Quo's Reviews > How Democracies Die: What History Reveals About Our Future
How Democracies Die: What History Reveals About Our Future
by
by
Quo's review
bookshelves: american-history, political-struggle, societal-struggle, interpersonal-dynamics
Aug 30, 2025
bookshelves: american-history, political-struggle, societal-struggle, interpersonal-dynamics
While How Democracies Die is now 7 years old, its focus remains sufficiently broad, continuing to be relevant, particularly given its rather global focus on what the quoted Larry Diamond has termed, a "period of democratic recession", also stating that "democracy peaked in 2005".

Authors Steven Levitsky & Daniel Ziblatt ask: "Are we living amidst the decline & fall of one of the world's oldest democracies?" The question was raised because a man with no experience in public office, little commitment to constitutional rights & clear authoritarian tendencies was elected president in 2016, not foreseeing that a person with such obvious liabilities could ever be reelected.
They advance the Criteria for an Autocrat: 1) Refusal to accept the legitimacy of an election; 2) Vilification of his opponents; 3) Encouragement of violence; and 4) Willingness to curtail civil liberties, the media and virtually anyone in opposition. Clearly, Donald Trump & autocrats in Turkey, Hungary, India & elsewhere met those criteria in 2018 as the book went to press.
It is commented that for generations "Americans have retained great faith in their constitution as the centerpiece of their belief in America as a beacon of hope, perhaps to the world."
There are however considerable liabilities with a document that is only 4 pages in length, contains few safeguards & can be interpreted in multiple ways. An example is the document's failure to define the limits of executive orders or the president's ability to act unilaterally.

Historically, American democracy has remained secure due to a strong middle class, America's inherent wealth, a vibrant civil society & strong democratic norms. However, the authors point out that "citizens are often slow to realize that their democracy is being dismantled."
Traditionally, America's two most important norms have been mutual toleration & institutional forbearance, including a spirit of general bipartisan cooperation. In spite of that, recent polarization has served to destroy democratic norms, with many in one party viewing the other party as an existential threat to American values & fewer independent voters.
By 2000, neither party continued to function as an ideological "big tent", with liberal Republicans & conservative Democrats both fleeing their parties. While Democrats have become more diverse, Republicans have remained fairly homogeneous, focused on race & religion, especially as regards white, working class, Christian conservatives.
In part, this is because Black enfranchisement & immigration have become such all-defining criteria within the two parties. As the country has become increasingly diverse, moving from 10% non-white in 1950 to 40+% non-white in 2020, these issues have transformed both parties.
Levitsky & Ziblatt declare that...
I close with a quote not from authors Levitsky & Ziblatt but from Hannah Arendt, an author who spoke & wrote about autocratic rule:
*Within my review is a photo image of authors Steven Levitsky & Daniel Ziblatt + 2 New Yorker magazine covers by Barry Blitt portraying America in the Age of Trump.

Authors Steven Levitsky & Daniel Ziblatt ask: "Are we living amidst the decline & fall of one of the world's oldest democracies?" The question was raised because a man with no experience in public office, little commitment to constitutional rights & clear authoritarian tendencies was elected president in 2016, not foreseeing that a person with such obvious liabilities could ever be reelected.
They advance the Criteria for an Autocrat: 1) Refusal to accept the legitimacy of an election; 2) Vilification of his opponents; 3) Encouragement of violence; and 4) Willingness to curtail civil liberties, the media and virtually anyone in opposition. Clearly, Donald Trump & autocrats in Turkey, Hungary, India & elsewhere met those criteria in 2018 as the book went to press.
It is commented that for generations "Americans have retained great faith in their constitution as the centerpiece of their belief in America as a beacon of hope, perhaps to the world."
There are however considerable liabilities with a document that is only 4 pages in length, contains few safeguards & can be interpreted in multiple ways. An example is the document's failure to define the limits of executive orders or the president's ability to act unilaterally.

Historically, American democracy has remained secure due to a strong middle class, America's inherent wealth, a vibrant civil society & strong democratic norms. However, the authors point out that "citizens are often slow to realize that their democracy is being dismantled."
Traditionally, America's two most important norms have been mutual toleration & institutional forbearance, including a spirit of general bipartisan cooperation. In spite of that, recent polarization has served to destroy democratic norms, with many in one party viewing the other party as an existential threat to American values & fewer independent voters.
By 2000, neither party continued to function as an ideological "big tent", with liberal Republicans & conservative Democrats both fleeing their parties. While Democrats have become more diverse, Republicans have remained fairly homogeneous, focused on race & religion, especially as regards white, working class, Christian conservatives.
In part, this is because Black enfranchisement & immigration have become such all-defining criteria within the two parties. As the country has become increasingly diverse, moving from 10% non-white in 1950 to 40+% non-white in 2020, these issues have transformed both parties.Levitsky & Ziblatt declare that...
Even if Trump doesn't dismantle democratic institutions, his norm-breaking is almost certain to corrode them. Tactics once considered abhorrent & inadmissible--lying, cheating, bullying--are now part of a politician's toolkit. Trump has lied with impunity and what was once seen as abnormal is now considered the norm.Ultimately, the authors caution against the Democrats copying Republican strategy but instead should "work to restore the norms of mutual toleration & forbearance." They should endeavor to "preserve rather than violate democratic norms, or America may elect a president even worse than Trump".
I close with a quote not from authors Levitsky & Ziblatt but from Hannah Arendt, an author who spoke & wrote about autocratic rule:
This constant lying is not aimed at making the people believe a lie but at ensuring that no one believes anything anymore. A people that can no longer distinguish between truth & lies cannot distinguish between good & evil. They become completely subjected to the rule of lies, deprived of the power to think & to judge. With such a people, you can do whatever you want.Note: There is much online with Harvard Professors Levitsky & Ziblatt updating their thoughts on Trump 2.0 and the further erosion of American democratic ideals. Nonetheless, I found How Democracies Die (2018) well worth reading.
*Within my review is a photo image of authors Steven Levitsky & Daniel Ziblatt + 2 New Yorker magazine covers by Barry Blitt portraying America in the Age of Trump.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
How Democracies Die.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
August 26, 2025
–
Started Reading
August 26, 2025
– Shelved
August 30, 2025
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-26 of 26 (26 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Bob
(new)
Sep 04, 2025 07:14PM
Good review, Bill. Even though you've put it all pretty much down as it is, probably the situation is worse. I feel very pessimistic. If trump should die in office, he will be succeeded be someone worse, not necessarily J.D. Vance. Erosion is certainly the word I would apply.
reply
|
flag
Fantastic review Bill! The quote from Hannah Arendt is particular insightful. We are indeed living in very dark times.
Bob, Ostep & Peter: Thanks for your comments & for reading my review of How Democracies Die. In addition to the comments within my review, there are a great many salient points from the book that might have been added. One, near the book's end suggests, somewhat hopefully, that "no single leader can end a democracy and no single leader can rescue one either. Democracy is a shared enterprise & depends on all of us." Each of us needs to remain vigilant and oppose potential tyranny, as best we can. Bill
And things are just getting worse since this book was published.As others said, that is an excellent quote from Hannah Arendt
Mikey: Thanks for your comment. Traditionally, it was felt that America had too many safeguards to allow an autocrat to change the face of the country. That said, Sinclair Lewis's 1935 novel, It Can't Happen Here now seems like a prescient work anticipating the likes of Trump & his MAGA forces. There was to be an MGM film of the book but the studio eventually backed off.These are indeed perilous times & with each passing day, we in the United States come to realize more fully what may be in store for a country that has felt itself secure from dictatorial rule. Bill
Bill, I agree with what you said, but one (82 year old) voice is scarcely enough. And this is a ruler who doesn't give a shit about what I or anyone else thinks. Only some major economic or climatic crisis will shake his rule. I have taken part in several demos, but unlike previous ones against police brutality or against the Vietnam War, I know that such demos have no effect if we have a fuhrer instead of a president. If he lives, I don't think trump will allow another election.
Bob, I think a climate crisis is just around the corner (by the way, it’s already arrived in Australia!). But as you no doubt know: every country gets the government it deserved. As you say, your current president most certainly won’t allow a next democratic election if he’s given his way. It’s up to you now, voters in the U. S. A.!
Bob/Peter: There are indeed multiple indications that Donald Trump will put in place a pretext to prevent a presidential election in 2028, continuing to allege that only he can save America. However, it is difficult to believe that the majority of Americans, some Republicans among them, would stand for such a disruption of America's history of peaceful transitions by a figure who has little regard for democracy or the American constitution & who conducts the presidency as if he were still presiding over a game show.
Levitsky & Ziblatt are correct in suggesting that "no single leader can end a democracy and no single leader can rescue one either." We should never misjudge the will of the American people to preserve democratic values in a time of crisis.
Thanks Linda. While impressed with the book's commentary by Levitsky & Ziblatt, I remembered Hannah Arendt's work on totalitarianism & autocratic rule, deciding to allow her the last word as it were. Bill
Quo, this is a good review and summary of what to expect of the book. I do disagree with a few of your points in the discussion. In particular, I no longer find it difficult to believe that a majority of Americans would stand for a complete dismantling of democracy. If Trumpism/MAGA is going to come to an end, it will be a result of pettiness, in-fighting, incompetence, unpredictable public mania or outrage over something like Epstein, or the death of Trump followed by a series of schisms within the post-Trump cult. It will not come about due to any general public awakening, or by any elected persons, least of all Republicans, growing a spine.Now, a comment I would address to the authors of the book (not to you, Quo, as I'm not sure where you stand on this): I no longer want to hear of the "problem" of polarization. If there are two political poles today, they are fascism and democracy. It is not incumbent upon the supporters of democracy to compromise, seek a middle ground, restore "bipartisanship," or anything of the sort. The ONLY way forward, if we are to retain democracy, is the total defeat of fascism. The best way to achieve that would be the ousting (hopefully through a democratic election!) of every politician who has expressed any degree of support for Trump or acted as an apologist for Trumpism. Ideally that would mean every Republican and a fair number of conservative Democrats, from the president down to the level of local library board member. But, more realistically, if we could knock out the most extreme 20% to 25% of elected Republicans, democracy might just stand a chance. Maybe.
Hello "Z"., Thanks for your comments & for reading my review. Your points are well-taken but almost everything I've read suggests that many of those who voted for Bush#2 later voted for Barack Obama, twice. And a fair number who are on record as having supported Obama voted at least once for Trump. People vote for a complex mix of reasons and even if they are declared Republicans or Democrats, many act independently, if not predictably.When I think of bipartisanship, I always remember Lyndon Johnson's prowess in getting the Voting Rights Act passed with the help of some conservative Republicans like Everett Dirksen of Illinois. It took some of LBJ's best bourbon + his consummate skill as a politician but he convinced Dirksen that signing the bill was the right thing to do, knowing that if a conservative like Dirksen signed on, many others would follow. When he had the needed votes, LBJ made sure that Dirksen was the first to sign the new bill.
This is before your time but when LBJ ran in place of the murdered JFK against Barry Goldwater, commercials show some of Goldwater's unflinching words along with the image of an atomic detonation. The Democrats should have placed the image of Donald Trump along with the images of insurrectionists on Jan. 6th, 2021 and thus made a statement linking the two. For whatever reason, the folks running Harris's campaign apparently did not want to portray her as an overly aggressive woman. (These were the same managers who thought that Biden could still win even after his disastrous debate performance & yet they retained their jobs. If the the Harris who took on Trump in the debate, humiliating the MAGA-man had come on strong, I think she might have won.
Trump is used to being a bully but doesn't do well when someone stands up to him, which is why he fires even those he's hired if they disagree with him. But in an election, you can't fire the opposing candidate. As Churchill said of Hitler & the thugs who surrounded him: "they show full well the truth of the saying that the Hun is always either at your throat, or at your boots."
Times are definitely different today but when Sen. Joseph McCarthy began to lose face with his fellow senators & the American people, his political demise was humiliating & swift. And just for the record, McCarthy's chief legal counsel was Ray Cohn, the very same fellow who mentored a young guy named Donald Trump.
So much of electioneering is about marketing and creating brand-loyalty, something the Democrats don't seem to do very well. But then, a fellow named Obama gained the presidency twice by landslides, in spite of his unusual name & the fact that he was only "half-white" as people like Sarah Palin put it. As it turned out, President Obama was not a great politician, lacking what LBJ & others (including Bill Clinton) were able to bring to the presidency.
I think that Americans will continue to rally, not just in the streets in opposition to Trump-style autocracy but in favor of the democratic spirit that has nurtured this country for 250 years, in spite of the Supreme Court & the billionaires who flock to Trump's version of the GOP. Lastly, we have to remember that more Americans failed to vote in 2024 than voted for Trump. Thanks for listening.... Bill
Great review of a spot-on topic Bill. Frightening times. It's appalling to see the disarray of the Dems compared to the lock-step, strategically focused GOP. And yet were Trump to run against Obama in 2028 I think Obama would win. (Of course neither can run again.) So who might that Dem savior be? I don't see that person out there yet.
Jim: Thanks for your comments. I think that the U.S. is in considerable danger under Trump, as well as those who fear him sufficiently to shout "Ja" to everything he decrees. My worry, is the present state of unreality in America, wherein folks who perpetrated an insurrection on 1/6/21 are now seen as patriots & those who prosecuted them, as traitors. And sad as it is to have yet another gun-based political assassination, Kirk's ravings were indeed anti-American & anti-democratic. Absent a MAGA anthem in his name, the right-wing embrace of the man is reminiscent of the Nazi beatification of Horst Wessels. As to 2028, Trump may find a way to annul the election & I doubt that the GOP would try to block him. Meanwhile, I like Cory Booker but doubt that the country that twice elected Obama by landslides is ready for someone who resembles Obama even at a distance, though I think that Booker is actually a better politician.
If the Democrats can form a coalition with disaffected Republicans & independents, while doing a better job of reaching out to working class Americans, a young, centrist Democrat from a border state, like Andy Beshear, may be able to win in 2028, assuming that he or anyone prevails in the primaries. In the meantime, keep reading & reviewing! Bill
Thank you for sharing this useful summary. It sounds as if it makes many of the same points as Timothy Snyder's On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century, but in far more depth.
Cecily: Thanks for reading my review. I haven't read Synder's 2017 book On Tryranny: 20 Lessons from the 20th Century but it actually has a somewhat higher G/R rating and considerably more reviews at the site than the 2018 book by Harvard professors, Levitsky & Ziblatt.As commentator H.L. Mencken put it quite some time ago:
On some great & glorious day, the plain folks of this land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by an outright moron.But long before Mencken's time, Thomas Jefferson was sufficiently prescient to warn:
Mankind soon learn to make interested uses of every right and power which they possess, or may assume. The public money and public liberty, intended to have been deposited with three branches of magistracy, but found inadvertently to be in the hands of one only, will soon be discovered to be sources of wealth and dominion to those who hold them.To be sure, Trump is no fan of either democracy or free speech. However, I do retain some faith in the notion that more Americans failed to vote in 2024 than voted for Donald Trump, though no-shows at the ballot box isn't just a recent phenomenon in the United States. What neither Jefferson nor Mencken foresaw was an American president who seemed to hold such sway on the entire planet.
They [the assembly] should look forward to a time, and that not a distant one, when a corruption in this, as in the country from which we derive our origin, will have seized the heads of government, and be spread by them through the body of the people; when they will purchase the voices of the people, and make them pay the price.
Human nature is the same on every side of the Atlantic, and will be alike influenced by the same causes. The time to guard against corruption and tyranny, is before they shall have gotten hold of us. It is better to keep the wolf out of the fold, than to trust to drawing his teeth and talons after he shall have entered.
Stunningly, Trump managed to convince a majority of Americans who voted in Nov. 2024 that he was both a martyr and a messiah. But what continues to be truly amazing is the spinelessness of the Republican Party in America, fearful of Trump's ever increasing reach in upending the career of anyone who opposes him and making loyalty to Trump & the MAGA-brand more important than loyalty to country. Bill
Wise words, Bill. Meanwhile, last night, Trump's joy at a state banquet at Windsor Castle was impossible to avoid on the UK news.
Sounds like an interesting read. I like reading about views contrarian to mine. Why read all that preaching to the choir stuff.Your review actually confirms the problem. Yo sound well read, but the last few years have shown those “Trump lies”. Are now being discredited. . Thus belief in lies flows both ways.
"Trump lies discredited"? Trump has famously stated that if you tell a lie often enough, it becomes the truth. However, with most of his followers, (which of course doesn't include many of those he hired & worked with in his first administration who now vilify both the man & his methods), telling a lie only only once works quite well!
Cecily: Yes, I was rather stunned at the ability of an eternal con-man to hold British royalty in his sway, in part because they fear his tariffs. Some time ago, there were those in Great Britain, not just Oswald Mosley & his followers, who also suggested that Adolf Hitler had something important to offer. Trump is nothing if not a keen marketer, though I prefer to think of his brand of marketing as hucksterism, which usually comes at the point of a sword. There is little to distinguish the present American president from Buzz Windrip in the Sinclair Lewis 1935 novel, It Can't Happen Here. Sadly, it has happened here!
Quo wrote: "Cecily: Yes, I was rather stunned at the ability of an eternal con-man to hold British royalty in his sway, in part because they fear his tariffs...."I'm not sure he held the royals in his sway: they are supposed to be (and probably like to be) outside and above politics, but the government and people fear the consequences of tariffs.
It can be dispiriting to be called a Communist, Marxist, Antifa, an America-hater & other epithets by the duly-elected president of one's country & his ever-loyal cheering squad. However, while peacefully marching in solidarity with millions of other Americans on Oct. 18th, 2025, under the banner of No Kings Since 1776, one feels uplifted & in harmony with what America has represented for 250 years, in spite of the noxious threat of Trumpism. Marchers of all ages & ethnic backgrounds in 250 American towns & cities chanted: "This is what democracy looks like!" Amen to that thought.
I strongly feel your comment on Charlie Kirk is way off base.I didn’t really know he he was, so i randomly googled and watched some of his debates that occurred on college campuses. It was free and open debate, and Kirk showed courtesy to his opponents and did not demean them in any way that I could see. That, and little pink houses are what America is all about.
Free and open, and respectful debate.
Who is the fascist here, Kirk or the gunmen and his supporters?
FDR was in power for nearly 4 terms.
The case could just as easily be made that he was fascist, as Trump. Samuel Pettengill the former Democrat Congressman from Indiana makes an excellent case for just that, in his book Smokescreen.
I do think Beshear of KY could be someone to keep an eye on for the Dems, they need to mainstream it a bit, IMO. Indiana has a 3rd gen Bayh now, they all have that Kennedy mane.
@Davy To be clear, Kirk should not have been murdered. Violence is not the answer. At the same time, you may want to do a little more research on this man. He was incredibly regressive and hateful.Kirk on black women, like Ketanji Brown Jackson (keep in mind she's a graduate of Harvard and he only made it through high school): "You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken seriously” without affirmative action. You had to steal a white person’s slot.”
Kirk on Martin Luther King, Jr.: "MLK was awful. He's not a good person."
Kirk on the Civil Rights Act: "A huge mistake."
Kirk on black people in positions like the pilot of an airplane: "If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, ‘Boy, I hope he’s qualified.’”
Kirk on Islam: "Islam is the sword the Left is using to slit the throat of America.”
Kirk on stoning gay people to death, per the Bible: “God’s perfect law when it comes to sexual matters.”
Kirk on the other political party: "Democrats stand for everything God hates."
Kirk on Covid mask mandates and vaccine requirements: “medical apartheid."
There are many others. I won't even touch the comparison of Trump, who I'm sure will be reviled by history as one of America's worst presidents, to FDR, one of the best.
Davy/Ostep: Of course, the late Mr. Kirk also spoke out against empathy, the sort invoked by Pope Leo & the late Pope Francis, as well as almost every pastor/rabbi/imam of almost every religious congregation on the planet. Kirk put it thusly: I can’t stand the word "empathy", actually. I think empathy is a made-up, New Age term that does a lot of damage, but it is very effective when it comes to politics. (He accused President Clinton of being guilty of the New Age sin of empathy.)And then there was Kirk's feeling about the value of a college education, suggesting that it was a complete waste of time & money to attend a college or university. This comes from someone who became a community college drop-out after one term.
In spite of the late Mr. Kirk's vile comments about those who just happened to be different from him, those not having had the good sense to have chosen white parents as an example, putting him in great company with Trump, his murder is just another chapter in the American plague of gun violence. We have lost politicians, including multiple presidents as a result of America's addiction to guns of all sorts. Interestingly, the NRA & with it the GOP in its entirety, is even against the banning of untraceable "ghost guns", alleging that such instruments of mass destruction, should be legal for anyone capable of concocting one. One wonders what the founding Fathers might have said to such continuing madness.


