regime's policies and ideology.
Furthermore, the section delves into the creation of a state apparatus designed to enforce loyalty and obedience to the fascist state. This apparatus included the infamous "Blackshirts" or paramilitary squads, who were instrumental in carrying out acts of violence and intimidation on behalf of the regime. The "Blackshirts" acted as enforcers of the fascist ideology, ensuring conformity and compliance through force and terror.
The section also explores the use of violence as a means of propaganda, with Mussolini and his regime seeking to project an image of strength and power. Acts of violence were often portrayed as necessary measures to protect and strengthen the nation, further reinforcing the fascist narrative of national pride and unity.
In conclusion, this section provides a gripping exploration of the role of violence in fascist regimes, particularly in Mussolini's Italy. It underscores the brutality and fear that became characteristic of such authoritarian rule, as physical aggression and intimidation were utilized to crush opposition and enforce loyalty. It serves as a powerful reminder of the dangers of embracing ideologies that glorify violence and authoritarianism and emphasizes the importance of defending democratic values, human rights, and the rule of law to prevent the rise of oppressive regimes. The section advocates for vigilant opposition to violence and the pursuit of justice for the victims of such regimes, both in the past and in the present, as part of the ongoing struggle for human rights and dignity.
Hitler's Regime Escalated Violence, Repression of Enemies and Targeted Groups
This section delves into the comparison between the repressive tactics of Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini. It starts by highlighting the differences in the speed and intensity of their efforts in the area of repression, with Hitler standing out for the swift and ruthless implementation of his brutal agenda.
The section explores how Hitler's Nazi regime quickly escalated violence and repression against perceived enemies, particularly targeted groups such as Jews, political opponents, and minority communities. The regime's implementation of anti-Semitic policies and the establishment of concentration camps were early signs of the extreme violence and oppression that characterized Hitler's rule.
Moreover, the section delves into the use of propaganda as a tool to incite and justify violence against targeted groups. Hitler's regime used hateful and dehumanizing rhetoric to vilify Jews and others deemed undesirable, creating a climate of hatred and intolerance that paved the way for widespread violence and persecution.
The section also emphasizes the systematic nature of repression under Hitler's rule, with state institutions and agencies actively involved in implementing violent policies. The Nazi regime utilized the Gestapo and SS, among other organizations, to carry out surveillance, arrest, and torture of those deemed threats to the regime's ideology.
In conclusion, this section provides a comparative analysis of the repressive tactics employed by Hitler and Mussolini. It highlights the distinctiveness of Hitler's regime, marked by its rapid escalation of violence and its use of propaganda to incite hatred and intolerance. It serves as a stark reminder of the dangers of embracing ideologies that promote violence and oppression and underscores the need for continued vigilance in defending democratic values, human rights, and the rule of law. The section advocates for remembrance of the atrocities committed under such regimes and the commitment to preventing the rise of strongmen who perpetrate violence and human rights abuses in the future.
Franco's Authoritarian Rule, Spain, Ruthless Suppression of Opponents, Dissenters
This section delves into the role of Francisco Franco, the Spanish dictator, in perpetrating fascist violence during his regime. It begins by highlighting Franco's contribution to the history of fascist violence, which emerged in parallel with the regimes of Mussolini and Hitler.
The section explores how Franco's authoritarian rule in Spain was marked by the ruthless suppression of political opponents and dissenters. After winning the Spanish Civil War in 1939, Franco consolidated his power and established a brutal dictatorship that lasted until his death in 1975.
Moreover, the section delves into Franco's use of military tribunals and summary executions as tools of repression. The regime engaged in mass arrests and trials of perceived enemies, often without due process, leading to numerous executions and disappearances.
The section also discusses how Franco's regime targeted specific groups for persecution, including communists, anarchists, and regional nationalists. The regime sought to suppress any form of opposition or dissent that threatened its authority and sought to impose a homogenous and centralized vision of Spain.
In conclusion, this section provides a historical account of Francisco Franco's contribution to fascist violence during his authoritarian rule in Spain. It underscores the repressive tactics employed by Franco's regime, including military tribunals and summary executions, to silence dissent and maintain control. It serves as a reminder of the devastating impact of fascist violence on individuals and communities and the importance of upholding democratic values, human rights, and the rule of law to prevent the rise of oppressive regimes. The section advocates for remembrance of the atrocities committed under such regimes and the commitment to preventing the recurrence of fascist violence in the future.
Pinochet's Torture and Brutal Tactics to Suppress Dissent, Eliminate Opposition
This section delves into the harrowing account of Nieves Ayress Moreno, who experienced imprisonment and torture under the Chilean dictatorship led by Augusto Pinochet. It begins by detailing the locations that serve as markers of Nieves Ayress Moreno's imprisonment, including the National Stadium, 38 Calle Londres, Tejas Verdes, and Tres Álamos. These places represent the sites of her captivity and suffering at the hands of the repressive regime.
The section explores the widespread use of torture and brutal tactics by Pinochet's forces to suppress dissent and eliminate opposition during the Chilean military dictatorship. Nieves Ayress Moreno's experience reflects the terrifying reality faced by many political prisoners and dissidents under the regime, who endured unimaginable torture and abuse.
Moreover, the section delves into the psychological and physical trauma endured by victims like Nieves Ayress Moreno, who faced unspeakable horrors while incarcerated. The regime's use of torture served as a means of instilling fear and silencing opposition, leaving lasting scars on the survivors and their families.
The section also highlights the importance of documenting and remembering the atrocities committed under authoritarian regimes like Pinochet's. The testimonies of survivors like Nieves Ayress Moreno serve as crucial reminders of the human cost of fascist violence and the necessity of seeking justice and accountability for the victims.
In conclusion, this section provides a chilling account of the violence and brutality experienced by Nieves Ayress Moreno and others imprisoned under the Chilean dictatorship. It emphasizes the profound impact of state-sponsored violence on individuals and communities and the urgency of confronting the legacies of such repressive regimes. It serves as a powerful reminder of the importance of defending human rights, promoting truth and reconciliation, and working to prevent the recurrence of such atrocities in the future. The section advocates for the pursuit of justice for the victims of fascist violence and the commitment to building societies that uphold democratic values, respect human rights, and reject violence and oppression.
Gaddafi's Adoption of Terrorist Methods to Eliminate Exiled Libyan Dissenters
This section explores the age of military coups and the adoption of extremist tactics by leaders like Muammar Gaddafi and Augusto Pinochet to suppress dissent. It begins by highlighting the prevalence of extremism during this period, as military coups became a common means for ambitious leaders to come to power and solidify their rule.
The section delves into Muammar Gaddafi's adoption of terrorist methods in the early 1980s to eliminate exiled Libyan dissenters. Gaddafi's regime was marked by violence and repression, with the use of state-sponsored terrorism as a means of exerting control and eliminating opposition both within Libya and beyond its borders.
Furthermore, the section draws parallels between Gaddafi and Pinochet in their use of violent tactics to maintain power and silence dissent. Both leaders resorted to extreme measures, including state-sponsored terrorism and repression, to crush opposition and consolidate their authority.
The section also highlights the international dimension of Gaddafi's violent methods, as he targeted Libyan dissidents living in exile, leading to infamous incidents such as the Lockerbie bombing in 1988. Gaddafi's regime was known for its involvement in terrorist activities abroad, which further fueled international condemnation and isolation.
In conclusion, this section provides an insightful analysis of the use of extremist tactics by leaders like Gaddafi and Pinochet during the age of military coups. It underscores the dangerous consequences of embracing violent means to retain power, as evidenced by the suffering and loss of innocent lives. It serves as a reminder of the need to reject violence and extremism in governance and to strive for democratic principles that respect human rights, promote peace, and ensure accountability for crimes committed under authoritarian rule. The section advocates for vigilance in safeguarding democratic institutions and preventing the rise of strongmen who perpetrate violence and human rights abuses in the name of maintaining power.
Political Repression in Turkey, Erdoğan's State-sponsored Violence, Secret Police
This section highlights the harrowing account of Tolga (using an assumed name) who experienced abduction, torture, and threats of rape at the hands of the Turkish secret police in 2017. It begins by quoting Tolga's traumatic experience, where he witnessed his loved ones before his eyes, fearing for his life as he endured unimaginable torture.
The section explores the context of political repression in Turkey and the use of state-sponsored violence under the rule of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Tolga's story reflects the reality faced by numerous individuals and dissidents in Turkey, who have been targeted by the government for expressing opposition or engaging in activities deemed threatening to the regime.
Moreover, the section delves into the systematic nature of the Turkish secret police's actions, indicating the widespread use of torture and intimidation as tools to silence dissent and instill fear among the population.
The section also emphasizes the importance of concealing Tolga's identity, highlighting the risks and consequences faced by individuals who speak out against authoritarian regimes and share their stories of abuse and torture.
In conclusion, this section provides a heart-wrenching account of Tolga's experience of violence and torture at the hands of the Turkish secret police. It underscores the grave impact of state-sponsored violence on individuals and communities and the urgency of defending human rights, promoting justice, and seeking accountability for crimes committed under repressive regimes. It serves as a powerful reminder of the need to protect and support those who bravely speak out against violence and oppression and the importance of standing against all forms of state-sanctioned abuse and torture. The section advocates for the international community's vigilance in holding strongmen accountable for their actions and working toward the establishment of societies that uphold democratic values, respect human rights, and reject violence and oppression.
Putin Used Background in KGB to Assert Control and Maintain Power
This section delves into the tactics and methods used by leaders like Vladimir Putin to exert influence and control. It starts with a quote from Putin in 2000, where he references his past as a KGB case officer and former FSB head, revealing the three ways he believed one could influence a person: blackmail, vodka, or the threat of murder.
The section explores Putin's use of his background in the KGB to assert control and maintain power during his leadership in Russia. It suggests that he relied on tactics reminiscent of his time in the secret service to wield influence over individuals and suppress dissent within the country.
Furthermore, the section highlights the presence of a pervasive culture of fear and intimidation under Putin's rule, where blackmail, threats, and violence have been employed as tools to silence opposition and consolidate power.
The section also underscores the strategic nature of Putin's approach, as he appears to draw upon his KGB experience to manipulate individuals and maintain a sense of control over both his political opponents and the general population.
In conclusion, this section provides insights into the methods employed by leaders like Putin to exert influence and control. It suggests that his past as a KGB case officer has significantly shaped his approach to governance, leading to the establishment of a climate of fear and intimidation within Russia. It serves as a cautionary reminder of the consequences of leaders with backgrounds in intelligence services and their potential to use their acquired skills to suppress dissent and perpetrate violence. The section advocates for the promotion of democratic principles, human rights, and the rule of law to counteract the rise of strongmen who rely on violence and fear to maintain power.
Trump's Inflammatory and Aggressive Language During Campaign and Presidency
This section explores the use of violent rhetoric and behavior by leaders, including Donald Trump. It begins with a quote from Trump during a February 2016 campaign rally in Las Vegas, where he expressed a desire to punch a heckler in the face.
The section delves into Trump's history of employing inflammatory and aggressive language during his presidential campaign and presidency. It suggests that his use of violent rhetoric contributed to a polarized and contentious political climate, where tensions were heightened, and aggression was normalized.
Furthermore, the section highlights the potential consequences of leaders like Trump using violent language, as it can inspire followers to act aggressively or violently towards political opponents or those they disagree with.
The section also discusses the impact of such violent rhetoric on democracy and civil discourse, emphasizing the importance of political leaders promoting respectful and constructive dialogue to uphold democratic values.
In conclusion, this section sheds light on the use of violent rhetoric by leaders like Trump and its effects on the political landscape. It highlights the need for political leaders to be mindful of the words they use, as violent language can contribute to a hostile and divisive atmosphere. It serves as a reminder of the responsibility of leaders to promote unity, respect, and peaceful discourse in the pursuit of democratic governance. The section advocates for leaders to prioritize constructive dialogue and peaceful resolutions, rejecting violence and aggression in their communication and actions.
Part III: LOSING POWER
Part III delves into the ways authoritarian leaders face resistance and challenges to their rule. Chapter nine "Resistance" explores the various forms of opposition that arise against strongmen regimes, from organized resistance movements to individual acts of defiance. It examines the tactics employed by citizens, activists, and political opponents to challenge the authority of these leaders and to advocate for democratic principles and human rights. Chapter ten "Endings" discusses ways strongmen come to an end and explores the aftermath of their rule and the legacies they leave behind. This part sheds light on the complexities and dynamics of resistance in the face of oppressive regimes and provides insights into the resilience and determination of those who strive to protect democratic values and push back against authoritarian rule.
Chapter Nine - Resistance
Chapter nine delves into the various forms of resistance that arise against authoritarian regimes. The author explores how individuals and groups challenge and oppose the rule of strongmen, highlighting the power of resistance movements.
Georg Elser's Daring Attempt to Assassinate Adolf Hitler in 1938
This section explores the brave efforts of individuals who sought to resist and challenge the power of strongmen, focusing on Georg Elser's daring attempt to assassinate Adolf Hitler in 1938. It starts by introducing Georg Elser, a thirty-five-year-old German from the Swabia region, who decided to take matters into his own hands and eliminate Hitler.
The section delves into the meticulous planning and execution of Elser's assassination attempt. He spent months carefully crafting and planting a bomb in Munich's Bürgerbräukeller, where Hitler was scheduled to give a speech on November 8, 1939.
Moreover, the section sheds light on Elser's motivations and the deeply personal reasons that drove him to take such a risky and audacious action. It is revealed that Elser's primary goal was not to overthrow the entire Nazi regime but to prevent the impending war and loss of lives that he believed Hitler's actions would lead to.
The section also explores the aftermath of Elser's assassination attempt, where, despite the bomb detonating as planned, Hitler miraculously left the venue early, avoiding the deadly blast and surviving the attempt on his life.
In conclusion, this section highlights the courageous acts of resistance taken by individuals like Georg Elser against the oppressive regimes of strongmen. Elser's assassination attempt on Hitler serves as a reminder of the courage and determination of those who risked everything to challenge tyrannical leaders. It emphasizes the significant impact that individual acts of resistance can have in the broader struggle against authoritarian rule. It advocates for the celebration and remembrance of such courageous acts to inspire future generations to stand up against oppression and tyranny.
Psychological Impact of Confinement, Human Spirit Persists During Oppression
This section delves into the challenging experiences of those who resisted strongmen's oppressive regimes, focusing on the struggles of individuals confined on remote islands under strict surveillance. It starts by describing confinement as a cell without walls, where the vast sky and sea surround the prisoners, and the ever-watchful patrols of militiamen act as their walls. This vivid imagery reflects the isolation and confinement endured by those who opposed authoritarian rule.
The section explores the psychological impact of confinement and the indomitable human spirit that persists despite the oppressive conditions. It highlights the prisoners' unwavering determination to overcome the barriers that keep them confined, seeing freedom beyond the patrol's reach as an obsession.
Moreover, the section sheds light on the resilience of those imprisoned, as they find ways to communicate and resist even in their isolated environment. Their determination to break free from the confines of the island and challenge the authoritarian rule serves as a testament to the human capacity for resistance and resilience.
The section also discusses the authorities' efforts to quell resistance and maintain control over the confined individuals, showcasing the lengths to which strongmen would go to suppress dissent and maintain their power.
In conclusion, this section offers a glimpse into the struggles faced by those who resisted authoritarian rule and were confined to remote islands. The section emphasizes the mental and emotional toll of confinement, but it also showcases the unyielding spirit of those who refused to be silenced. It serves as a reminder of the importance of defending human rights, promoting freedom of expression, and resisting oppressive regimes. The section advocates for the recognition and celebration of acts of resistance against strongmen to inspire hope and solidarity among those seeking freedom and justice.
1942 Event After Anti-Nazi Film, Pilot Finds 100 People Received Mystery Letter
This section explores the ways in which individuals used creative means to resist the oppressive rule of strongmen. It starts by highlighting a specific event in June 1942, two months after the premiere of the anti-Nazi film "A Pilot Returns," where one hundred people in Munich received a mysterious letter in the mail.
The section delves into the contents of the letter, which contained a stinging critique of the film and its depiction of war and heroism. It praised the film's courage in challenging the glorification of violence and questioned the realities of war portrayed in propaganda films.
Moreover, the section discusses how this anonymous act of resistance through letter-writing reflects the power of communication and expression in resisting authoritarian regimes. The act of sending these letters allowed dissenters to challenge the prevailing narratives promoted by the strongman's propaganda machine.
The section also explores the risks associated with such acts of resistance, as the author of the letters remained anonymous to protect themselves from retaliation by the regime. It underscores the courage and determination of individuals who risked their safety to speak out against oppression and falsehoods.
In conclusion, this section highlights the creative and courageous ways in which individuals resisted strongmen through art and expression. The mysterious letters sent after the premiere of "A Pilot Returns" serve as an example of how communication and critique can be powerful tools in challenging oppressive regimes. The section underscores the importance of free expression and the power of creative resistance in the face of authoritarian rule. It advocates for the recognition and celebration of acts of resistance in all forms, encouraging individuals to stand up against oppressive leaders and promote freedom and justice.
Age of Military Coups Gave Leftists Opportunities to Organize for Armed Struggle
This section examines how individuals and groups used armed struggle as a means to resist far-right regimes during the age of military coups. It starts by highlighting the increase in options available to leftists who sought to train and prepare for armed resistance against authoritarian rule, particularly in comparison to the fascist era.
The section explores how the age of military coups provided leftists with more opportunities to organize and mobilize for armed struggle. It delves into the various regions and countries where leftist groups emerged, seeking to challenge far-right regimes and their oppressive policies.
Moreover, the section discusses the ideological motivations behind these resistance movements, emphasizing their commitment to fighting against the repression, violence, and human rights abuses perpetrated by the military dictators.
The section also examines the challenges faced by these resistance movements, including the risks of infiltration, repression, and violent responses from the authoritarian regimes they opposed. It highlights the immense courage and determination of those involved in armed struggle, who were willing to make tremendous sacrifices for the cause of freedom and justice.
In conclusion, this section emphasizes the emergence of armed resistance movements during the age of military coups. It sheds light on the ideological motivations, challenges, and risks faced by leftist groups as they sought to confront far-right regimes. The section underscores the importance of understanding the historical context in which these resistance movements arose and the complex dynamics of political struggles during times of authoritarian rule. It advocates for the recognition and appreciation of the courage and sacrifice of those who fought for democracy, human rights, and justice during this tumultuous period.
1993 Plan to Overthrow of Gaddafi's Regime was Planned From Abroad
This section explores the efforts of Libyans who met at the Hotel Ambassador in Zurich in February 1993 to plan the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi's regime. It begins by highlighting the shared sentiment among these individuals, as they could relate to the desire for liberation from the oppressive rule of Gaddafi's authoritarian regime.
The section delves into the challenges faced by these Libyan resistance members in organizing and planning their efforts from abroad. It discusses the risks and dangers they encountered, knowing that Gaddafi's regime was notorious for its brutal repression of dissent.
Moreover, the section discusses the motivations behind the resistance movement and the vision they had for a Libya free from Gaddafi's tyranny. It highlights their determination to achieve justice, democracy, and human rights for the Libyan people.
The section also examines the role of exile in shaping the resistance movement, as many of the individuals involved had fled Libya to escape persecution and sought international support for their cause.
In conclusion, this section sheds light on the bravery and determination of the Libyans who gathered at the Hotel Ambassador in Zurich to plan the overthrow of Gaddafi's regime. It highlights their shared desire for freedom and justice and the challenges they faced in organizing their resistance efforts from abroad. The section emphasizes the importance of understanding the historical context and motivations behind resistance movements during times of authoritarian rule. It advocates for the recognition and appreciation of the courage and sacrifices made by those who fought for democracy and human rights in the face of oppressive regimes.
New Media Platforms, Digital Technologies Help Organize Resistance Movements
This section examines how the practice of resistance and the methods employed by both resistance movements and authoritarian rulers evolved with the advent of new media and technologies. It starts by highlighting the significant changes that occurred in the landscape of resistance by the time Muammar Gaddafi's rule ended in 2011.
The section explores how new media platforms and digital technologies played a crucial role in facilitating communication and organizing resistance movements. Social media, in particular, emerged as a powerful tool for activists to mobilize and disseminate information, reaching a broader audience both domestically and internationally.
Moreover, the section discusses the challenges faced by authoritarian rulers in adapting to these technological advancements. Traditional methods of censorship and control over media outlets were no longer sufficient to suppress dissent, as online platforms provided alternative spaces for individuals to voice their grievances and organize against oppressive regimes.
The section also examines how authoritarian rulers sought to counter the impact of new media by adopting their own strategies in the digital realm. Governments deployed online surveillance, disinformation campaigns, and cyber-attacks to undermine resistance movements and control the narrative.
In conclusion, this section underscores the transformative impact of new media and technologies on the practice of resistance and the dynamics of authoritarian rule. It emphasizes the role of social media in empowering activists and enabling them to challenge oppressive regimes more effectively. The section also highlights the challenges faced by authoritarian rulers in maintaining control over information and dissent in the digital age. Overall, the chapter advocates for a nuanced understanding of the interplay between technology, resistance, and authoritarianism in the modern era.
2010, PM Putin Received Calendar With Lingerie-clad Students Praising Virility
This section explores instances of resistance and opposition to strongman leaders, including Vladimir Putin. It starts by highlighting a provocative incident in 2010 where Prime Minister Putin received a special birthday present—a calendar featuring lingerie-clad University of Moscow journalism students praising his virility.
The section delves into the context and implications of this incident, emphasizing the use of unconventional forms of resistance to challenge Putin's leadership and cult of personality. The calendar's release can be seen as an act of defiance, utilizing humor and satire to undermine the image of Putin as a strongman leader.
Moreover, the section examines the reactions and responses from Putin's government to such acts of resistance. It discusses how the Russian authorities often resort to censorship, crackdowns on dissent, and media control to suppress opposition and maintain Putin's carefully crafted public image.
The section also explores the broader landscape of resistance movements and opposition groups in Russia during Putin's tenure. It touches on various forms of activism and dissent, ranging from traditional protests to online campaigns and social media movements.
In conclusion, this section sheds light on the diverse forms of resistance and opposition that emerge against strongman leaders like Vladimir Putin. It emphasizes the significance of creative and unconventional acts of defiance in challenging authoritarian rule. The section underscores the importance of understanding the various dynamics of resistance movements and the strategies used by strongman rulers to control dissent. It advocates for the recognition and appreciation of the courage and ingenuity displayed by individuals and groups in their efforts to challenge oppressive regimes.
Satire as Powerful Tool to Challenge the Authoritarian Rule of Berlusconi in Italy
This section explores the power of satire and humor as forms of resistance against strongman leaders and oppressive regimes. It begins by highlighting an incident involving comedian Sabina Guzzanti, who hosted a new show called "Raiot: Weapons of Mass Destruction" on the Rai 3 channel in November 2003. Guzzanti signs off the first episode with the playful remark, "See you next Sunday, maybe," implying that her show might face censorship or cancellation due to its satirical content.
The section delves into the significance of Guzzanti's show and how satire served as a powerful tool to challenge the authoritarian rule of Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi in Italy. Through her comedic sketches and commentary, Guzzanti fearlessly critiqued Berlusconi's government and its erosion of media freedom, highlighting the importance of preserving free speech and independent journalism.
Moreover, the section explores the broader landscape of resistance through satire and humor against strongman leaders. It discusses how comedians and satirists have historically played a vital role in challenging oppressive regimes by exposing their flaws, hypocrisy, and abuses of power.
The section also delves into the responses of authoritarian rulers to such forms of resistance. It discusses how regimes like Berlusconi's often respond to satirical criticism with attempts at censorship and legal action to silence dissenting voices.
In conclusion, this section highlights the significance of satire and humor as powerful tools of resistance against strongman leaders. It emphasizes the courage and creativity of individuals like Sabina Guzzanti, who use their platforms to challenge oppressive regimes and defend democratic values. The section underscores the importance of preserving free speech and media freedom as essential elements of a vibrant and democratic society.
Women's March, Massive Display of Resistance Against the Trump Administration
This section explores the importance of collective action and grassroots movements in resisting the rise of strongman leaders. It begins by quoting writer and activist Gloria Steinem's powerful statement during the Women's March on January 21, 2017, held the day after Donald Trump's inauguration. Steinem emphasized the significance of the U.S. Constitution, which starts with "We, the People," reminding the public that the power lies with the collective rather than the president alone.
The section delves into the significance of the Women's March as a massive display of resistance against Trump's administration and its policies perceived as divisive and discriminatory. It discusses how millions of people across the United States and around the world participated in the march, advocating for women's rights, equality, and social justice.
Moreover, the section explores the broader landscape of resistance movements in the face of rising strongman leaders globally. It highlights the power of grassroots activism and collective mobilization in challenging autocratic rule and advocating for democratic principles.
The section also discusses how strongman leaders often respond to resistance movements with attempts to suppress dissent and undermine the legitimacy of protesters. It emphasizes the importance of maintaining a united front and continuing to challenge the erosion of democratic norms and principles.
In conclusion, this section emphasizes the importance of collective action and grassroots resistance in countering strongman leaders and defending democratic values. It underscores the significance of movements like the Women's March as powerful demonstrations of popular discontent and the demand for a more inclusive and just society. It highlights the role of ordinary citizens in shaping political change and safeguarding democratic institutions in the face of authoritarian challenges.
Turkey, Imamoğlu Wins Mayoral Election, Positive Politics vs Fear-based Rhetoric.
This section the section starts by examining the success of a positive political message during the 2019 mayoral race in Istanbul. The opposition candidate, Ekram Imamoğlu, managed to win the mayoral election, showcasing the power of positive emotions in politics. Imamoğlu's campaign focused on unity, inclusivity, and hope, resonating with voters and challenging the divisive and authoritarian rule of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's party.
The section delves into how Imamoğlu's message contrasted with the fear-based rhetoric commonly employed by strongman leaders to maintain control. By emphasizing positivity and unity, Imamoğlu inspired a sense of hope and belief in a better future among the citizens of Istanbul, effectively countering the fear tactics often used by authoritarian regimes.
Moreover, the section explores how Imamoğlu's success in Istanbul's mayoral race was a testament to the power of grassroots organizing and collective mobilization. His campaign brought together a diverse coalition of supporters, including secularists, liberals, and conservatives, united by their desire for positive change and a return to democratic values.
The section also discusses how Imamoğlu's victory in Istanbul signaled a broader trend of resistance against strongman leaders around the world. It highlights how leaders like Erdoğan have responded to opposition victories by undermining democratic institutions and holding rerun elections to regain control.
In conclusion, this section emphasizes the importance of positive political messages and grassroots organizing in countering strongman leaders. It showcases the success of Ekram Imamoğlu's campaign in Istanbul, which relied on hope, unity, and inclusivity to challenge authoritarian rule. It underscores the significance of collective action and resistance in defending democratic values and working towards a more equitable and just society.
Chapter Ten - Endings
GG, ranging from repudiation to attempts at rewriting history. It emphasizes the complex nature of strongmen's downfalls and the impact they have on the societies they governed.
Events Leading to Gaddafi's Final Moments, Role of External Forces in Ousting
Ihis section recounts the dramatic downfall of Muammar Gaddafi, the Libyan strongman. It starts with the pivotal moment on October 20, 2011, when Gaddafi hid inside a drainpipe, desperate to escape his enemies. His authoritarian regime was crumbling as rebel forces and NATO airstrikes intensified their efforts to oust him from power.
The section delves into the events leading up to Gaddafi's final moments, detailing how his regime had brutally suppressed opposition for decades. The Libyan people had suffered under Gaddafi's rule, with human rights abuses, torture, and disappearances being commonplace. His desperate attempt to hide in a drainpipe symbolized the desperation of a leader who had lost control over his nation.
The section also highlights the role of external forces, particularly NATO, in the ousting of Gaddafi. The international community had grown increasingly critical of his regime's violence and human rights violations. NATO's intervention provided crucial support to the rebel forces, further weakening Gaddafi's grip on power.
As Gaddafi was eventually discovered and captured, the section explores the aftermath of his downfall. He was subjected to violence and killed by rebel forces, marking the end of his four-decade-long rule. However, his violent death also raised concerns about the rule of law and justice in post-revolutionary Libya.
Overall, this section focuses on the endings of various strongmen regimes, including Gaddafi's, and reflects on the complex nature of their downfalls. It highlights the role of internal and external forces, the impact of grassroots resistance, and the challenges faced in establishing a stable and democratic governance structure after the fall of strongman leaders.
Authoritarian Playbook, No Chapter on Failure, Strongmen Don't Plan for Downfall
This section explores the downfall of authoritarian leaders and their ultimate failure. It begins with the statement, "The authoritarian playbook has no chapter on failure," emphasizing that these strongmen do not plan for their eventual downfall.
The section examines the common traits and tactics employed by authoritarian leaders throughout history, such as Mussolini, Hitler, and Gaddafi. These strongmen often rely on fear, violence, propaganda, and the suppression of dissent to maintain power. Their goal is to project an image of invincibility and dominance to their supporters and adversaries alike.
However, the section also reveals the vulnerability of these strongmen despite their iron-fisted rule. External factors, such as international pressure, economic sanctions, and military interventions, can contribute to their eventual downfall. Additionally, internal opposition and grassroots resistance play a crucial role in weakening their regimes.
The section highlights the importance of understanding the cyclical nature of authoritarian rule and how the same patterns can repeat throughout history. By examining past cases, we can gain insights into the dynamics that lead to the eventual failure of strongman regimes.
Furthermore, the section underscores the significance of remembering the atrocities committed by these strongmen to prevent their legacy from being romanticized or forgotten. The chapter urges readers to confront the darker chapters of history and learn from them, as this knowledge can help prevent similar patterns of authoritarianism from emerging in the future.
In conclusion, this section serves as a cautionary reminder that no authoritarian regime is invincible, and understanding the historical context and factors that contribute to their failure is vital in safeguarding democracy and human rights in the face of tyranny. The section urges readers to remain vigilant against the rise of new strongmen and to uphold the values of democracy, freedom, and justice.
Interconnected Fates of Mussolini and Hitler, Their Deaths Just One Day Apart
This section delves into the interconnected fates of two infamous authoritarian leaders, Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. It begins by highlighting the proximity of their deaths, which occurred just one day apart in April 1945, signifying the symbolic end of their brutal reigns.
The section explores the circumstances leading to their downfalls. Both Mussolini and Hitler clung to power despite mounting losses in their respective wars, World War II in particular. As Allied forces closed in on their territories, they faced increasing opposition from their own people and the international community. The downfall of their regimes was a culmination of military defeats, internal dissent, and isolation on the world stage.
In the face of imminent defeat, Mussolini tried to flee Italy, but he was captured and executed by Italian partisans, his body subjected to public humiliation in Milan. Meanwhile, Hitler chose to commit suicide in his underground bunker in Berlin, avoiding capture and facing justice for his atrocities. Their deaths marked the end of their oppressive regimes and the fall of fascism in Italy and Nazism in Germany.
Despite their shared fate of violent deaths, the posthumous treatment of Mussolini and Hitler differed significantly. While Hitler's body was incinerated by his loyal followers to prevent it from becoming a shrine, Mussolini's body was hung upside down in a Milan square, becoming a grotesque spectacle of public vengeance.
The section delves into the complex legacies of Mussolini and Hitler, examining how their actions and ideologies continue to reverberate in modern times. The memory of their reigns serves as a stark reminder of the atrocities committed under authoritarian rule and the devastating consequences of unchecked power.
In conclusion, this section reflects on the intertwined fates of Mussolini and Hitler, two ruthless dictators whose deaths marked the end of their tyrannical rule. Their ultimate downfall stands as a testament to the resilience of democracy and the collective effort to hold authoritarian leaders accountable for their actions. It also serves as a poignant reminder of the importance of learning from history to prevent the rise of future strongmen and the preservation of democratic values.
Events Leading to Hitler's Suicide in Underground Bunker, Inevitability of Defeat
This section discusses the anticipation of Adolf Hitler's eventual demise. It begins by highlighting the widespread belief that many people had predicted Hitler's possible suicide at some point during his reign as the leader of Nazi Germany. As the Allied forces closed in on Berlin and the Third Reich collapsed, it became increasingly apparent that Hitler's options were limited, and his desperation grew.
The section explores the events leading up to Hitler's suicide in his underground bunker in Berlin in April 1945. As the war reached its climax, Hitler's mental and physical state deteriorated rapidly. Surrounded by loyalists and increasingly isolated, he faced the inevitability of defeat. Fearing capture and potential humiliation, Hitler chose to take his own life, thus avoiding the fate that had befallen his ally Benito Mussolini, who was executed and displayed publicly by Italian partisans.
Despite the anticipation of his eventual demise, Hitler's suicide still came as a shock to many. The news of his death spread quickly, leaving his followers and the world in a state of disbelief. His suicide note and the knowledge that his long-time companion Eva Braun had also taken her life added to the tragic and enigmatic nature of his final moments.
The section further examines the aftermath of Hitler's suicide and its impact on the end of World War II. With his death, Hitler left a power vacuum in the Nazi regime, leading to the swift collapse of the Third Reich. German forces surrendered shortly after his death, effectively ending the war in Europe. The suicide of the most infamous dictator of the 20th century marked the symbolic end of the Nazi regime and the fall of the dark chapter of history that was World War II.
In conclusion, this section explores the anticipation and eventual realization of Adolf Hitler's suicide. As the war reached its conclusion and the Third Reich crumbled, Hitler's decision to take his own life became an ultimate act of desperation and an attempt to control his own fate. His death left a profound impact on the course of history, bringing an end to the horrific era of Nazi rule and serving as a stark reminder of the consequences of unchecked power and tyranny.
Belief Among Strongmen, Divinely Chosen, Touched by Divine Providence
This section delves into the belief among strongmen that they have been divinely chosen, using the example of Francisco Franco's end to illustrate this notion. It highlights how all strongmen perceive themselves as being touched by divine providence, as if they were destined for their leadership roles. Franco's case stands out as it seemingly suggests that he had a unique dispensation, considering the unusual circumstances surrounding his death.
The section provides insights into Franco's rise to power and his long-lasting dictatorship in Spain. Throughout his rule, Franco promoted the idea of his providential mission, presenting himself as the savior of Spain, chosen by destiny to protect the nation from communism and uphold traditional values. This messianic self-image allowed him to consolidate power and justify his authoritarian regime.
As Franco's rule neared its end, he continued to maintain a facade of strength and divine protection, despite his declining health. The section discusses how in his later years, Franco suffered from various health issues, including Parkinson's disease, which severely impacted his ability to lead effectively. Despite his deteriorating health, he refused to relinquish power, and his regime struggled to maintain its grip on the country.
When Franco finally passed away in November 1975, it marked the end of nearly four decades of authoritarian rule in Spain. His death left a significant power vacuum, leading to uncertainty and concern over the future of the nation. Although Franco had portrayed himself as a chosen and immortal leader, his passing demonstrated the mortality of even the most powerful strongmen.
In conclusion, this section explores the belief shared among strongmen that they are divinely chosen for their leadership roles. Franco's case exemplifies this mindset, as he presented himself as a savior of Spain, touched by divine providence. However, his eventual death revealed the vulnerability and mortality of even the most powerful dictators. The passing of Franco marked the end of a significant era in Spanish history and initiated a period of transition for the nation.
Pinochet Emulated Franco's Style, Only Partially Succeeded in Following Path
This section explores the parallels between Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet and Spanish strongman Francisco Franco. It starts by noting how Pinochet admired Franco and saw him as a role model for his own leadership. Like Franco, Pinochet sought to rule with an iron fist, consolidating power through a military coup and imposing a repressive regime in Chile.
The section highlights that while Pinochet emulated Franco's style of leadership, he only partially succeeded in following the Spaniard's path. Both strongmen died in their native lands, avoiding exile or execution. Franco had ruled Spain for nearly four decades, while Pinochet's reign lasted for about 17 years. However, like Franco, Pinochet's time in power was marked by brutality, human rights abuses, and suppression of political dissent.
As Pinochet's rule came to an end, he faced increasing pressure from both domestic and international sources to relinquish power and restore democracy. His regime had garnered significant criticism for its human rights violations and the violence used against political opponents. In a moment of crisis, Pinochet organized a referendum in 1988 to extend his rule, but the majority of Chileans voted against him, leading to the eventual transition to democracy.
Despite stepping down from power in 1990, Pinochet retained significant influence in Chile's political landscape. The section discusses how he became a senator-for-life, granting him immunity from prosecution. However, this immunity could not shield him entirely, and he faced legal battles related to his human rights abuses in the later years of his life.
In conclusion, this section emphasizes the influence of Franco on Pinochet's leadership style and his attempts to emulate the Spanish strongman's approach to governance. Pinochet's reign was marked by violence and repression, similar to Franco's rule in Spain. However, unlike Franco, Pinochet's hold on power was not as enduring, and his eventual departure marked a pivotal moment in Chile's transition to democracy.
Gaddafi Attempts to Navigate New Era of Authoritarian Rule, Art of Survival
This section delves into Muammar Gaddafi's attempts to navigate the transition to the new era of authoritarian rule. It starts by highlighting Gaddafi's belief that he had successfully adapted to the changing political landscape and mastered the art of survival. Unlike Franco and other strongmen, Gaddafi was willing to form alliances with former adversaries if it served his interests in staying in power.
Gaddafi's regime was characterized by his ruthless suppression of political dissent, human rights abuses, and the use of violence against his opponents. Despite this, he managed to maintain a tight grip on Libya for over four decades, holding both formal and informal positions of power within the government and military.
In an effort to bolster his regime's image and position Libya on the global stage, Gaddafi attempted to repair relations with Western countries. He renounced Libya's weapons of mass destruction program, which led to an easing of sanctions and a temporary improvement in relations with the international community.
However, as the Arab Spring swept through the Middle East and North Africa in 2011, Gaddafi's reign faced a significant challenge. Protests erupted across Libya, demanding an end to his rule. In response, Gaddafi resorted to violent suppression, employing military force against his own people in a desperate attempt to cling to power.
The section highlights how Gaddafi's fate eventually mirrored that of other strongmen. Despite his claims of invincibility and readiness to die on Libyan soil, he could not escape the growing pressure and international condemnation. As rebel forces gained momentum and the international community intervened with airstrikes, Gaddafi's hold on power crumbled.
In October 2011, Gaddafi was captured and killed by opposition forces, marking the end of his 42-year-long rule. His death represented a turning point in Libya's history, as the country entered a period of instability and uncertainty. Gaddafi's fate serves as a cautionary tale for other strongmen who believe they can master the transition to the new era of authoritarian rule, as their ultimate end may be as dramatic and violent as their rise to power.
Berlusconi's Reaction to Downfall of Gaddafi (So passes the glory of the world)
This section explores the fate of another strongman, Silvio Berlusconi, and his reaction to the downfall of Muammar Gaddafi. It starts with Berlusconi's response to the news of Gaddafi's death, quoting his remark, "SIC TRANSIT GLORIA MUNDI (So passes the glory of the world)." This phrase reflects the transient nature of power and fame, a reminder that even the mightiest leaders will eventually meet their end.
Silvio Berlusconi, the flamboyant billionaire and media tycoon, had a tumultuous political career in Italy, marked by allegations of corruption, scandals, and abuse of power. He was known for his charismatic personality and his ability to commandeer the media to shape public opinion and maintain his grip on power.
Berlusconi's leadership style was characterized by a mix of authoritarian tendencies and populist appeal. He sought to portray himself as a man of the people, using his media empire to craft a carefully curated image that resonated with his supporters.
However, like other strongmen, Berlusconi's reign faced significant challenges. Amidst various scandals and legal troubles, his approval ratings waned, and he faced growing opposition from civil society and political rivals. Berlusconi's position as a political titan seemed to be unraveling as public discontent intensified.
The section suggests that Berlusconi's comment on Gaddafi's death may be a reflection of his own awareness of the fragility of power and the transient nature of political glory. As his own political fortunes began to wane, he might have contemplated the fate of other strongmen, realizing that his time at the helm of Italian politics could also be nearing its end.
In conclusion, this section highlights how the downfall of Gaddafi and the changing political climate served as a stark reminder to Berlusconi of the fleeting nature of power and fame. It symbolizes the common fate of strongmen throughout history, as their glory and authority ultimately give way to the passage of time and the shifting tides of public sentiment.
Berlusconi Proposed Transformation of Forza Italia Modeled on GOP in U.S.
This section delves into Silvio Berlusconi's political maneuvering and his attempts to reshape his party, Forza Italia, in March 2015. During this period, Berlusconi proposed a significant transformation for Forza Italia, suggesting that it should be remodeled into the Italian equivalent of the Republican Party in the United States.
Forza Italia was Berlusconi's political vehicle and a center-right party that he had founded in the early 1990s. The proposed transformation signaled Berlusconi's efforts to adapt to the changing political landscape and consolidate his party's position in Italy's political system.
By comparing Forza Italia to the Republican Party, Berlusconi aimed to appeal to a broader base of voters and rebrand the party as a more inclusive and moderate force in Italian politics. This strategic move sought to counter the rise of populist and far-right parties, which were gaining popularity in Italy and challenging Forza Italia's traditional center-right positioning.
However, despite Berlusconi's attempts at political reinvention, the challenges he faced persisted. The section suggests that his ambition to transform Forza Italia into an Italian version of the Republican Party might not have achieved the desired results, given the complexities of Italian politics and the growing fragmentation of the political landscape.
In conclusion, this section sheds light on Berlusconi's efforts to reposition his party, Forza Italia, in response to the changing political climate in Italy. His proposal to emulate the Republican Party's image aimed to broaden the party's appeal and reassert his political influence. However, it also reflects the challenges faced by strongmen like Berlusconi when navigating the shifting currents of public opinion and attempting to adapt their political strategies to remain relevant in a rapidly changing political landscape.
Conclusion
In the conclusion Ruth Ben-Ghiat reflects on the patterns and characteristics of strongmen throughout history. The author emphasizes the importance of understanding how they ascend to power and maintain control, issuing a warning about the potential threats these leaders pose to democracy and human rights.
If Autocrats are Ousted People Openly Reject, Erase Memory, Dismantle Symbols
In the Conclusion Ruth Ben-Ghiat explores the aftermath of autocrats falling from power and the ways their people react to their downfall. When autocrats are ousted, the people often outwardly reject them and try to erase their memory. This process usually involves dismantling the symbols and monuments associated with the regime and renaming streets and public places to distance themselves from the past. Public trials and truth commissions may be held to expose the atrocities committed by the fallen leaders and their cronies. The purpose is to create a clean break from the authoritarian past and foster a sense of national healing.
However, the outward repudiation is not always entirely genuine. While people may publicly disavow the fallen autocrat, the remnants of the regime often persist, and there might be elements of nostalgia among some segments of the population. These feelings can be exploited by politicians who seek to reclaim power or push for a revisionist narrative of the past. In some cases, the fallen strongmen may even make a political comeback, attempting to regain power through democratic elections or other means.
Furthermore, the removal of autocrats does not necessarily bring about a complete transformation of the political landscape. The networks of power and patronage established during their rule might endure, perpetuating corruption and authoritarian tendencies. The failure to address the root causes of autocracy and deal with the legacies of the past can hinder the transition to a truly democratic and accountable society.
This section concludes that the fall of autocrats from power is often met with outward repudiation and attempts to erase their memory, but the underlying challenges of dismantling autocratic structures and fostering genuine democratic change remain significant. The legacy of strongmen and their impact on society can be long-lasting and complicated, requiring sustained efforts to address and overcome the consequences of their rule.
The Importance of Understanding How Authoritarians Gain and Maintain Power
this section emphasizes the importance of understanding how authoritarians gain and maintain power in order to effectively oppose them. To achieve this, she suggests a clear-eyed view of the strategies these strongmen use throughout history, drawing on lessons from the past to inform present and future actions.
One key aspect is recognizing the power of propaganda and manipulation of public perception. Strongmen like Mussolini, Hitler, and others utilized sophisticated propaganda campaigns to create a cult of personality, promote their ideologies, and establish a sense of national unity. Learning from these historical examples, modern societies can counter such efforts by fostering media literacy, promoting critical thinking, and holding leaders accountable for spreading false information.
Another critical factor is addressing the appeal of authoritarianism to certain segments of the population. Autocrats often tap into economic grievances, feelings of marginalization, and fears of social change to gain support. By addressing these underlying issues and offering viable alternatives, societies can reduce the appeal of authoritarian leaders and movements.
Additionally, Ben-Ghiat emphasizes the importance of maintaining strong democratic institutions and safeguarding the rule of law. Autocrats frequently seek to undermine democratic norms and institutions, weakening checks and balances to consolidate their power. To resist this, it is crucial to build and protect resilient democratic institutions that can withstand the erosion of democratic principles.
Furthermore, international cooperation is vital in countering authoritarian threats. Strongmen have often exploited geopolitical tensions and divisions to advance their agendas. Building alliances and partnerships among democratic nations can provide a united front against authoritarian interference and support the promotion of democratic values globally.
This section concludes that to effectively oppose authoritarians, it is essential to understand the strategies they employ and the factors that contribute to their rise. By learning from historical examples, addressing underlying issues, strengthening democratic institutions, and fostering international cooperation, societies can better resist and counter the allure of authoritarianism and uphold democratic principles.
Countering Authoritarianism by Prioritizing Accountability and Transparency
This section emphasizes the importance of countering authoritarianism by prioritizing accountability and transparency in government. Authoritarians often consolidate power by undermining democratic institutions, limiting checks and balances, and promoting a culture of secrecy. To counter this, it is crucial for democratic societies to hold leaders accountable for their actions and ensure transparency in government operations.
One way to achieve accountability is through robust and independent investigative journalism. Journalists play a critical role in exposing corruption, abuses of power, and human rights violations by authoritarian leaders. They act as watchdogs, helping to keep those in power in check and informing the public about important issues. Protecting and supporting a free and independent press is essential to maintaining transparency and holding authorities accountable.
Furthermore, strengthening legal mechanisms to ensure accountability is essential. Authoritarians often manipulate the legal system to shield themselves from scrutiny and accountability. By bolstering the rule of law, protecting judicial independence, and establishing mechanisms for investigating and prosecuting abuses of power, democratic societies can prevent authoritarian leaders from acting with impunity.
In addition to accountability, fostering transparency in government is crucial to counter authoritarianism. Authoritarians often thrive in environments where information is tightly controlled, and dissenting voices are silenced. Promoting open access to information, ensuring public participation in decision-making processes, and protecting whistleblowers are important steps in ensuring transparency and preventing the consolidation of power by autocratic leaders.
This section concludes that to counter authoritarianism effectively, societies must prioritize accountability and transparency in government. By empowering independent journalism, strengthening the rule of law, and promoting open access to information, democratic societies can resist the erosion of democratic principles and protect against the rise of authoritarian leaders. These efforts are essential in maintaining a healthy democracy and safeguarding the rights and freedoms of all citizens.
America's Role in Success of Global Authoritarianism, US Banks, Media Outlets
This section discusses America's role in the success of authoritarianism globally, tracing back to the 1920s when US banks and media outlets supported Mussolini's dictatorship in Italy. The section highlights how external support from powerful nations can embolden and sustain authoritarian regimes.
During the early 20th century, US banks provided financial backing to Mussolini's regime, helping to stabilize his government and fund his ambitious projects. Additionally, some American media outlets portrayed Mussolini as a strong leader who brought stability to Italy, thus legitimizing his authoritarian rule to the international community. This support and validation from influential American institutions contributed to the consolidation of power by Mussolini and strengthened his position on the global stage.
Furthermore, the United States has a history of supporting various authoritarian regimes, especially during the Cold War era, where the focus was often on countering the spread of communism. This support sometimes involved turning a blind eye to human rights abuses and undemocratic practices by authoritarian leaders, as long as they aligned with American geopolitical interests. These alliances have often led to the suppression of dissent and the weakening of democratic institutions in the countries involved.
The author highlights that in the present day, some authoritarian leaders, such as Putin and Erdogan, have used Western business connections to their advantage, making it easier for them to maintain power and evade international accountability for their actions. By identifying these patterns of external support, the book underscores the importance of being vigilant in the face of authoritarianism and ensuring that powerful nations do not inadvertently enable and perpetuate undemocratic practices in other countries.
This section explores how America's involvement and support have played a significant role in the success of authoritarianism globally. It reflects on the historical instances of external backing for authoritarian leaders and emphasizes the need for critical evaluation and responsible engagement with regimes that undermine democratic principles and human rights. By understanding these dynamics, the book urges readers to advocate for accountability, transparency, and democracy on both the domestic and international fronts.
Manipulation of Truth, Erosion of Moral Values, Leads to Hopelessness, Despair
In this section Ruth Ben-Ghiat delves into the distressing aspects of strongman rule, particularly the perpetual deception, corruption, and callous disregard for human life that characterizes such regimes. The section highlights how the manipulation of truth and the erosion of moral values under authoritarian leadership can lead to feelings of hopelessness and despair among the populace.
Strongman leaders are often notorious for their incessant lying and propagating of false narratives to maintain power and control. This manipulation of information undermines public trust in institutions and the media, leading to a state where truth becomes elusive and elusive. The distortion of reality and dissemination of alternative facts create a sense of confusion and disillusionment among the public, making it difficult for citizens to make informed decisions and hold leaders accountable for their actions.
Moreover, corruption is a common feature of strongman regimes, where leaders and their cronies use their positions of power to enrich themselves at the expense of the public. This rampant corruption not only undermines economic development and social progress but also fosters a sense of injustice and unfairness among ordinary citizens. As wealth and resources are siphoned away by those in power, the quality of life for the general population diminishes, leading to a growing sense of frustration and disillusionment.
Furthermore, the callous disregard for human life under strongman rule can be deeply distressing. Authoritarian leaders often prioritize their own ambitions and self-preservation over the welfare of their people, leading to human rights abuses, violence, and repression. The use of force and intimidation to suppress dissent creates an atmosphere of fear and insecurity, making citizens feel powerless and voiceless in the face of brutality.
This section highlights the bleak and disheartening aspects of strongman rule, including ceaseless lying, corruption, and disregard for human life. These traits foster an atmosphere of despair among the population, eroding trust in institutions, destabilizing economies, and creating an environment of fear and hopelessness. By shedding light on these distressing features of authoritarian regimes, the book urges readers to be vigilant in safeguarding democratic principles, promoting transparency and accountability, and resisting the allure of strongman leadership that threatens the well-being of societies and individuals alike.
Strongman, Virile Man (with Ruth Ben-Ghiat)
The dictator as Alpha Male - Greg Olear
In her book Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present, the historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat identifies five key “tools of rule” employed by dictators of the last century.
The first is what she calls “A Greater Nation:” the strongman vows to restore his country to its proper place in the global hierarchy. Thus Putin seeks to bring back the Soviet Union (if not the Russian Empire of the tsars), Berlusconi conjures up memories of ancient Rome, and Trump—who never grew as powerful as Pinochet or Mussolini but was absolutely a strongman—promises to Make America Great Again. Three of the other “tools of rule” are obvious: propaganda, corruption, violence. The fifth, by contrast, is not something much seen in scholarly work on dictators. Ben-Ghiat calls it “virility.”
“The strongman would be nothing without bodies to control,” Ben-Ghiat writes. “He needs crowds to acclaim his projects of national greatness on camera, taxpayers to fund his follies and his private bank accounts, soldiers to fight his wars, and mothers to birth all of the above. The systems Mussolini and other leaders created to procure bodies for sexual pleasure may be seen in this context. Far from being a private affair, the sex life of the strongman reveals how corruption, propaganda, violence, and virility work together and how personalist rulers use state resources to fulfill their desires.”
Strongmen present—or try to present—as what Trump’s acolytes would call “alpha males.” They don’t let women push them around or hen-peck them. Instead, they “grab ’em by the pussy.” Heck, if you’re a dictator, they just let you do it.
Ben-Ghiat continues:
Many strongmen boast of their virile powers. Bare-chested photographs advertise the fitness and potency of Mussolini and Putin. Gaddafi, Berlusconi, and Trump vaunt control of desirable women . . . . Some broadcast their sexual stamina. “I can love four women at the same time,” says Duterte; “If I sleep for three hours, I have the energy to make love for three hours after that,” claims Berlusconi.
Far from being seen as tacky, outrageous, pathetic, or just plain gross, this disgusting behavior is part of the strongman’s appeal. Fawning men envy him—who wouldn’t want to cavort with Miss Universe contestants, or get with Stormy Daniels? Trump does what they can only dream of. He’s living their best life. “The appeal of these leaders for many,” Ben-Ghiat writes, “rests on their having the power to get away with things that ordinary men cannot, whether in the bedroom or in politics.”
What was a main reason voters went for Trump in 2016? They liked that he said whatever he wanted. He was a living middle finger to political correctness, a fuck-you to the woke mob. The Access Hollywood tape didn’t end his campaign, I’d argue, because it was both an extreme example of him saying whatever he wanted and a bedroom boast. A lot of dudes liked what he said to Billy Bush. Here was a guy who had four dozen sexual assault or rape claims against him, and kept right on going. Red Pill misogynists eat up that kind of thing.
Virility is an essential component of the strongman’s toolbox—but not one much written about by historians. Strongmen, Ben-Ghiat told me on today’s PREVAIL podcast, “is the first book to take masculinity and body politics seriously, and place them up there with propaganda, corruption, and violence as tools of rule. Nobody else has done this before.”
It is instructive to look at U.S. politics through this lens. As Noel Casler has often pointed out, Trump is an elderly man who wears a girdle, a diaper, lifts, a ladies’ watch, makeup, and a grandmother’s coif, and yet is perceived as an “alpha male.” His despotic heirs in the GOP have different methods of broadcasting machismo, but they all do it—even the women. Plenty of Republicans post videos of themselves shooting assault rifles or packing heat. Dan Crenshaw jumps out of airplanes and rocks the cool eyepatch. Matt Gaetz (allegedly) parties with teenage girls and breaks into SCIFs. Madison Cawthorn beats up trees. Jim Jordan comports himself like a caveman, famously eschewing the sports coat.
Some of these Republicans have to try extra hard. For example, Missouri Senator Josh Hawley is hardly a paradigm of straight white alpha maleness. Unlike Crenshaw or Tom Cotton...
https://gregolear.substack.com/p/strongman-virile-man-with-ruth-ben?s=r
THIS IS THE 41st in a series of dialogues with artists, writers, and critical thinkers on the question of violence. This conversation is with Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a professor of History and Italian Studies at New York University and the author of Strongmen: From Mussolini to the Present (Norton, November 2020).
BRAD EVANS: Despite those who argue that mainstream fascism has been consigned to the pages of history, you continue to insist upon the need for a more urgent and considered appreciation of the term. This seems altogether more prescient given what’s happening in the United States today. With this in mind, I’d like to begin by asking you what exactly do you understand the term “fascism” to mean? And do you think it’s useful to speak about fascism in the 21st century?
RUTH BEN-GHIAT: Fascism as it unfolded in the 1920s and 1930s is a political system that depends on dictatorship, on a one-party state led by a charismatic leader. It is a system of state-organized violence that preaches xenophobic nationalism, racism, class unity rather than class conflict, anti-feminism, and imperialism.
Mussolini, its creator, had been a socialist, and the original fascist movement he founded in 1919 took some elements from socialism: the idea of revolution as a lever of historical change, for example. Yet the idea, parroted by the right-wingers from Jair Bolsonaro to Dinesh D’Souza today that fascism was a left-wing movement is absurd. Leftists were the fascists’ earliest and most consistent targets.
I leave the term fascist for these interwar movements, because to say that fascism is back today paradoxically lulls many people, who associate fascism with a regime that allows no opposition parties or press, to say, “Well, you see? We don’t have that here. There’s nothing to worry about.”
That doesn’t mean that fascist tactics have not endured, from personality cults to the designation of state enemies, to myriad other things. In August 2016, to warn about just such recurrences, I wrote a piece for The Atlantic about the similarities between Trump and Mussolini.
But today, authoritarianism works differently: it keeps a veneer of democracy, allowing (and then rigging) elections; it keeps a pocket of opposition; it may not use much physical violence, opting for threat and legal harassment, as Viktor Orbán does in Hungary. I call this “new authoritarianism,” others call it “electoral authoritarianism,” or, Orbán’s own self-serving term, “illiberal democracy.” We are still searching for a language to describe what is unfolding.
BRAD EVANS: …how then do contemporary authoritarian regimes differ in terms of their violence when compared to fascism in the 20th century?
RUTH BEN-GHIAT: Fascism was the political expression of a view of violence as the lever of social change and history that came out of World War I. Fascism gave violence an absolute as well as instrumental value; it was an end in itself. Once in power, fascist rulers like Mussolini and Hitler used propaganda to convince their people to view violence differently, giving a patriotic and moral value to acts of persecution that protected the nation from its internal and external enemies.
Today’s rulers use violence differently: outside of communist regimes like North Korea, the leaders I call the new authoritarians, like Putin, tend to avoid mass killing of their own populations outside of war. Putin uses targeted violence, like poisonings and murders, some staged as accidents, of high-level critics, while Erdoğan favors mass detention for state enemies labeled as terrorists. Torture is still practiced by both. If you factor in gun violence and police killings of people of color, the United States is of course a far more violent country in the absolute. No other country that is not counted as a “failed state” has 400 million guns in private hands, or so many militias.
BRAD EVANS: A central concern throughout much of your work is the importance of memory in the face of historical denial. I am also reminded at this point of Henry A. Giroux’s notion of the violence of organized forgetting…
RUTH BEN-GHIAT: History is essential today on several levels. First, we’re living through a period of assault on the truth, on evidence-based inquiry, and the histories that respect that. Second, authoritarian states and their ideologues and trolls are organized to rewrite history to fit their needs. To return to the claim the fascism is left-wing, the agenda here is to cleanse the right of violence so the right can more easily commit violence again.
In my research for my book Strongmen, which looks a century of authoritarian regimes, a commonality of fascist regimes, Pinochet’s Chile, Gaddafi’s Libya, and now Putin’s Russia is the aggressive rewriting of history. Mentioning the 1939 Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact is banned today in Russia. In America, there is the assault on the concept of civil rights: the term now is attached to the rights of white Christians to practice their faith and to right-wingers to be able to express themselves freely on campuses and elsewhere. It’s not just the forgetting of violence in play, but the invalidation of the idea that such violence was a crime. The focus is, again, to legitimate new violence in the present.
BRAD EVANS: …I am also mindful that if we simply begin with mass genocide and concentration camps then we are in danger of overlooking the subtleties of oppression, which can be woven into the prejudicial fabric of the everyday. In terms of developing a viable critique, how might we better connect grand ideologies with everyday forms of intimidation and subjugation?
RUTH BEN-GHIAT: Your question circles back to the first one and to why I don’t label today’s developments as a return of fascism. Authoritarianism can be thought of as a process of colonization — of civil society, of minds and bodies and values and culture — and it happens over time, as well as with the grand repressive moments like after the Reichstag fire or Kristallnacht.
Living in a democracy under attack, I set out to track the small changes, which I do through my op-eds and interviews, to keep our attention on the changes around us happening every day. What Trump, Bolsonaro, etc., want is for us to be silent, out of fear. Instead, we’ve seen a flowering of protest, even under conditions of a pandemic, and a multifaceted program of legal, judicial, and other pushback in the United States and electoral strategies that, as with the 2018 midterm elections, brought a new political class into power.
Histories of Violence: America Is Not a Fascist State — It’s an
Authoritarian One - Los Angeles Review of Books
https://www.lareviewofbooks.org/article/histories-of-violence-america-is-not-a-fascist-state-its-an-authoritarian-one/
[Excerpt from Interview] Ruth Ben-Ghiat: ‘Any society can be susceptible to strongman figures if it’s the right time’
In the book you begin by describing how there is a strong link between masculinity and authoritarianism. What are some aspects of masculinity that make an authoritarian leader and draw the support of people?
Ruth Ben-Ghiat: There are many types of masculinity in the world, but the strongman is an authoritarian leader who not only damages or destroys democracy but uses this kind of toxic, arrogant masculinity as a tool of rule. So some of them, like Mussolini and Putin, will use their bodies, they strip their shirts off, and so they let their bodies become kind of emblems of national strength. And they also use threats. Their strength is also threatening. This is a kind of masculinity that’s about domination, possession of others, and it connects to a worldview where these leaders have a proprietary conception of power and the state so that they seize businesses, as Erdoğan does in Turkey and Putin in Russia. So this is a kind of masculinity, and the reason I use arrogance is that there is nothing that shouldn’t be theirs.
Do you think in some societies people are more drawn to a father figure, a savior, than in other societies?
Ruth Ben-Ghiat: One of the ways these leaders find popular appeal is that they correspond to ancient archetypes of male figures, such as the protector or the father figure and also the savior. One common theme is that they all say they are going to save the nation. Only they have unique qualities, and this is where their charisma can come in or their personality cult. Only they can save the nation. On the one hand, they project themselves forward in time, where they say, “I’m going to make things great in the future.” They often pose as modernizers where they’re building highways and airports. But they also channel nostalgia, where they say, so it’s not “Make the nation great again,” as Donald Trump would say, it’s not “Make the nation great,” it’s “Make it great again.” So the nostalgia for a world that used to be better, for a lost empire, is very important. Mussolini had the Roman Empire, Erdoğan has his fantasy of reviving the Ottoman Empire. … They attract people by playing into fantasies of grandeur and power.
One of the things my research taught me is that any society can be susceptible to this strongman figure if it’s the right time. The right time is sometimes after a defeat … or a time where there has been a lot of social change that includes gender emancipation or racial equity, and white males in the European and American context often feel threatened.
More
When people are frightened they want authoritarian daddy to take care of
everything.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/4/9/2090841/-How-can-the-party-of-stupid-hateful-and-wrong-be-beating-us-Here-is-how-we-win-Saturday-s-GNR
STRONGMEN: Mussolini to the Present | Kirkus Reviews
https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/ruth-ben-ghiat/strongmen-ben-ghiat/
