Modern Tyrants

by Daniel Chirot

Along with its much vaunted progress in scientific and economic realms, the twentieth century has witnessed the rise of the most brutal and oppressive regimes in the history of humankind. Even with the collapse of Marxism, current instances of "ethnic cleansing" remind us that tyranny persists in our own age and shows no sign of abating. Daniel Chirot offers an important and timely study of modern tyrants, both revealing the forces that allow them to come to power and helping us to predict where they may arise in the future.

Genres: History, Politics, Political Science

510 pages, Paperback

First published February 7, 1994

Reviews

[Paul Gosselin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a very sobering read. I have a lot of respect for all the historical research that Chirot put into this document. And while Chirot’s book was already a sobering read when published in 1994 (a few years after the fall of the Iron Curtain) it seems more so now. While Chirot would not have imagined tracking trends in the West (or the United States specifically) potentially leading to totalitarianism or tyranny, ongoing events since March 2020 force us to consider such matters. For example, just after discussing the 19th century cultural and intellectual precursors of the rise of totalitarianism in Germany and Russia in the 20th century and the role played by nationalism, Chirot makes the following observation:

"It is not true that all nationalism leads to tyranny. But if based on jealous and vengeful resentment, on memories of past wrongs, real or imagined, on a conviction that somehow "the nation" is capable of being superior but is frustrated and blocked from being so because of powerful alien foces, the probability that tyranny will ensue is high. (...) If, furthermore, nationalistic elites absorb the Western idea of nationalism while discarding the Enlightenment concepts of the rights of the individual against the community, tyranny is more likely. (pp. 49-50)

Now think of Critical Race Theory (CRT), the Black Lives Matters movement, which at the core of it’s ideology a nourishes "jealous and vengeful resentment, on memories of past wrongs, real or imagined". Though in the 21st century the ideological power of nationalism is less than in the early 20th century, if would be stupid to underestimate the emotional power of a “jealous and vengeful ideology” as a powerful vector of social action. If one had the intent to divide and conquer the United States, targeting a very vulnerable spot, it would be hard to find a more effective tool for disruption than Critical Race Theory. I have not read anything more recent by Chirot so I would be rather curious what he would say about trends (and the massive human rights abuses) in the West since March 2020. While nationalism may have been a critical vector for the rise of 20th century totalitarianism perhaps the next generation of historians will tell us that globalism may be an even more powerful vector for the rise of 21st century totalitarianism... Time will tell... But just remember Lord Acton’s observation that “All power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Genesis tells us that in the Post-Flood world men attempted such a thing at the Tower of Babel and the judgement of Babel fell, dividing their languages and protecting them from the abuses of such Absolute political power. Who knows if this planet will soon be in need of another such Babel judgement?

In this generation, those who most use the term “tolerance” are typically the most intolerant in fact.

Like the Nazi Brown Shirts, postmoderns are ready and willing to use intimidation, threats and violence against anyone expressing views they disagree with... ESPECIALLY anyone they see as a threat to their POWER or influence. A little history lesson is often of much use. As historian George Santayana used to say: “Those who ignore history, are condemned to repeat it.” In this case, like the Nazi Brown Shirts, AntiFa activists (and Cancel Culture generally) have demonstrated that they are ready and willing to use intimidation (legal, or otherwise), threats and violence against anyone opposing their program... This is EXACTLY what the Nazis did in the period when they were attempting to gain power over Germany.

But getting back to Chirot’s book, here is a quote (drawn from a discussion of the rise of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, leading up to the Killing Fields). Chirot observes:

There is no need to repeat what has been said about the similar practice of labelling people in China. Such a system of strict social categories that consigns vast portions of the population to inferiority as class enemies, often because they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, produces a sense of massive despair and hopelessness. It also encourages constant denunciations and searches for "bad" backgrounds. These categories become the basis of social competition, and to be classified in an unfavorable way may mean death, or, at best, increased suffering for oneself and one's family. (...) Only if one believes it is possible for people to be utterly selfless, devoid of ambition except for the collectivity, and entirely uninterested in helping their families can one seriously believe that application of such social categories can lead to anything other than a vicious struggle for survival at all levels of the society, to denunciations, and to cruelty and persecution.

We may soon discover that such issues are quite relevant regarding a new form of apartheid that present-day postmodern elites seem VERY intend to put in place by means of the "vaccine passports" policy.

I have further comments on Chirot's book here.

[Nick · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good book that gives some excellent historical analsysis of several of the without doubt nastiest regimes of the 20th century. His focus on intellectual tradtions and identification of general feelings of ressentment as the prime sources of totalitarian regimes is a convincing one.

However, he fails to adequatly explain why many socialist countries did not become totalitarian regimes that killed thousands or even millions of its inhabitants. Countries like Laos, Vietnam, Burkina faso, Sri Lanka, Cuba, Yuguslavia are not examined enough or not even mentioned in this book. Claiming the USSR collapsed partly because it's leader at the time Gorbachev had some sense of humanity that prevented him of doing acts of cruelty necessary to keep the USSR from faling apart feels a bit shallow.

But then again this is a very liberal and pro capitalism book.Altough his claim that isolated regimes tend to fall prey easier to tyranny than open countries has some merit to it, it's a bit shallow again to limit this to economic connections. After all, China had opened up to the west but it did not prevent it from supressing a great many of popular movements in it's borders the most famous one at Tiananmen. The other way Cuba and burkina Faso under commander Sankara were isolated countries in an economic sense yet they did not became tyrannies.

So final conclusion; it's a good book and very easy to read with a clear point of view, I would recommend reading some other political analysis of the same countries with a different point of view.

[Jose · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read long ago was disappointed Castro,Che didn't make the book which did have the Khmer Rouge,very informative if somewhat still lacking.

[Lindsay · Rating 2 out of 5]

Wouldn't be a bad work, except for the fact that I totally disagree with his categorization of modern typologies. I mean, *come on*, totalitarianism is *completely* different that our classical understanding of dictatorship. Really.

[Nick Wallace · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great overview of modern authoritarianism.