Mahtimiehet - Tyrannien nousu, uho ja tuho

by Ruth Ben-Ghiat, Mari Janatuinen (Translator), Jukka Pitkänen (Narrator)

Väkevä tietokirja tyrannien uudesta noususta.

Autoritaarisia, maskuliinisuuttaan korostavia johtajia on noussut valtaan Brasiliasta Unkariin ja Turkista Intiaan. He hyödyntävät samoja keinoja kuin Mussolini ja Hitler aikoinaan ja valtaan päästyään he rapauttavat demokratiaa valeuutisilla, vaalien manipuloinnilla ja suoralla väkivallalla.

Valta turmelee nopeasti. Mahtimiehet uskovat, että heillä on lupa mihin vain. Hitler ja Putin ovat pitäneet valtion kassaa omana kulutilinään. Gaddafi puolestaan vei seksiorjajoukon mukaan valtiovierailuille.

Ajankohtainen tietokirja kysyy, miksi tyrannit ovat nousseet taas valtaan, vaikka historiallinen todistusaineisto puhuu heitä vastaan.

Genres: History, Politics, Nonfiction, Biography, Audiobook, Political Science, Psychology

Audiobook

First published November 10, 2020

About the author

Ruth Ben-Ghiat is an internationally acclaimed historian, speaker, and political commentator for the Atlantic, CNN, the Washington Post, and other publications. She is a professor of history and Italian studies at New York University and lives in New York City.

Reviews

[Barbara (The Bibliophage) · Rating 4 out of 5]

Originally published on my book blog, TheBibliophage.com.

Watching real-life strongman moves while reading Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present from Ruth Ben-Ghiat is both surreal and chilling. But given that the book’s publication date was also the U.S. Election Day, comparisons are inevitable. At least to one of the candidates … you don’t need me to specify which one, right?

Ben-Ghiat takes a measured, scholarly, historic approach to strongmen in the second half of the twentieth century and first twenty years of this century. She addresses leaders from around the world, dividing them into these categories: the fascists, the coup leaders, and the new authoritarians. As strongmen, they evolve from the first version through the third, since the world changes with them.

Rather than turning a macro lens on just a few men with these tendencies, Ben-Ghiat offers a broad variety with seventeen examples. Some history she tells with more detail than others, but each strongman gets their due. Moving from the ways they gain power to the tools they use to maintain it, the details show precisely how they damage the nations they rule.

Tools of Power
When Ben-Ghiat turns to how these strongmen gather, increase, and consolidate power, the book gets difficult to read. Page after page about violence, corruption, and propaganda isn’t easy. Not to mention the challenge of digesting her chapter on how strongmen use virility and sexual abuse to enhance their power and turn against their own citizens.

In this section, you’ll find relatively familiar events and those which didn’t get enough exposure. When a strongman falls, the skeletons generally come out of the closet. But the people who suffered at their hand may choose to stay silent, having gone into exile and started new lives. So many atrocities stay hidden until historians and political scientists seek the truth. Which makes books like Ben-Ghiat’s more necessary now than ever.

On the other hand, Ben-Ghiat uses familiar events like Hitler’s concentration camps or the disappearing of Chilean dissidents to make her points. And then she carries those same principles through a variety of other strongmen to show the similarities. I learned more about Pinochet and Berlusconi, and well as Erdogan and Gaddafi. Things maybe I wish I didn’t know …

Resistance
Thankfully, Ben-Ghiat includes a third section about the resistance to and downfall of the various strongmen. Whether it’s the rebellious Russian musicians, Pussy Riot, or the downfall of Pinochet by virtue of a constitutional citizen’s vote, the implication is clear. Citizens who stand by and do nothing risk their very lives, and the existence of their country as they know it. If this isn’t a message for the moment, I don’t know what is.

My conclusions
For most of my life, I’ve felt lucky to live in a country that wasn’t blatantly corrupt, that didn’t seem fooled by propaganda, and wasn’t ruled by violent men. The last few years have helped me see American history and current events more accurately, and this book contributes to that awareness. As they say, those who don’t understand history are doomed to repeat it.

Because Ben-Ghiat covers decades of history, I found connections to many books I’ve read from Gun Island by Amitav Ghosh to Night by Elie Wiesel. She mentions the supposed healing touch of French and English monarchs, as the authors of Quackery did. And the discussion of Vladimir Putin’s penchant for poisoning brought to mind Luke Harding’s book A Very Expensive Poison. And books by Isabel Allende often touch on the rule of Pinochet. Without knowing it, I’ve chosen books touched by strongmen rulers. Their very presence in history is painfully common.

I recommend Strongmen if you’re a student of history and politics or a citizen of the world. It’s intense, readable, and insightful, and a topic that’s critically important to understand.

Acknowledgements
Many thanks to NetGalley, W.W. Norton and Company, and the author for the opportunity to read a digital advanced readers’ copy in exchange for this honest review.

[Tim Null · Rating 4 out of 5]

Strongmen by Ruth Ben-Ghait pairs well with Autocracy, Inc. by Anne Applebaum. Strongmen covers the history of several well-known dictators; that is, their rise to power through to their fall and death. It repudiated the idea that autocracy is an efficient and effective form of government.

Quotes:

"Authoritarianism has been reputed to be an efficient mode of governance, ... the opposite is true. ... [A dictator] is no one without his followers."

"Strongman states, helped by their foreign backers, obscure the profound destruction they cause. Instead, they perpetuate the notion that authoritarianism bests democracy in terms of efficiency and economic growth."

[Boudewijn · Rating 3 out of 5]

In today's world the strongmen are back: heads of state who damage or destroy democracy rule Russia, Turkey, Hungary and Brazil. And even a lot of stable democracies see the rise of populists, who all seem to run the same scenario. In this book, Ruth Ben-Ghiat show that nothing is new, and a lot of these new strongmen use the same tactics which we saw in the previous century.

This book gives a very good overview of how these strongmen use propaganda, corruption and violence to stay in power, and at the same time how they can be stopped. Disturbing, but clarifying.

[Lydia Wallace · Rating 5 out of 5]

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. 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. Pick this great book up and enjoy reading it page after page without being able to put it down. #1 New Release in Men's Gender Studies. Ben- Ghiat you are a great author. This isn't the type of book I would usually read, but I am waiting for your next book.

[Steven Z. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Recently I read Anne Applebaum’s book THE TWILIGHT OF DEMOCRACY which laid out where the United States stood in a world that seems to trend toward autocratic rule. To say the least her thesis which depicts how American democracy has gone so terribly wrong is scary and alarming. It appears that there is a “strongman playbook” that these autocratic wannabes follow which is the main focus of Ruth Ben-Ghiat’s new work, STRONGMEN: MUSSOLINI TO THE PRESENT published before the attack on the capitol on January 6, 2021. The books appearance is a further warning of what might occur as Donald Trump continues to stir the pot about his election loss and the dangers should he return to the White House in 2024. Ben-Ghiat has spent her career ruminating about how authoritarians manipulate the truth to gain power and her book is very troubling as she lays out the “strongmen’s playbook” highlighting strategies and techniques employed by the likes of Benito Mussolini, Muammar Gaddafi, Augusto Pinochet, Mobutu Sese Sebo, and Vladimir Putin, among others to seize power for as long as they desired.

Last November the American people overcame the misinformation, lies, and conspiracy theories put forth by Donald Trump and his followers to seemingly reject someone who consistently tried to employ the “playbook” but the failure of the Republicans to support truth allowed Trump to escape an impeachment conviction. The result is that the American people must confront and cope with a somewhat resurgent Trump who threatens to run again for president in 2024 and if it comes to pass reach down into his toolbox of the authoritarian playbook to regain the White House. This proposition may make the Republican base happy, but it presents an ongoing existential threat to the overwhelming majority of the American people.

In her important narrative Ben-Ghiat recounts the acts of bravery, solidarity and dignity that resulted in the removal of strongmen over the last century and she makes it clear by delving into numerous historical examples what signs to look for as these men try and seize power and what strategies are needed to stop them. For Ben-Ghiat the key to understanding today’s authoritarianism and its allies, we must pursue a historical perspective.

Benito Mussolini emerges as the “godfather” of authoritarianism as his approach puts forth a role model for other strongmen wannabes to emulate. From Mussolini to Putin the personalist reign is their mantra concentrating power in one individual whose own financial and political interests prevail over national ones in shaping domestic and foreign policy. Loyalty to him and his allies rather than expertise is the main qualification for serving in government, as is participation in his corruption schemes. They rule by employing patronage and fear to maintain loyalty and support. The book divides the strongmen era into three parts; 1919-1945, the fascist era; 1950-1990, the age of military coups; and 1990-present as the new authoritarian age and the author present clear examples and analysis as she examines individual strongmen, their compatibility and similarities with each other.

What is striking from the outset is the role of virility and how it is combined with other tactics. The autocrat’s display of “machismo and his kinship with other male leaders are not just bluster, but a way of exercising power at home and conducting foreign policy.” It translates into targeting women, LGBTQ+ populations, immigrants, people of color, and the press. Mussolini prepared the script used by today’s authoritarians that casts the leader as a victim of domestic enemies and an international system that has cheated his country. Mussolini partnered with conservatives in his rise to power and he created a template for Silvio Berlusconi, Donald Trump, Augusto Pinochet, and Vladimir Putin to name just a few. The key for these men according to the author is that the rhetoric of crisis and emergency they rely on, and the comfort of knowing who to blame for the nation’s troubles and how only they know how to fix them, i.e.; Trump’s commentary during the 2016 campaign, in reference to Washington’s problems is that “only I know how to fix it.”

It is interesting how elites cling to authoritarians. Afraid of losing their class, gender, or racial privileges they support insurgents as they strive for power. Once ensconced in office elites strike an “authoritarian bargain” that allows them to pursue their agenda. A useful example is how Senator Mitch McConnel and his Senate minions have gone along with Trump to achieve judicial appointments, tax cuts for the wealthy, and voter suppression in order to maintain white political control. When Trump descended the escalator at Trump Tower in 2015 the Republican Party was already an extremist organization and it could use the reality TV star to achieve its goals. Trump and his minions, the likes of Steve Bannon, Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, and Roger Stone, all right wing extremists and white supremacists have been supporting strongmen all around the globe for years so the events of the last four years should not have come as a surprise.

If one looks for a Trumpian role model apart from Mussolini it is easy to apply the tactics and image creation of Silvio Berlusconi, an Italian media tycoon and politician who served as Prime Minister of Italy in four governments from 1994 to 1995, 2001 to 2006 and 2008 to 2011. Berlusconi came to power by election after the Cold War ended through voter suppression and rigging elections. He would shape public opinion through the television stations he owned. He stressed Italy’s need to return to “national greatness,” his ability to fix Italy’s problems, particularly those caused by the left, and flaunt the image of virility as he worked to keep out foreigners and immigrants. He even had parliament pass laws to protect him from prosecution. Immigrants were his favorite target as he practiced his xenophobic rule stressing the fear of white replacement and the low Italian birthrate, all echoing Mussolini, and a template for Donald Trump. It is no accident that Berlusconi developed a strong relationship with Vladimir Putin and Ben-Ghiat’s observations about the two men and the “bromance” appear to be dead on.

The theme of national greatness permeates the rhetoric of strongmen. Francisco Franco recalled the glories of the Spanish Empire; Mussolini longed for Italia Irredenta and the Roman Empire; for Putin it is Imperial Russia and the Soviet Empire; and for Racip Tayyip Erdogan it is the Ottoman Empire and ethnically cleansing the Kurds in Syria. These rulers’ obsessions have turned into policy i.e., Gaddafi cleansed Libya of Italians, Hitler cleansed Germany of Jews, Putin pursues Eurasian domination and reshaping Russian culture partnering with the Russian Orthodox Church. Trump wanted to build his border wall to keep out immigrants with detention camps, family separation, and politically has the support of white evangelicals. Further the Trump administration worked to undo decades of advances for women, people of color, and LGBTQ+ communities. He was obsessed with nostalgia for a white America dominated by males, along with his crusade to nullify Barack Obama’s legacy. He redefined civil rights, traditionally linking the struggle of African Americans for legal equality, as the protection of Christian “freedom of religion and expression.” Even his Attorney-General, William Barr stated we are waging “unrelenting, never-ending fight against criminal predators in our society,” who of course are black and brown people.

While Ben-Ghiat discusses different strongmen and compares them with Trump she tends to lump many of them together without creating a conceptual framework to work with. I agree with Francis Fukuyama’s review in the New York Times, November 17, 2020, “Authoritarians From Mussolini to Trump” when he writes, [she] gives us “very little insight into Donald Trump beyond what is already widely known. What we get instead is an endless series of historical anecdotes about a heterogeneous collection of bad leaders ranging from democratically elected nationalists like Modi to genocidal fanatics like Hitler. What sense does it make to put Silvio Berlusconi in the same category as Muammar Qaddafi or Saddam Hussein? Berlusconi may have been sleazy, manipulative and corrupt, but he didn’t murder political opponents or support terrorism abroad, and he stepped down after losing an election. Ben-Ghiat notes that many strongmen came to power in the 1960s and ’70s through military coups, but that today they are much more likely to be elected. Wouldn’t it be nice to know why coups have largely vanished?

Fukuyama further argues accurately that Trump really does deserve more careful comparison with other leaders. There are indeed certain parallels between him and contemporary populists like Hungary’s Orban, Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Poland’s Jaroslaw Kaczynski, insofar as they all rely on a similar rural social base for their support. On the other hand, there are unexplained differences: Orban, Duterte and El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele, for example, used the Covid pandemic to vastly expand executive authority, while Trump did the opposite, abdicating responsibility and shifting authority to the governors. Most strongmen are ruthlessly efficient and Machiavellian; Trump demonstrated incredible incompetence in failing to build his border wall, repeal Obamacare or expand his voter base. And, of course, he failed to win re-election to a second term. Revelations in The New York Times of Trump’s tax returns suggest he ran for president not out of a mad desire for power, but simply to avoid bankruptcy in his failed hotel business. And yet, despite myriad revelations, he exerted a magnetic pull on his core followers. Why? Perhaps it might be more useful to understand the ways that Trump is sui generis, and how he could set a pattern for strongmen of the future, rather than reprising familiar precedents from the past.”

Talia Lavin writing in the Washington Post, December 24, 2020, “Corruption, Violence and Toxic Masculinity: What strongmen like Trump have in Common” is less critical than Fukuyama as she states that Ben-Ghiat “makes a convincing argument for including Trump in these less-than-august ranks, most of all when laying out the specifics of his corruption. For the reader inured by the drip-drip-drip of stories of brazen corruption over the course of years, it is bracing to see a half-decade’s worth of reporting so carefully distilled and to recall that it is in fact aberrant to see a son-in-law enriching himself at taxpayer expense, or to watch the Trump Organization’s coffers fill, golf outing by golf outing, with the aid of the Secret Service. As Ben-Ghiat shows, such self-enrichment is more in line with a Gaddafi or a Mussolini than a transparent or accountable democratic leader. Trump’s violence, too, is laid out chillingly: “In the tradition of the fascists, Trump uses his rallies to train his followers to see violence in a positive light,” she writes of his frequent exhortations to violence and demonization of immigrants at these spectacles.

This is not, however, merely another addition to the annals of Trumpology. Beginning with the rise of Mussolini and concluding with the present era, Ben-Ghiat attempts to portray the ways democracies die in the arms of authoritarians, and the common traits that enable these downfalls. This is, no doubt, an admirable goal, and the author finds many points of authentic insight into the characters of strongmen and their followers along the way. Her prose manages the difficult maneuver of being both rigorously sourced and quite readable, with luminous, hard-won conclusions studding the text. In describing the torturers and flunkies who surround strongmen, she writes, “The special psychological climate that strongmen create among their people — the thrill of transgression mixed with the comfort of submitting to his power — endows life with energy, purpose, and drama.” It’s an observation that distills so much of the public life of the United States over the past half-decade — and resounds throughout an increasingly antidemocratic world.”

Ben-Ghiat offers a series of chapters outlining how strongmen attain and retain power. Chapters on the use of various forms of violence, including intimidation and assassination; propaganda; corruption; virility emphasizing sexual enslavement, lies and misinformation; torture, and raping their countries natural resources and wealth are disconcerting and at times horrifying. Ben-Ghiat creates a portrait of depravity that has gained the support of millions worldwide in part because of fear or accepting a belief system that abhors fact and relies on misinformation and outright lies offered by authoritarians. These techniques are used across the board whether we are speaking of demented individuals or sociopaths who have altered the course of history. As an American it is very troubling to realize how the former president fit the pattern set by the Pinochet’s, Putin’s, and numerous others as he rose to power through denigration and rejecting truth.

In the end Ben-Ghiat’s book is a worthy contributor to the works of Masha Gessen, Timothy Snyder, Steven Levitsky, Daniel Zimblat, and Jason Stanley who warned us about Trump’s propensity toward authoritarianism and we can only hope that out of office he will not continue to foment the trends and beliefs in American politics that have burgeoned over the last decade, though that hope is not necessarily a realistic assumption.

[Megan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Decent book but not quite a must-read in my opinion. At least not for those who are already very well-informed about authoritarian leaders and regimes.

The problem is, like usual, the people (mainly in the US) that really need to read this book (primarily as a cautionary tale) are the ones who never will. For them, there is no precedent made by other countries, no need to look abroad to learn from the mistakes made by countries that “have nothing to do with us.” America is and always will be ethnocentric and the ignorance can be infuriating at times but what can you do?

While Ben-Ghiat does do a good job of presenting a collective narrative of the strongman’s governing style, personality traits, how he got into power, how he ultimately left power, etc. (all important to people looking at how to resist and prevent for falling for this style of leadership), the chapters often seemed a bit disorganized - sort of jumping from one ruler/regime/time in history to two or three others within a span of two pages.

I haven’t felt very well at all in the past month, but aside from that, this book just really seemed to drag on and I was relieved to have finally finished it (even though I’ve read books nearly 4x its length this year alone). Do with that what you will.

Something else I found a bit irritating was when Ben-Ghiat made either untrue statements (supported by her lack of citations) or blatantly opinionated ones. For instance?

”Putin’s government has used Soviet-style political murder and torture, imprisonment, and poisoning against those who expose his crimes. The journalist Anna Politkovskaya was among these. She made 50 trips to Chechnya, covering human rights abuses during Putin’s “dirty war” there. After a failed FSB attempt to poison her on an airplane, in 2006 she was shot in the elevator of her apartment building, becoming one of dozens of reporters killed for uncovering information Putin wanted buried.”

Considering I just read the Putin biography by Philip Short which presented a very different story (basically this, in a nutshell: Politkovskaya was writing too many critical stories of Chechnya’s top rebel leader there, who easily has enough power to have her killed by one of his lackeys. Although the crime was never investigated nor proven to be connected to the young leader, one of his group’s members made a very telling statement that had the journalist not been poking her nose into business that wasn’t hers, she’d still be alive). What I got from the whole thing was that Putin did indeed hear about the event, said something a bit tone deaf about her death, but in reality had absolutely nothing to do with it nor nothing to gain by it.

Or when she refers to ”The raised stakes of having a White supremacist in the White House outweighed the risks of infection.” Defending Trump is the last thing I’d ever do, but this is not established fact; rather, partisan opinion. Do I think he’s racist and has he said rather ugly and hateful things about minority groups? Of course. But I don’t need someone else to tell me this, much less go as far as labeling him a white supremacist. It just adds an unnecessary level of bias along with uncited “facts” to the book that can make you question other parts of the general story.

I’d still recommend this book if you’re highly interested in it, but don’t necessarily take everything she writes as fact, unless it is accompanied by a credible citation. For me though, I just felt it wasn’t teaching me anything I didn’t already know.

[Paige McLoughlin · Rating 5 out of 5]

The author divides the subject of authoritarian strongmen into three periods, The fascist dictators Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, and others up to WWII, The cold war period of client dictators expedient during the cold war Mbutu, Pinochet, Gaddafi, Then the current wave of autocrats of the 21st century Berlusconi, Putin, Modi, Orban, Erdogan, Trump. All of them share similar characteristics in personal characteristics of immorality, gangsterism, loyalty above all else, the cult of virility covering, surrounded by yesmen but highly incompetent at running successful states, cronyism, and corruption while claiming to be law and order. They usually weaken or ruin the societies they run, set up a cult around themselves, and cause their followers to debase themselves while taking pride in the leader's transgressions as they dismantle the civil society. Some are rewarded with cronyism but are discarded when it no longer serves the autocrat. They also are on a quest to control bodies through violence including political enemies, groups singled out like immigrants, women, outsiders, sexual minorities, and ethnic minorities. And their regimes usually end badly and do much damage to their own countries and others. I think the author is a good left-liberal and her analysis is good mostly but suffers a blind spot here and there. She recognizes that rightwing elements often give strongmen their power in order to protect their own privilege but enter a devil's bargain with the strongman but nothing like the ordinary people who get in the way of the despot. The followers often willingly revel in his transgressions and debase themselves and often can't face up to it so increase their loyalty by vicarious participation in the strongman's crimes. the pieces after the fall don't put together again in a satisfying way. We are in such times where such figures seem ascendant. Some of her advice is good and she does talk about humanitarian and leftist resistance strategies with mixed results. I don't know she has some advice to deal with this problem but much more space is given to the diagnostics I have mentioned above. I don't know she is clear-eyed but doesn't give much more than the vaguest of hope to cling on. Tough read and no easy answers.

Here is the author talking to Democracy now in the wake of the Capitol Hill Insurrection by a Trumpist mob.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsVFb...

[Mike · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5 stars. I had taken a much-needed break from reading books about Trump this year, but decided to give this one a shot because it seemed so timely...and it is. This is the first book I’ve read that places Trump in a proper historical context, rather than a journalistic account, a psychological evaluation, or a theory-heavy analysis. Instead, it is a well-researched and highly documented scholarly (but accessible) historical discussion of strongmen figures of the last century, the traits they share, and the ways they gain and retain power. Ben-Ghiat discusses the three types of strongmen: those who rose to power through political machinations in the post-WWI era (Mussolini, Hitler, and Franco), those who rose to power through military coup in the post-WWII era, and finally the more recent strongmen who gained and held power through popular vote (in many cases through corrupt elections), such as Berlusconi, Putin, and Trump. The second section deals with the traits they share to hold power (a toxic combination of propaganda, corruption, violence, and macho-posturing -- what Ben-Ghiat refers to as"virility"), while the final section describes their fall.

This is not a book on Trump, per se, but places him in the context of authoritarian strongmen of the last century. As an American, I found the Trump sections to be the most pertinent for me, but the discussions of Berlusconi, Gaddafi, and Putin were equally eye-opening, and often enlightening in what they revealed about living in the Trump era. Since Ben-Ghiat makes the convincing argument that certain authoritarian characteristics of these strongmen are quite similar, I found myself beginning to understand how Trump’s behavior over the last four years was just as much about self-preservation as self-promotion. To think that Ben-Ghiat released this book before the current attempt to overturn the 2020 election is only more proof that her insight and analysis is spot-on. Of all the books I’ve read on Trump in the last four years, I think this is the one that will set the stage for how historians understand his time in office. Well worth a read, even if you’re burned out on Trump (as we all are!).

[Monique · Rating 5 out of 5]

Both fascinating and horrifying - much of which is sadly familiar. This book should be compulsory reading for all Americans right now.

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have once again decided to embark on a mission to read a number of books on subjects that will be of great importance to the upcoming 2024 US Presidential Election. This was a great success as I prepared for 2020, with an outcome at the polls (and antics by both candidates up to Inauguration Day) that only a fiction writer might have come up with at the time! Many of these will focus on actors and events intricately involved in the US political system over the last few years, in hopes that I can understand them better and, perhaps, educate others with the power to cast a ballot. I am, as always, open to serious recommendations from anyone who has a book I might like to include in the process.

With the events of July 21, 2024, when Joe Biden chose not to seek re-election, the challenge has become harder to properly reflect the Democratic side. I will do the best I can to properly prepare and offer up books that can explore the Biden Administration, as well as whomever takes the helm into November.

This is Book #19 in my 2024 US Election Preparation Challenge.

Ruth Ben-Ghiat opens her book with a bold assertion, positing that the last century has been a breeding ground for authoritarian leaders of various sorts, partially due to history, but also strongly tied to political and military happenstance. Ben-Ghiat effectively presents a handful of men who have carried the mantle and shown how their authoritarian rule has shaped countries around the world. From the best-known Benito Mussolini through to the lesser understood Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the author present these men —and only men, as she clearly comments—through a number of filters to show how they are true authoritarians. A great read and highly entertaining, a book that piqued my curiosity and helped me see the world in a new light.

Authoritarian leaders need not be those who claim power in an undemocratic manner, as Ruth Ben-Ghiat argues from the opening pages of this book. She depicts them in a number of categories, but ties them together with a belief that they are self-proclaimed protectors of the country, evading accountability while capturing the resources of the people as thy destroy the democratic foundation. While doing so, they skirt the necessities of good government (or any government) while praising themselves and many in the same boat. The need to be idolised and have idols of their own is key. Ben-Ghiat mentions the praise Vladimir Putin had for his fellow Russian Joseph Stalin, Donald Trump hints at the greatness of Libyan despot Muammar Gaddafi, Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro found great admiration for his fellow South American Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet, as Türkiye’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan found Adolf Hitler to resonate as an efficient leader worth emulating. That the world has stood by and allowed this baffles me, but as Ben-Ghiat explains, it is all too common.

She breaks the types of leaders down into multiple groups, some coming from countries who had a lack of political structure at the time of their emergence. One might put Hitler and Mussolini in this category. The Great War decimated both Germany and Italy, leaving a power vacuum for someone to fill the void. Other leaders came to power through colonial overthrows, where a new and localised leader had to fill the gap left by European powers, including
Gaddafi and Zaire’s Mobutu Sese Seko. A third group could be those who took power through coups or democratic pathways and changed the rules to ensure they were not likely to lose power with ease. Ben-Ghiat lumps Trump, Pinochet, and Putin in this group, perhaps the most interesting of the groups. To say that authoritarian leaders have a single set of rules would be false, though it is surprising how easily democracy can yield to this type of man.

Ben-Ghiat uses the rest of the book exploring traits of the various men, who flex their political and literal muscles to ensure they stay in power and that the country works in their favour. There is surely the view that these men ought to be praised for their stunning good looks—thankfully the author does not try to convince us that all are stunning eye candy—or their ability to secure women to fill their harem. While some use their looks, others provide a pile of wealth to buy their way into power. Some might say Trump or Italy’s Silvio Berlusconi used their business power and transferred it into political and sexual power to overcome their lack of leadership abilities. Ben-Ghiat does not rationalise it at all, but does make a point of showing how these men used that power to work in their favour.

Men of influence also used their violent tactics too keep control over their people. As is explored repeatedly throughout the book, Putin and Pinochet had their opponents disappear when needed, a sign of their ‘full into line’ tactics that never stopped. One might say that having the power to make others disappear could prove useful in countries where the opposition could turn the people with ease. Others, like Gaddafi and Mobutu, used public torture and execution to keep people in line. Showing the extent to what could be done should someone speak or act out against the leader help push people into line and leaves many who might want to oppose the political system from acting, for fear of horrible torture or death in front of the masses. Scare tactics cannot be dismissed as only for a handful of people, but the masses, should they not follow the path provided to them.

After exploring the end of power for those who are not currently still holding onto their country’s reins, Ben-Ghiat also posits that there could be a way of preventing these leaders from continuing their power well into the 21st century. Knowledge and political action are surely a few ways of handling the situation, though it is not entirely clear who would enforce change in systems that begin to show this problem. As Ben-Ghiat shows, even democracy is susceptible to authoritarian leaders, though it might be the support base that can be changed to ensure these men do not rise to or keep power. Education and lack of sycophancy is surely part of the process, as well as not falling for strict propaganda to depict the truth of the world in which we live. This is also a difficult task, but one that cannot simply be wished away. Power is hard to break and while the world is not prepared for multiple military overthrows of power—would this not cause new power vacuums?—something has to be done.

Ruth Ben-Ghiat delivers a stunning look into the rise and sustainability of authoritarian rule over the last century. Where did it emerge and for what reason has it remained in place? Ben-Ghiat fills her chapters with convincing evidence to show that there are surely a number of issues in the world that promote this type of leadership, or at least power gaps that are filled by people of such sentiment. From the apparent eternal rule of Putin through to the electoral shenanigans of Trump, and even the military iron-fist used by Pinochet, men gravitate to ways in which they can control the people and keep them in their pockets. I could not get enough of the research and presentation that Ruth Ben-Ghiat used for this book, educating me at every turn. One can only hope that those peoples who are currently under the control of such leadership styles will toss off their shackles and see the light. It’s nicer out here and sycophancy is so 20th century.

Kudos, Madam Ben-Ghiat, for this highly entertaining and educational piece that left me wanting more.

Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/

[Rob Alexander · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating to see how authoritarian leaders take power, retain it, and eventually lose it. I rarely read books like this, and found myself repeatedly thinking, “Ah, that’s why!”

All politicians of good will should read this book, and do all they can to promote transparency and honesty in politics.

[Wick Welker · Rating 3 out of 5]

Strongmen can come from any ideology.

This is overall not a bad book from a historical account of several “strongmen” or authoritarian rulers from Mussolini to present. You’ll get scattered, tidbits of history and the common strategic ploys that these men have made that bind together a narrative that the author is putting forth here. There is nothing super revelatory or earth shattering but I did enjoy the historical accounts. However, this book has an enormous misstep by only talking about right wing authoritarians rulers without sparing a sentence for left wing rulers that should have had a large part in this book about “strongmen”. I’ll get into it.

This book covers Mussolini, Hitler, Franco, Pinochet, Gaddafi, Putin, Muboto and Trump. The historical accounts of these men, how they came into power and what they did with it is what this book excels at. The fascist strongmen has several features that all these men share: destruction of media, ownership of media, spreading falsehoods, propagandizing conspiracies, misogyny, sexual exploitation, courting paramilitary groups, subverting traditional liberal democratic precedents, anti-communist panic, fostering a cult of personality and harsh domestic civil rights violations among others. All of these men foot the bill. Even Trump. However, Trump is different than the other strongman mentioned and I feel this lack of nuance discredited the author a tad.

Trump clearly uses fascists rhetoric and tactics and has wielded them with skill to gain control and to be elected a second time to office. However, Trump has not committed anything as close to genocide, murder and civil rights violations that the other men have committed. Does that make Trump a sweetheart that doesn't deserve the fascist label? No, of course not. Trump is clearly a fascist or at least fascist adjacent. But every time the author made a side-by-side comparison with Musolini invading Ethiopia and murdering the civilians there after committing rape in his private quarters made me roll my eyes. Trump simply is not on the same level as the other men. Now, he certainly could be, but he hasn’t. By making this premature comparison, I believe it saps the strength of the argument that Trump is a fascist and all the clear warning flags just fall on deaf ears. Trump is a rising fascist and he can get much, much worse that he did in his first term. Now that people start calling him Hitler, half the population ignores the warning. It is extremely important to be accurate and precise with language and I feel this author was too reckless and this book only served as confirmation bias to readers who already agree with her.

Now let’s get to the glaring omission of this book: Stalin, Mao and Xi. Where were these guys when this book was written? These three men fit the time period the author covers and also fit every single metric the author puts forth to be a strongman except one: anti communist panic. I argue that literally the only thing that separates a fascist from Stalin, Mao and Xi is using anti communist panic to create and harness a reactionary political landscape. That’s it. Otherwise, Communist dictators are also deplorable strongmen and make great bedfellows with the likes of Hitler, Mussolini, Pinochet, Franco, Gaddi and Muboto.

So the underpinnings of this entire book are ideological. Meaning, the author has ideological blinders on and it weakens all of her arguments. Autocracy and authoritarianism come from both sides of the political spectrum. In our modern time of the rising fascism and the danger of reactionary politics, it is extremely important to remove our ideological blinders lest we fall for a strongman on the other side of the spectrum. This was a major misstep with this book.

[Alison Rose · Rating 4 out of 5]

The problem is not that we live in a world with authoritarians. The problem is that we live in a world with their supporters.

Because as the author makes clear many times in this book, strongmen would be nobodies if nobody cared about them, if nobody admired them, if nobody aided and abetted them by supporting and amplifying them. There are a lot of people who want to be strongmen themselves but lack the capabilities required to do so, so the next best thing is to blindly and rabidly prop up someone who does, especially since much of their reason for doing so is out of bigotry and fear and anger, and the person they get behind not only shares those beliefs but makes them mainstream and tells the people they're right to have them.

I mean, at this very moment, we're facing an absolutely ludicrous situation in this country, where a lying, cheating, hateful, crazy felon has a decent shot at getting back into the White House even after orchestrating a coup against the country when it voted him OUT of the White House...all because the other guy in the race is a little old and a little slow. Millions of people are so ensconced in their prejudices and avarice and meanness that they gleefully support someone whose main goal is to become History's Greatest Dictator, and a whole lot of others are like "Well gee, I don't know, wouldn't it be worse to have a guy who stutters sometimes" because they refuse to confront the reality of what we're facing.

And I think this book could be useful reading for them! Not the cultists, because for one thing most of them probably wouldn't pick up a book unless you paid them, but also there is literally nothing anything could say to get them to stop chugging the Kool-Aid. But those wishy-washy people who act like Biden stumbling over a word here and there is just as concerning as Project 2025 (fucking read about it and wake up) really really need to read this. The author does a terrific job not just of explaining who these men were and what they did, but crucially how they are all connected. I had varying levels of familiarity with the main people she discusses in here, so I learned a lot along the way, but the thing that really stuck out was just how much sameness there was amongst them. Their words and behaviors and methods of obtaining power and interactions with others and beliefs about themselves...so much of it just echoed through the decades that she covers. The way some of them almost mimicked each other too was notable, including because it really makes it clear what pathetic insecure little fuckboys they really are. Like, you have so little personality you gotta steal Mussolini's? Come on.

I also appreciated how she highlighted the ways that these men would commit atrocities out in the open once they had a strong enough grip on power, because it really shows how much of the onus and the blame is on the people under them. None of these men were subtle or secretive about what they were doing. They're incapable of being so because they need the adulation and even the outrage to fuel them. And to be candid, the people today saying "Oh Trump wouldn't really be that bad" are 1) stupid as fuck because we already had him for four years and he WAS that bad and with another four he would be exponentially worse, see the link above; and 2) sure sound a whole lot like German citizens in the 40s claiming they had no idea where all the Jews went. Keep trying to convince yourselves of that, but unless you've been in a coma for the past eight years, history will not believe you.

As is often the case with books of this type, I do think there were a few points where she went into maybe too much granular detail, and others where I would have liked a little more. I also wish the conclusion had maybe looked at some efforts in this country and around the world to try to combat disinfo and hate groups and such. But this is a very well-researched, well-written, and thorough look at this existential threat that just won't die...because too many small-minded hateful people are keeping it on permanent life support.

[Michael’ · Rating 1 out of 5]

The liberal brain rot starts on the cover. I’m only on page 3 and Ghiat is already claiming Italy is secretly run by a Russian cabal. Proof? Hillary Clinton once said so.
She then claims an Italian politician who worked with Berlusconi was profiting from investments in trade between Russia and Italy. According to Ben-Ghiat this is an immanent threat to the safety of Americans. But in what way is not clear. Horror of horrors! The Jewish bankers are wielding the stupid Italians like a weapon against civilisation and to exterminate Americans because “they hate our freedoms”! Why else would these chiefs hate civilised societies?
Did I say Jews? I meant Russian bankers. I accidentally wrote stupid Italians, it should have said conservative Italians. And civilisation should say “open international system”. And “our freedoms should say LGBTQ+ rights. Chiefs should've been populist strongmen and civilised should’ve been open. Annoying typos.
This has nothing to do with whether or not Berlusconi is a strongman or with his politicsl story. So I searched the book for mentions of Trump and Biden. When Joe Biden, his son and their political allies suddenly heavily invest in natural gas and weapons this is not an issue. Joe Biden demands the resignation of the Ukrainian judge investigating his son’s investments as a precondition for aid? No problem. Biden sends LNG carrying ships to Europe in the run up to the Ukraine conflict. Nothing to see here. Everything Berlusconi or Trump do is treated like a scandal even when it clearly isn’t scandalous. Everything Biden, who is just as shady as Trump or Berlusconi, does is okay. The purpose of this dumb book is to make one wing of the corrupt, bought off establishment seem like absolute good while the other wing is said to be a mere front for ethnicity A we don’t like. Whether that ethnicity is Russian, Chinese, Jewish or Arab, I don’t care. When establishment politicians invest in Ukraine, Germany or Japan that is okay. When an anti-establishment politician invests in Russia or China or a Russian or Chinese person invests in the west, that’s an evil conspiracy and proves foreign nations want to undermine the west, not that they want continued cooperation, which is what trade usually signals.
But beware of Stalin! He isn’t actually covered in the book but Putin is very evil because he likes Stalin. Stalin is apparently so evil he can’t be mentioned. She’s not interested in Stalin because this book is written as an attack on her right-wing opponents. He’s only mentioned when she can demonise the right-wing Putin with it.

When I found something irrelevant, I skipped it. The worst part about this book how it lacks any serious coverage of strongmen. What I hope from a book like this is to go through a number of strongmen in different systems and under different conditions. Show what the trends are. What the background is. What the systems they exploded onto where like. What the social, ideological and economic context of strongmen is. How the careers of individual strongmen looked. A narrative of how they rose to power. An overview of how they used their power. Ben-Ghiat prefers spouting semi-relevant information and dumb opinions. I ended up skipping most of it. Stupid book.

[Karen Adkins · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a brilliant book. Ben-Ghiat's goal here is simple: to demystify autocrats. She examines a century of authoritarians (starting with Mussolini and running through Trump, just under 20 are her focus) to isolate the common patterns. She articulates their grounding ideology (fear of the other and a mythical appeal to a falsely orderly nostalgic national past), their tools (propaganda, corruption, violence, virility), and how they fail (why resistance matters and can work). Crucially, she articulates the ways in which their ideology and tools are inherently unstable (cult of personality appeals and manifestations of virility are dependent on decaying bodies and minds; the kinds of incentives, bribery and coercion that autocrats rely on can lose their appeal; violence and propaganda, in their sheer repetitiveness, can become numbing to a public). In other words, for all the appalling grimness of many of the anecdotes and evidence, this book is a curiously hopeful read. She means us, I believe, to walk away from this book being both aware of the extent and danger of autocratic rule (her conclusion emphasizes the sophistication of newer autocrats, both with social media and their ability to use the optics of democracy to mime a kind of popular rule that is a mirage), and to have a sense of our agency in resisting them. Most crucially for me as an American reader, I appreciated her cross-cultural approach. Ben-Ghiat is a professor of Italian history, but her autocrats come from all over, and as an American, she resists what must have been the temptation to put Trump front and center. Rather, she smartly focuses on less well known autocrats (Mobutu Sese Seko, Augusto Pinochet, Moammar Gaddafi, Silvio Berlusconi), and every chapter opens with an illustrative anecdote of the focus that comes from a non-Trump autocrat. It seems clear that while Trump may have been the occasioning cause of this vast work of historical synthesis, he is not the *purpose*; rather, Ben-Ghiat wants us to be aware of the kinds of structural and social stresses that make the emergence of autocrats a constant danger, and our need to revive our democratic and civic institutions for more transparency, accountability, and animating emotion, so that they are better able to withstand the autocrat's temptation. Everyone should read this book.

[Alexandra Preston · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm not sure exactly how to feel about this book. I think overall I walk away from it feeling a little let down. I don't feel as if I learned what I set out to learn which is what a strongman is and how they come to power and gain influence and legitimacy. I feel as if a lot of the talking points that would have gone towards answering this were lost among the horrors of the regime's and strongmen once they were already in power. And while those are things that should be talked about and brought up it doesn't really add much to answering the question of how strongmen come to be and what circumstances lead up to such a thing. I think perhaps I feel this way most strongly because the narrative felt disjointed to me. One moment the book would be talking about one strongman and his reign only to jump to another and back again then on to another following a general theme. I personally feel it probably would have been stronger to have dedicated segments to each strongman documenting the specific circumstances that lead to their rise, their individual skills and how they used them to navigate into positions of power, then go on to say what they did once in power to maintain it, to their downfall (if there is one) or how they continue to maintain their power currently. Then at the end to have had a few chapters dedicated to discussing the similarities between them all would have in my opinion painted a clearer picture and given more answers.
Also, there were quite a few notable Strongmen that were not discussed (or who had their absence acknowledged through the forward) which I think is an additional missed opportunity to discuss more thoroughly the strongman.
I do feel there were some interesting points made and some interesting theories postulated in regards to strongmen, but I feel personally as if this has missed the mark for me and I'm left wanting a more thorough investigation of the subject.

[Peacejanz · Rating 5 out of 5]

WOW! We read this book for a book group discussion in a group read for those seeking peacefulness in the USA. We are all alarmed at what the present US President is doing regarding the poor, the rich, and immigrants who seek freedom from fear. This is a scholarly book, written by a scholar who carefully documents every thing she states (unlike some in political power in the US today), At the beginning of the book, she lists the tyrants she describes and their actions, even the methods they used to grab power. The list starts with Idi Amin and ends with Donald J. Trump. I was absolutely shocked when I read the book. Almost all of these tyrants used the same method to get to power - including surrounding themselves with financially powerful men, repeated lies - again and again, never checking for the truth, taking from the poor to give more to the rich. D. Trump has followed many of the methods described in the book. I do not think that D. Trump read the book but his assistant Steven Miller can read very well and has been advising D. Trump for many years. This is a book of surprises for those of us who did not look at past dictators clearly. Many of them were supported by the USA, it breaks my heart to say. If you are concerned about what is happening in our country today, read this book. I was recently telling one of my doctors about the book and he told me that he had just finished reading it. It is a book for all of us - regardless of political beliefs. dictators exist, we just do not always recognize them. This is one of the two best books I have read this year. It is a book for eveyone. Good reading.

[Arup · Rating 3 out of 5]

A political, psychological and historical tour of the minds and worlds of the STRONGMEN of last century which has eventually submerged into today's counterparts. The course of history is volatile mostly,what is important is to be able to see it in context, Ben Ghiat has done that job with utmost sincerity and substantive clarity. Though it was mostly of three to five 'nationalite', but a lot of others have been analyzed shortly alongide their keeping up with the people rock hard, whether it comes to the question of being saved or redeemed to the point of no return. Got bored at some parts though for not being accustomed to those historical whereabouts, it was a good read all in all.

[Michael · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is hardly more than an excuse an excuse to try and bring Trump into a discussion comparing him to Hitler and Mussolini. A bad President does not translate into a Fascist dictator no matter how hard you try to shoe horn the idea into existence. A book that does not include Mao, Tito, Stalin, Ceaucescu, any of the Kim Dynasty or Castros into the discussion of Strongmen is just an extended Atlantic diatribe.

[Rick · Rating 3 out of 5]

A typology of authoritarians that traces consonances from Mussolini to Trump. Strongest on Mussolini, Pinochet, and Gaddafi. Riddled with obvious factual errors and bizarre, nonsequitur sentences. Rushed, perhaps, to appear shortly after the U.S. election.

[Susan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating information on the main characters, some of whom I was less familiar with like Franco and Pinochet. There was nothing new about Trump, but an interesting comparison of his many authoritarian characteristics with other strongmen.

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

F***, man.

[Beauregard Bottomley · Rating 4 out of 5]

Trump is not the evil that permeates American politics. It’s those who support him. As this book demonstrates the power must be enabled by the mob for the rot to fester and spread while the erstwhile leader thinks he controls the mob, while it is the mob that controls him.

It helps if the authoritarian has no empathy and is a narcissist. Under the Hegelian paradigm the narcissist has no sense of the other except as an object to be used and disposed of and thus develops no awareness of his own self because there is no self-reflection for a narcissist since it takes recognition of an other in order to realize their is a self (J. M. Bernstein in his freely available course on Hegel’s Phenomenology notes that fact about narcissists, the conscience needs an unconscious to be self-aware and a narcissist never reflects beyond the now or themself past the present moment). Mussolini’s wife mentioned that Mussolini portrayed himself as a lion, but lacked a real sense of self and courage.

Authoritarians mentioned in this book realize that we are in a post-modern world where there is no overriding authority determining truth and that truth for them and their enablers is the lie that their leader is stating for that day. Their meaning derives from their feelings and both the authoritarian and the mob need each other for validation.

This book suffered from age even though it is only two years old. Trump’s pernicious teleological (he pretends that the now is predetermined) manipulation of those around him, his followers, and his enablers are still polluting the discourse such that his poison is still polluting rational discourse. He still claims he won the election and his followers still blindly follow him as if the rational isn’t real, reality is what they are told and they embrace meaning to their meaningless life by willfully believing his absurdities.

The strongmen featured in this book reasons for creating chaos are at best enigmas and are unknowable except for the fact that they could wreak havoc and evil, so they did. Trump and his mob and sycophantic enablers need each other and this book would double in length from just focusing on Trump and his last two years of insanity and just as importantly the MAGA morons who still follow him and empower him. I can hardly wait for the inevitable melting of Trump and his MAGA moron followers in real-time.

[Marks54 · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a book by an NYU historian who does regular talking head work for the news channels. The book itself is a comparative case study of authoritarian political leaders, beginning with Mussolini and Hitler and covering developments up to just before the Russo-Ukrainian war in February 2022. The major stars are all there, although less attention is paid to military dictators (apart from Pinochet). The idea is to consider whether there are significant commonalities that the most notable “strongmen” share. This is the question across the sample, but also for three temporal subsets - the traditional fascists who arose after WWI; the military dictators who arose after WW2 during decolonization processes and the Cold War; and the modern right wing authoritarians who arose after the fall of Communism in 1989 and the early 1990s. How these leaders rise to power, maintain themselves, and fall from power is considered and compared. There are chapters on particular sets of issues such as propaganda, sexual behaviors, and corruption, among others.

I did not learn that much that was new on individual cases, although the materials on Berlusconi were new to me. The comparison and contrast was helpful. For example, it reinforced what has become increasingly clear since 2020, that the best model for assessing the former president’s behavior is to be gleaned from the behaviors of these other authoritarians and not from other US politicians. (This had been increasingly clear without the book, but the analysis the author provides is helpful.). The book is well written and easy to follow,

It is not clear to me how this analysis will age, in that the storylines on Trump and Putin, among others are very likely to be modified as the Ukrainian War plays out, the judicial system chugs along in the US, and the 2024 election approaches. The significance of the book lies in how modern authoritarians fit in with past ones. That strikes me as an evolving story at this time.

[Claude Demers · Rating 3 out of 5]

Incomplete and erratic

This book is certainly well intended and timely. We sorely need insights into how an abomination like Trump was possible. Unfortunately, this book is long on anecdotes, sometimes way off topic, and sadly short on structural analysis of the underlying social conditions that give rise to authoritarians. Crucially, the author does not devote any analysjs to some of the most egregious dictators of the past century (certainly not coincidentally, all leftists): Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Kim, Castro, Tito, Caesescu, Xi, Ortega. This is a huge hole in the analytical framework which fatally weakens the narrative and conclusions. Very disappointed.

[Rajiv Chopra · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book by Ruth Ben-Ghiat is excellent.
She divided the book into three broad sections: the rise, the 'tactics', and the fall.

There is no chapter on the conditions that cause autocrats to rise or fall. You, the reader, must draw the lessons from the chapters in the book.

When you read the book, there is a chance you will recognize your local autocrat. The book opens your eyes to the dangers these people pose. I hope we learn from the book and use the lessons for our benefit.

Well written, the book is relevant and a pleasure to read.

[Khris Sellin · Rating 4 out of 5]

A study of authoritarian figures, from Mussolini to Trump. We see the pattern repeating itself over and over again. How can people be so blind to it? Why do they follow these "leaders" so willingly, when everything about them screams stupidity, hatred, and danger? I will never understand.

[Ryan · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's a little disorganized, as a function of its ambition to tie all strongmen together and show their similarities and differences, but still a valuable read in today's age of crude men spouting populist slogans to get power and money.

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ruth Ben-Ghiat is a professor of history and Italian studies at NYU. She specializes in authoritarianism and more specifically Italian fascism. Strongmen is her book for general audiences. It is well-researched (end notes and bibliography take up 75 pages in my edition) and fairly easy to read. At the same time, it is very difficult to read in the year 2025.
In this book Ben-Ghiat covers what she feels are the defining traits of strongmen by discussing the similarities between them. She concentrates on Berlusconi, Franco, Gaddafi, Hitler, Mussolini, Pinochet, Putin, Seko, and yes, Donald Trump. She also brings in any number of others, Idi Amin, Jair Bolsonaro, Recep Erdogan, Modi, etc., etc.
This is an intense book, and she doesn’t avoid difficult topics, so if you are triggered by rape and torture, you should not read this book.
The book is divided into 3 parts and a conclusion: Getting to Power, Tools of Rule, and Losing Power. It is interesting to see her discussion of how each strongmen took power-it has generally changed over the years—and the means for spreading propaganda, such as newspapers and radio early on, then television, and finally the internet and social media. Of course, one thing that help preserve the rule of strongmen was the help of the American government and American business leaders.
The book didn’t give me much hope. Basically, it ended when Biden took office and there is no discussion regarding Donald Trump’s reelection, and I believe Ben-Ghiat held out hope for the US. I don’t know what she would believe now.
Anyway, this is an important book for our time, though a more accurate title would be Strongmen: Mussolini to Trump.

p. 23 of my edition “Mussolini prepared the script used by today’s authoritarians that casts the leader as a victim of his domestic enemies and of an international system that his cheated his country”
and
P. 24 [Mussolini] denounced negative e coverage of him, and Fascism as “criminal.”
And so much more

[Liam Ostermann · Rating 3 out of 5]

[small corrections made in March 2025. I have left my concluding remarks regarding the first Trump presidency stand because I think it was true at the time it was written. What happens now is anybody's guess but that doesn't change my views about this book.]

I really don't want to criticise this book or discourage anyone from reading it - there is lots that is very good in it but, like any relatively short book that covers such a wide time span and vastly different societies I couldn't help but feel that the result was reductive and, in the end, its attempts to provide a guide to how strongmen take over countries provides guidance that is only really of use after the event - once the strongman is in power and has destroyed/removed all dissent. It reminded me of all those books/TV programs about serial killers and pointing out all the signs of disturbed/disturbing behavior that they manifest when young. All true but all totally generic and impossible to use until after they have become a serial killer. Otherwise an awful lot people would be locked up for being less the the agreed 'normal' in their teenage years.

If you have read any amount of real history about the rise of Hitler and Mussolini, or of the Congo and post colonial African history or of that of South America anytime since the various countries achieved independence from Spain then I would imagine you would be as annoyed as me by the simplifications and reductionism in this book. There are so many variables, and differences between the various 'strongmen' and the countries they ruled and abused, one can't help feeling that trying to achieve overall themes is also a way of avoiding the responsibility and blame that countries like the UK and the USA have in Mexico, Central America and South America. Although the author is far to good to fall into any really simplistic explanations it would be far to easy to use this book to dismiss what has happened in, for example South America post WWII, as the inevitable result of authoritarian traits resulting from its Spanish colonial past - so very unenlightened compared to the good individualism of the North American Puritan tradition - rather then the result of deliberate policy decisions in Washington, for example.

That is pretty harsh - and I stress the book is not bad - but it is no more of a textbook 'how-to-be-a-dictator' then a real analysis of dictators - I don't think you can really learn anything useful about the past by reducing its complexities to a small checklist events and behavior.

Finally clearly the book is also a response to the first Trump presidency and, while I have no time for him and great problems with the actions of the US government, it is important to remember that in the end the democratic system in the USA proved surprisingly resilient. The politicians Trump most vociferously denounced in the closing days of his gruesome presidency were most often Republicans who were Trump supporters but who would not simply do what he said and defy all the evidence that he was asking them to do illegal things. Recognizing that strength is as important as challenging the lies that tried to overthrow the system.