KEY WORDS: DEMOCRACY, TYRANNY, STRATEGIES USED BY TYRANTS, FAMOUS HISTORICAL TYRANTS, DONALD TRUMP, TOCQUEVILLE, TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY, PROPAGANDA, EDUCATION, ROLE OF THE CITIZEN
America is formally a democracy, and a good case can be made that the country has been an effective democracy for most of its previous history as an independent nation. Yet, disturbing recent evidence suggests that we have once again entered an era in which concentrated wealth may be exercising overwhelming domination of national politics. We have been there before during what Mark Twain called the gilded age, but democracy largely survived and corrective measures were eventually implemented. Today, wealth distribution has again taken its almost inevitable course in the absence of adequate progressive taxation (Ref 1), and today we are confronted with an additional challenge to effective democracy, the challenge of classical tyranny.
In response to this, a struggle continues today (January, 2020) to protect American democracy from the authoritarian tendencies of a president who is now considered a tyrant by a significant fraction of the population. In light of numerous actions taken by this president, we examine here the means classical tyrants used to gain power and compare how closely these reflect those used by our current president, Donald Trump.
This article will explore the possibility that greater opportunities than ever before in American history may now exist for a shrewd narcissist to assume power, by combining ancient methods with modern communications technologies to gain autocratic power in a democratic society that has become vulnerable to some of its own ingenious technical innovations.
To demonstrate this, the next section provides four strategies that aspiring tyrants are likely to use to achieve autocratic power, followed by five examples of famous tyrants in western history who implemented them successfully. This is followed by examining how Donald Trump implemented the same strategies to achieve his goal of nearly absolute power to run the American federal government, followed by an assessment of some of his actions in office.
The strategies described below and used by several successful past tyrants to gain power are available to all politicians, including those in a democratic society. The difference is one of degree in how much the aspirant follows the rule of law and how much he clearly favors one part of the population over others. While not all tyrannies are equal in destructive effects during the time a particular tyrant is holding office, the essay concludes by noting the future risks to democracy in any society that allows a tyrannical government to persist.
Common Paths to Power Taken by Successful Tyrants
Most English language dictionaries define tyranny as "the arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power." That definition is used here. The five historical tyrants discussed here to illustrate how these strategies were applied are major figures in the history of Western civilization: Julius Caesar, Augustus Caesar, Lorenzo de Medici, Benito Mussolini, and Adolf Hitler.
I have chosen no female leaders to make these points. Will and Ariel Durant have written that Elizabeth the First was probably the greatest ruler England ever had, concluding that this resulted from Elizabeth's application of superior skill in understanding and influencing people over a broad political spectrum, not from tyrannical practices (Ref 2). Nevertheless, Catherine the Great and especially Cleopatra could be brutal if it served their purpose, and both were female leaders (Ref 3). If the majority of historical tyrants have been male, so have the great majority of political leaders to date.
Following are the four strategies all of the tyrants mentioned above used successfully to gain autocratic power:
1) The aspiring tyrant cultivates a number of wealthy and powerful individuals and offers them a quid pro quo in exchange for their support;
2) The aspiring tyrant identifies and cultivates a base among the larger general population. While this base will often consist mainly of decent people, it is useful if the members are relatively easy to fool (in particular, not too well educated);
3) The aspiring tyrant identifies one main, easy to articulate position that is of particular importance to this base and promises to address it to suit their concerns. The greater the passionate enthusiasm of the base for this position, the more the tyrant stands to benefit; and
4) The aspiring tyrant masters and employs an effective means of communication tailored to his base, to constantly rally their support for him.
Examining the five tyrants identified above, we can determine how well each applied these four strategies to achieve tyrannical power.
Julius Caesar is well known as the man who brought down the Roman Republic (Ref 4). Note how well he applied the above four strategies for establishing a tyranny. First, he cultivated the wealthy and powerful in Rome. He was one of them, but he also had a lot to offer the others. Rome itself was in an economically depressed state when Caesar approached the Rubicon after achieving his spectacular victories in Gaul. His pedigree, his demonstrated leadership, and the prospects for an improved economy in the recently expanded Roman realm made him popular with the unwieldy Senate of approximately 800 members, which largely accepted him. He clearly complied with strategy 1). How about 2)? Many of the plebs in Rome were unemployed because of the weak economy. Caesar's promise of a better economy under decisive leadership made them a natural base. Number 3)?
Confronting the widespread grievance due to unemployment was not only promised to his base but was then successfully addressed. Number 4)? Many historians have noted that Caesar was a highly effective public speaker, when that talent was especially critical for political success. While he was never declared Emperor, Caesar filled that role, and ever since 18th century historian Edward Gibbon, Caesar's ascendancy has been regarded as the beginning of the Roman Empire and the end of the Roman Republic.
Augustus Caesar (Originally Octavius) was the heir apparent if there was to be a single Roman Emperor, though that designation was not then yet applied (Ref 5). However, Mark Anthony also coveted this role, so Octavius had to be patient and skillful before being confirmed as Julius' successor. 1) Like Julius, he was already well connected with those whose wealth and influence could promote him for reciprocal benefits. 2) His base became the Roman plebs. His successes as a leader in defeating his political opponents and the continuing growth in Roman prosperity during the interim preceding his ascension to office convinced them he could deliver. 3) To consolidate this base, he promised improved economic prospects in a greater Roman Empire. 4) He communicated these plans well as an effective public speaker. When finally in office, he developed the grand strategy of the Roman Empire, established for it stable boundaries, systematically organized the famous Roman legions, and created the (often troublesome) Praetorian Guard (Ref 6). All of these achievements induced the Senate to declare him the first official Roman Emperor, at which time he gained the name Augustus.
Lorenzo de Medici was not the best banker among the de Medicis, but others in that family took care of the financial side (Ref 7). 1) In Lorenzo's case, the quid pro quo with other powerful families in Florence was their recognition that this charismatic figure offered good prospects for an improvement in the city states' economy, to make all boats rise to general satisfaction. 2) To consolidate a political base, Lorenzo promised the people of Florence improvement in their economic lives, as well as hedonistic festivals to assuage their private frustrations. By delivering on the latter promise he got into serious trouble with the religious fanatic Savonarola, but for most of his comparatively brief rule Lorenzo was extremely popular. 3) Renaissance Florence always had enemies, like all Italian city states of that era, and Lorenzo shrewdly used this threat to rally his base, most of the city's population, to patriotism. 4) Scholars have noted that Lorenzo was generally accessible to the people and communicated well with them directly. In doing this, he was clever enough to maintain the fiction of a Florentine Republic, while history shows that he almost succeeded in destroying it.
Benito Mussolini appears in the outrageous and perceptive Fellini film Amercord as a bombastic dictator who fooled enough people to be almost worshiped by many in the town where some say the famous director grew up (Ref 8). Il Duce seems to have followed the four steps an aspiring tyrant should take to maximize the odds for becoming successful: 1) He endeared himself with the wealthy industrialists of northern Italy and gained their financial backing by supporting development of major armaments. 2) He established a base in the general population by emphasizing that the plans articulated above would provide more jobs, and by arguing for a greater Italy. 3) While there was no major foreign enemy upon whom Mussolini focused in his early quest for power, he energized his base by insisting on Italy's right to colonies in Africa for economic exploitation and for Italian dominance in the Mediterranean, which he referred to as Mare Nostrum (Our Sea). 4) Mussolini was generally recognized as an effective public speaker, even by Hitler whose speeches were extremely effective with his own base.
Adolf Hitler is today often considered the most repulsive human being of all time for his effort to exterminate entire communities of people, particularly the Jews but not restricted to them entirely (Ref 9). Yet, Hitler was highly successful in his effort to become a powerful tyrant. It is therefore useful to explore how well Der Fuhrer achieved his dictatorial position by applying the four strategies that successful aspirants to such powers often follow. 1) Hitler gained support from many wealthy German industrialists who stood to gain from the major rearmament he had in mind from the beginning. 2) By emphasizing the humiliation to which Germany was subjected in the Treaty of Versailles and by promising jobs to depression-starved workers, he gained a large base of angry middle and working class Germans. 3) Hitler asserted a German need for more land (Lebensraum) that could only come from large areas to the East. His base were pleased with this prospect. 4) Hitler scores high on communication skills, not only as a highly effective speaker, but also for capitalizing on a relatively new medium for reaching large numbers of remote listeners. His speaking skills were improved by taking lessons from a professional actor, while the radio was emerging as a major medium when Hitler sought dictatorial powers. He became one of the most hypnotic speakers in history.
The Case of Donald Trump
We begin by showing how Trump campaigned, following the four strategies that the five autocrats already discussed appear to have used. We then review Trump's presidency to date, asking if he has governed as a tyrant in the classical mode and conclude by assessing if his efforts seem directed mainly to the general welfare or toward himself and family for private gain (Ref 10).
Note how well Trump's campaign conforms to the tactics the five already discussed employed. 1) While claiming in the 2016 Republican campaign that he was not dependent on other sources of funding for his candidacy (never established along with other personal financial information), Trump obviously raised a considerable amount from many sources. The approximately $150,000,000 allegedly used for his inauguration ceremonies has never been entirely accounted for. It would be naive to assume there was no quid quo pro with many large corporations and wealthy individuals willing to support his campaign, from which many benefited greatly. 2) Trump clearly identified a base from the start. Instead of trying to appeal to the majority of the American population, which rejected him in the popular vote, he identified a base he knew would support his key political position with enthusiasm: white male working Americans and through them many of their wives, a people who felt threatened that their vision of a white majority America was endangered by diverse others, including academic experts with their allegedly un-American global outlook. 3) The issue that energized this base perfectly was THE WALL. Arguing ferociously with all opponents during the campaign and later, Trump insisted that a large wall across the entire US-Mexico border must be built. 4) Trump, like Hitler, used a modern communications medium, Internet Twitter, to transmit simplistic messages, often employing techniques he had learned as a television entertainer. All of this was employed during his 2016 campaign. We conclude that Trump entered the race for the White House applying the same four strategies common to the five famous tyrants already examined.
We now ask if Trump has governed as an actual tyrant.
The best example is THE WALL. When Trump failed after multiple attempts to get the resources for a major extension of this barrier, he ignored the Constitutional role of Congress and by executive fiat transferred the funds appropriated by Congress for diverse military projects to his Wall. He has now done that on two separate occasions.
Beyond this, in violation of all precedent, he organized an expensive Fourth of July celebration at the Lincoln Memorial that featured, in addition to himself, a display of modern military hardware, thus finally getting a semblance of the great military parade on Pennsylvania Avenue he wanted from the start but was canceled for fear the heavy tanks would crack the pavement. Envy of other more dramatic military parades dear to many foreign leaders, some of them dictators, is even more disturbing. These decisions suggest a leader more interested in achieving his goals by fiat and self promoting showmanship than through established legal processes and honoring other national achievements. All these actions are marks of a tyrant.
Now consider whether Trump has been "a good tyrant for America, or a bad one" during his tenure so far.
Has this president had the welfare of the entire American people in mind, instead of clearly favoring one sector? To what extent have dissimulation and outright lying played a role in his communications during his tenure in office? Is there evidence that he has used his office to advance his own and his family's interests during this presidency?
Trump certainly has shown bias for his base, as opposed to equal concern for the people at large. The most visible evidence for this is his rallies, which from the many signs on display show clearly how those attending have bought his message. Equally interesting is his constant use of rallies to reach this base. Since the days of Hitler, the term rally has taken on the ominous meaning of assembling and addressing only those who agree and are in strident opposition to those who oppose. We can question whether rallies are the best way to promote political agendas in a democracy. It was reported during the campaign that Trump, famous for reading little, had a copy of Hitler's "My New Order" in his bedside cabinet (Ref 11). This book contained speeches by the German dictator. Trump's former wife Ivana claimed that he read some of these speeches in an article that appeared in a 1990 issue of Vanity Fair, though Trump has denied this. Is it possible that Trump absorbed some political suggestions from its author?
What about other major decisions he has made that affect the American people directly and currently? One clear example demonstrates how this self-proclaimed genius presumes to think, the issue of climate change. Assuming greater insight than almost the entire scientific community, Trump has not only ignored their warnings and many recent climate disasters, he has even acted to cancel American participation in the well-researched Paris Agreement that offered hope for an international effort to address this serious global problem. Meanwhile, California burns and other states flood.
What about lying? If the author of the fact-finding columns in The Washington Post is correct, Trump has been found guilty of thousands of erroneous statements, which are often identified simply as lies. He is famous for making statements and then backing off them, but by then the damage has often been done, sometimes to himself. He seems to speak mainly for immediate effect and not to convey valid information.
Finally, there is little doubt that Trump is obsessed with protecting and increasing his own wealth, which is not illegal in itself, but also in revealing as little about it as possible, which is more questionable for an American president. The latter is contrary to precedent and involves highly questionable actions such as refusing to release his tax records. Many authorities have noted that it is illegal for a sitting president to enrich himself through his office while in it. Given Trump's passion for hiding his tax records and his many efforts to direct government officials and foreign dignitaries to or near to his own properties, there is a strong suggestion that this president is trying to enrich himself at public expense. However these legal issues are resolved, they all suggest serious ethical violations.
President Trump's attempts to dictate to all major government departments has already made clear that he satisfies the definition of a tyrant. To this can now be added that the measures he has implemented may not be in the general interest of the majority of American citizens. Furthermore, recent testimony during a Congressional investigation has revealed attempts to use a foreign government to investigate a potential political opponent, undermining the integrity of a future American presidential election.
The conclusion is inevitable. Unlike some tyrants who arguably did at least as much good as harm during their reign but in company with others whose net effect was clearly negative in their own time, Trump seems likely to go down in history as a tyrant who did far more harm than good to his country during his time in office.
An interesting book on Trump is an assembly of essays written primarily by members of the psychiatric community, edited by Bandy Lee, M.D., M. Div. and titled The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump. Dr. Lee was the organizer of the "Yale Duty to Warn Conference" that addressed the current president's mental state ( Ref 12). The noun that appears most often in describing that state in these articles is narcissist, defined as one whose mental orientation is centered on oneself. That would seem to accord with the behavior of a person who is constantly promoting his own family and business interests in office, while being very secretive about his dealings with others, whether personal or financial.
Concluding Discussion
Moving beyond Trump and returning to the title of this essay, The Anatomy of Tyranny, we note again that the greatest harm tyranny may do to a society is to establish a practice that may become permanently established, even if a given tyrant - typically an initial one - proves productive to the general welfare. The best case on record of this is what occurred in Rome following the successful administrations of the productive tyrants, Julius and Augustus Caesar. For one century following the death of Augustus, the next series of Emperors were among the worst rulers in history. Rome only survived because of the excellent provisions introduced by Augustus, in particular the early strength of the Rome centered imperial economy and the military system that he created, both ushering in the famous Pax Romana. For a highly regarded assessment of these developments and the subsequent consequences, see Gibbon (Ref 13).
Several notable European thinkers have shown us how easily a propensity for tyranny can arise in a democratic society. The most famous analysis of this is by Alexis de Tocqueville, who introduced the relevant concept, "the tyranny of the majority" (Ref 14). Tocqueville did not mean the tyranny exercised by the tyrant, but the tyranny that results when an aspiring tyrant in a democratic society capitalizes on the ignorance of enough voters to fool them into thinking he is the leader who will lead them into prosperity and prominence, making them and their society "great again." This base then becomes the source of the tyranny.
All doubt about Tocqueville's meaning and his intent vanish when the work of a contemporary French scholar, Lucien Jaume, quotes Tocqueville from a letter written to a friend who had questioned the author's cautious enthusiasm for democracy in his greatest work, Democracy in America, (Ref 15). In a single sentence that is translated into English Tocqueville answers, "My purpose in writing The Democracy was to show democracy to itself, in order that it might know itself and correct itself."
The argument gathers strength in the work of another French thinker, Jacques Ellul, who made a detailed study of modern propaganda in the mid-twentieth century, condensed into a book on the subject that noted the techniques still used today to influence people's thought, but with increasingly sophisticated technology (Ref 16). Among the principles he reviews are: 1) Say the same things over and over to drum them into people's heads. 2) Know your audience, and reach for those you can fool most easily. Ellul published in the mid-twentieth century and was probably familiar with the brilliant propaganda Josef Goebbels crafted for Hitler, effective with some even in France. In light of this second recommendation, we might note the importance of education in detecting propaganda.
In conclusion, it is worth noting that Tocqueville was impressed by observing the ubiquity of newspapers in early America during his famous visit here, often finding copies even on what was then the frontier that he visited during a severe winter. He also encountered political interest and activity everywhere (Ref 17).
On a visit I made years ago to the Museum of the Constitution in Philadelphia, the program started with an impressive brief summary of what the museum was opened to convey. The speaker ended his remarks with two remarkable sentences I will not forget. "There is one role in the United States that stands above that of the president of this country. That is the role of the citizen."
That role will soon be tested again.
References Some of the works referenced are articles in the Encyclopedia Britannica (1959 edition.) These are identified as EB, Vol. number, article on.
1) Piketty, Thomas; Capital in the Twenty-First Century; translated by Arthur Goldhammer; Belknap Press, Harvard University, 2014.
2) Durant, Will and Ariel; The Age of Reason Begins, Volume 7 of The History of Mankind: Simon and Schuster, New York, 1961.
3) EB, Vol 5; articles on Catherine the Great and Cleopatra. EB, Vol 2, article on Mark Antony for more on Cleopatra.
4) EB, Vol 4; article on Julius Caesar
5) EB, Vol 2: article on Augustus Caesar
6) Luttwak, Edward N.; The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire - From the First Century A.D. to the Third; The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore and London, 1976.
7) EB, Vol 15: Article on the Medicis
8) Smith, Dennis Mack; Mussolini- A Biography; Vintage Book, New York, 1982.
9) Hitler, Adolf; Mein Kampf; American Annotated Translation, 1939 Copyright by Houghton Mifflin. 1939, Published by Reynal and Hitchcock, New York, 1940.
Shirer, William L.; The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich - A History of Nazi Germany; Simon and Shuster, New York, 1960. Written by a talented journalist who lived under the Third Reich before exchange in 1941.
Speer, Albert; Inside the Third Reich; The Macmillan Co. New York, 1970.
Sereny, Gitta; Albert Speer - His Battle with the Truth; Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1995. The author's long interviews with Speer suggest that he probably knew of the Holocaust, but escaped from accusation. A valuable source on Hitler because of what Speer revealed as Nazi Armaments Minister during World War II.
10) This is a Reference to the American Press, not all of which has been critical of President Trump. Because he is current, time may be lacking for in depth scholarly studies. Generally critical have been The New York Times and The Washington Post. More nuanced and sometimes supportive has been The Wall Street Journal. Many articles in the printed and electronic media give a broad spectrum of views, indicating strong political polarization in America today.
12) Lee, Bandy, M.D., M. Div.; The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump - 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President; Thomas Dunne Books, St. Martin's Press, New York, 2017.
13) Gibbon, Edward; The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Part I, Chapters 1-4;in Great Books of the Western World, Vol 40, EB Publisher, Chicago, 1952. Gibbon is outstanding for noting the corrupting effects of tyrannical government, even if initially successful. A pity the great historian had no time to write The Rise and Fall of the Roman Republic, for its possible relevance today.
14) Tocqueville, Alexis; Democracy in America, Part I, Chapters 7,8, and 9; George Lawrence translation, Harper and Row, New York, 1966, Perennial Library Edition, 1988. Chapters 7 and 8 define the dangers of "the tyranny of the majority." Chapter 9 describes why the early United States was well situated to avoid this. Today?
15) Jaume, Lucien; Tocqueville - The Aristocratic Sources of Liberty; Arthur Goldhammer translation; Princeton University Press, 2013.
16) Ellul, Jacques; Propaganda; Copyright, Alfred A. Knopf, Vintage Books Edition, 1975.
17) Brogan, Hugh: Alex de Tocqueville - A Life; Yale University Press, New Haven, 2006. A fine account of Tocqueville's entire life, providing much personal/interpersonal context for his work.