What do you think?
Rate this book
The New Autocracy: Information, Politics, and Policy in Putin's Russia
Corruption, fake news, and the "informational autocracy" sustaining Putin in power
After fading into the background for many years following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia suddenly has emerged as a new threat--at least in the minds of many Westerners. But Western assumptions about Russia, and in particular about political decision-making in Russia, tend to be out of date or just plain wrong.
Under the leadership of Vladimir Putin since 2000, Russia is neither a somewhat reduced version of the Soviet Union nor a classic police state. Corruption is prevalent at all levels of government and business, but Russia's leaders pursue broader and more complex goals than one would expect in a typical kleptocracy, such as those in many developing countries. Nor does Russia fit the standard political science model of a "competitive authoritarian" regime; its parliament, political parties, and other political bodies are neither fakes to fool the West nor forums for bargaining among the elites.
The result of a two-year collaboration between top Russian experts and Western political scholars, Autocracy explores the complex roles of Russia's presidency, security services, parliament, media and other actors. The authors argue that Putin has created an "informational autocracy," which relies more on media manipulation than on the comprehensive repression of traditional dictatorships. The fake news, hackers, and trolls that featured in Russia's foreign policy during the 2016 U.S. presidential election are also favored tools of Putin's domestic regime--along with internet restrictions, state television, and copious in-house surveys. While these tactics have been successful in the short run, the regime that depends on them already shows signs of age: over-centralization, a narrowing of information flows, and a reliance on informal fixers to bypass the bureaucracy. The regime's challenge will be to continue to block social modernization without undermining the leadership's own capabilities.
After fading into the background for many years following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia suddenly has emerged as a new threat--at least in the minds of many Westerners. But Western assumptions about Russia, and in particular about political decision-making in Russia, tend to be out of date or just plain wrong.
Under the leadership of Vladimir Putin since 2000, Russia is neither a somewhat reduced version of the Soviet Union nor a classic police state. Corruption is prevalent at all levels of government and business, but Russia's leaders pursue broader and more complex goals than one would expect in a typical kleptocracy, such as those in many developing countries. Nor does Russia fit the standard political science model of a "competitive authoritarian" regime; its parliament, political parties, and other political bodies are neither fakes to fool the West nor forums for bargaining among the elites.
The result of a two-year collaboration between top Russian experts and Western political scholars, Autocracy explores the complex roles of Russia's presidency, security services, parliament, media and other actors. The authors argue that Putin has created an "informational autocracy," which relies more on media manipulation than on the comprehensive repression of traditional dictatorships. The fake news, hackers, and trolls that featured in Russia's foreign policy during the 2016 U.S. presidential election are also favored tools of Putin's domestic regime--along with internet restrictions, state television, and copious in-house surveys. While these tactics have been successful in the short run, the regime that depends on them already shows signs of age: over-centralization, a narrowing of information flows, and a reliance on informal fixers to bypass the bureaucracy. The regime's challenge will be to continue to block social modernization without undermining the leadership's own capabilities.
- GenresRussiaPoliticsNonfiction
332 pages, Paperback
Published February 6, 2018
13 people are currently reading
159 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
May 26, 2018
I follow the news about Russia in the US reasonably closely and read Russian but most of what I read from Russian news is about events and not analytical. Reading this book gave me a much better understanding of different aspects of political developments in Russia since Putin took power in 2000.
The book is a collection of essays, most with at least two authors, one Russian and one American. Although available at my public library, the essays follow an academic approach, with extensive footnotes and endnotes. The writing is hardly literary (or a joy to read as writing) but I think it says some useful if perhaps not surprising things that helped me understand about policy, decision making, and implementation of decisions in today's Russia. I find much of what I read here in terms of providing a meaningful explanation and model for today's Russia better than what comes from popular authors who are very good at describing aspects (usually unpleasant) of today's Russian trends and history but have overly simplistic or shorthand explanations for how this came to be, if they try to do so at all.
One article argued in a way I found reasonable that Putin only has so much ability to push certain projects ahead as he would like, calling this "manual control," in which Putin invests his reputation and makes public statements that force something to happen more or as less as he (strongly) desires. What is clear is that he can't run an entire country that way and most of what happens is through "normal politics" that in Russia involves a lot of people from different spheres, not just politicians (but then that is normal in most countries) and in particular not because of the direct interests of Mr. Putin.
In each of the thematic articles, the authors suggest that the usual western opinions about the subject at hand (that the Russian Duma is a rubber stamp parliament, that Putin has distributed all significant power to the "Siloviki," and so on) is almost inevitably oversimplified and that the actual situation is more complex, describing the complexities and providing at least some evidence based analysis. After reading this one feels much better informed about what is going on in today's Russia and why.
Again, the main drawback is that the writing is not intended for a general audience or particularly engaging - it is somewhat of a job to get through all 300 pages, even for someone with considerable interest. One possible compromise solution is to borrow the book from a public library and read the 25 page introduction that refers to much of the content in the rest of the book, as well as other sources.
The book is a collection of essays, most with at least two authors, one Russian and one American. Although available at my public library, the essays follow an academic approach, with extensive footnotes and endnotes. The writing is hardly literary (or a joy to read as writing) but I think it says some useful if perhaps not surprising things that helped me understand about policy, decision making, and implementation of decisions in today's Russia. I find much of what I read here in terms of providing a meaningful explanation and model for today's Russia better than what comes from popular authors who are very good at describing aspects (usually unpleasant) of today's Russian trends and history but have overly simplistic or shorthand explanations for how this came to be, if they try to do so at all.
One article argued in a way I found reasonable that Putin only has so much ability to push certain projects ahead as he would like, calling this "manual control," in which Putin invests his reputation and makes public statements that force something to happen more or as less as he (strongly) desires. What is clear is that he can't run an entire country that way and most of what happens is through "normal politics" that in Russia involves a lot of people from different spheres, not just politicians (but then that is normal in most countries) and in particular not because of the direct interests of Mr. Putin.
In each of the thematic articles, the authors suggest that the usual western opinions about the subject at hand (that the Russian Duma is a rubber stamp parliament, that Putin has distributed all significant power to the "Siloviki," and so on) is almost inevitably oversimplified and that the actual situation is more complex, describing the complexities and providing at least some evidence based analysis. After reading this one feels much better informed about what is going on in today's Russia and why.
Again, the main drawback is that the writing is not intended for a general audience or particularly engaging - it is somewhat of a job to get through all 300 pages, even for someone with considerable interest. One possible compromise solution is to borrow the book from a public library and read the 25 page introduction that refers to much of the content in the rest of the book, as well as other sources.
August 1, 2022
I appreciate the nuanced, evidenced based approach to understanding Putin's actions, policies, and motivations. After reading what Gessen, Hill, and Satter's takes on Putin and his particular brand of leadership/dictatorship, it was helpful to see where the evidence backs uo their assertions and where it does not.
The take away - Putin's actions are hard to understand because of the complex web of sometimes competing interests that he tries to keep in balance - and also because he seems to shoot from the hip and not always think through the implications of his actions.
The book itself is a bit of a slog to get through - dry academic writing with no journalistic storytelling bent in sight. But it does provide evidence for every assertion it makes. I found it best read in small chunks, and the essay compilation format made it perfect for that approach.
The take away - Putin's actions are hard to understand because of the complex web of sometimes competing interests that he tries to keep in balance - and also because he seems to shoot from the hip and not always think through the implications of his actions.
The book itself is a bit of a slog to get through - dry academic writing with no journalistic storytelling bent in sight. But it does provide evidence for every assertion it makes. I found it best read in small chunks, and the essay compilation format made it perfect for that approach.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews