today's autocracies are more sophisticated, relying on complex networks that blend financial corruption, surveillance technologies, and global influence.

these regimes are not isolated, but are connected to other autocratic states, and even to businesses and institutions in democratic countries.

they collaborate through deals, not ideals, sharing resources to maintain power and wealth, while repressing their citizens.

in this chapter, you'll learn how these modern autocracies operate behind the scenes, using corruption as a tool of power, controlling narratives through advanced technology, and reshaping global norms to suit their interests.

understanding these strategies is crucial for anyone concerned about the future of democracy and the growing influence of authoritarian regimes in today's interconnected world.

the greed that binds democracies to autocracies in 1967, an unusual meeting took place at a hunting lodge near vienna.

the greed that binds democracies to autocracies#

austrian and west german industrialists, along with soviet officials, gathered to discuss a new opportunity—exporting siberian gas to western europe.

this meeting marked a significant shift from the minimal economic exchanges that had previously defined east-west relations.

the gas pipelines that emerged from these talks symbolized a growing entanglement between the capitalist west and the communist east, driven by mutual economic interests.

for west germany, led by figures like foreign minister willy brandt, this burgeoning relationship wasn't just about energy.

it was a strategic move to create interdependence with the soviet union, making future conflicts less likely.

brandt's ostpolitik aimed to soften the cold war's sharp edges by fostering economic ties that would, in theory, slowly influence the eastern bloc toward more open, liberal policies.

this approach was known as wandel durch annäherung, meaning change through rapprochement.

it later evolved into wandel durch handel, or change through trade, reflecting a widespread belief that economic engagement could bring about political change.

but not everyone in the west was convinced.

u.s. leaders like nixon, carter, and reagan worried that these economic ties could give the soviet union undue influence over western europe, potentially compromising nato's strength.

they questioned whether trading with an autocracy like the soviet union was worth the risk, given the ussr's history of subverting european democracies and supporting extremist movements across the continent.

as the cold war ended and the soviet union collapsed, the optimism of the 1990s fueled the belief that integrating former communist states into the global economy would naturally lead them toward democracy.

this sentiment extended to china as well, with leaders like ronald reagan and bill clinton expressing confidence that trade would encourage political liberalization.

but this optimism often overlooked the realities of authoritarian resilience.

russia, under vladimir putin, demonstrated how autocratic regimes could manipulate economic ties to entrench their power rather than democratize.

western institutions, eager for profits, played a crucial role in this process, enabling kleptocratic practices that enriched putin and his circle.

the consequences of these choices reverberated far beyond russia, as autocrats worldwide used similar tactics to launder money through western financial systems, further blurring the lines between legitimate business and corruption.

ultimately, the global entanglement of democracies with autocracies, driven by economic self-interest, has created a complex web where the pursuit of profit often undermines democratic values and strengthens authoritarian regimes.

understanding this dynamic is critical for anyone concerned with the future of global democracy.

the global spread of kleptocracy#

the global spread of kleptocracy when hugo chavez took office in venezuela in 1998, he promised to reform a country mired in corruption and inequality.

at the time, venezuela was the wealthiest nation in south america, with a strong democratic tradition.

however, its political system was plagued by nepotism and bribery, common issues in oil-rich states.

chavez tapped into public anger over these problems, winning the presidency by vowing to create a more honest and equitable society.

despite his initial promises, chavez quickly chose to embrace corruption rather than combat it.

when his intelligence chief, jesus urdaneta, warned him about corrupt practices within his government, chavez responded by dismissing urdaneta and shutting down any investigation.

this decision set the stage for venezuela's transformation into a full-fledged kleptocracy, where loyalty to chavez became the key to wealth and power.

over the next 14 years, the venezuelan state siphoned off billions of dollars in oil revenue into private bank accounts around the world.

for instance, in 2017, investigators uncovered millions hidden in portuguese and swiss banks, and in 2021, a $2 billion scam was traced through andorran banks.

venezuela's story is not an isolated case.

kleptocracy has spread globally, with autocratic regimes increasingly using similar strategies to enrich themselves and maintain power.

countries like zimbabwe and russia have followed venezuela's lead, using corruption as a tool to consolidate authority.

zimbabwe, under robert mugabe and later emerson manangagua, turned to gold smuggling and other illicit activities after the collapse of its farming industry.

these regimes have developed sophisticated networks to launder money, often with the help of financial institutions in countries like the uae and turkey, which have become hubs for hiding and transferring illicit wealth.

the global spread of kleptocracy has significant implications for the world.

as dirty money flows into western financial systems, it fuels the corruption of autocratic governments and undermines the rule of law in democracies that accept it.

this influx of illicit funds has emboldened authoritarian regimes, allowing them to resist international sanctions and continue their repressive practices.

in zimbabwe, for example, the regime's relationship with china and russia has provided the financial and military support needed to suppress opposition and maintain control.

the rise of global kleptocracy represents a serious challenge to democratic governance and global stability.

this intertwined network of corruption and power works to sustain autocratic regimes while also threatening the integrity of democratic institutions worldwide.

confronting this threat is critical for safeguarding the future of democratic societies.

the power of narrative control in modern autocracies#

in today's interconnected world, controlling the narrative has become a powerful tool for autocracies.

while we once believed that technology would inevitably spread democracy, regimes like china and russia have shown how it can also be harnessed to stifle dissent and manipulate public opinion.

these autocratic governments have developed sophisticated systems to control information, using both cutting-edge technology and traditional propaganda to maintain power and influence.

china's efforts to control its flow of information began with the creation of the great firewall, an extensive system of internet censorship that blocks access to content deemed threatening to the regime.

over time, this has evolved into a broader system of surveillance, especially in regions like xinjiang, where the uyghur population is subjected to constant monitoring.

this surveillance system isn't just about controlling what people see and hear, but also about predicting and preventing dissent before it happens.

the export of chinese surveillance technology to other countries, including pakistan, zimbabwe, and serbia, has extended this model of control beyond china's borders.

these systems, sold under the guise of safe-city technology, are increasingly used for political repression rather than just crime prevention.

this trend highlights a growing global market for technologies that allow autocratic regimes to tighten their grip on power.

parallel to this, russia has perfected the use of disinformation as a tool of influence, both domestically and internationally.

russian state media like rt spread narratives that sow distrust in democratic institutions and promote a sense of hopelessness.

this firehose-of-falsehoods technique, where multiple contradictory stories are broadcast to confuse and demoralize, has proven effective in both russia and abroad.

beyond their borders, autocracies like china and russia are actively working to undermine democratic values on a global scale.

they do this through extensive media campaigns, strategic partnerships, and even direct influence operations aimed at spreading their preferred narratives.

for example, chinese investments in global media, combined with partnerships with russian outlets like rt, amplify their reach and influence, particularly in regions like africa and latin america.

it's clear that modern autocracies have turned narrative control into a powerful weapon.

by leveraging technology, disinformation, and global influence networks, these regimes are not only maintaining power at home, but also challenging the principles of democracy worldwide.

how autocracies are rewriting the global rules#

how autocracies are rewriting the global rules autocratic regimes are increasingly focused on reshaping the international order to emphasize state control over individual freedoms.

their aim is to establish new norms within international institutions that safeguard their authority and shield their practices from external scrutiny.

by strategically pushing new norms in international institutions, these regimes aim to create a world where their authority is unquestioned and their practices are shielded from external criticism.

the origins of our current international system, particularly the universal declaration of human rights established in 1948, laid the groundwork for a global commitment to human dignity, freedom, and justice.

despite its imperfections, this framework has influenced global behavior for decades.

however, autocracies like china and russia are now leading a determined effort to dismantle these principles.

they seek to replace universal human rights with concepts like sovereignty and development, which effectively allow them to evade scrutiny and justify their repressive actions.

china has been particularly aggressive in promoting this shift.

within the united nations, it pushes for language that emphasizes win-win cooperation and mutual respect, phrases that seem benign but are intended to replace discussions about human rights.

this strategic maneuvering is designed to make human rights monitoring and international criticism increasingly irrelevant, thereby allowing autocratic regimes to operate with impunity.

meanwhile, russia champions the idea of a multipolar world, which it presents as a fair and balanced alternative to western dominance.

in reality, this narrative is used to justify russian aggression and influence in other countries, framing it as part of a broader struggle against a decrepit western hegemony.

this idea resonates with countries that feel marginalized by the current global order, making it a powerful tool in russia's arsenal for building alliances and undermining democratic values.

such efforts are supported by the creation of alternative institutions like the shanghai cooperation organization and brics, which bring together nations willing to ignore human rights in favor of mutual economic and political interests.

as these groups grow in influence, they further erode the global commitment to the rule of law and human dignity.

the ongoing efforts by china, russia, and other autocracies to reshape the international order are not just a challenge to western dominance.

they represent a fundamental shift in the way global governance operates.

if successful, this new order could drastically limit the ability of international institutions to uphold human rights and democratic values, leading to a more authoritarian world.

defeating democracy with strategic smears#

in the ongoing struggle between autocracy and democracy, modern dictatorships have refined the art of discrediting their opponents.

while earlier regimes might have relied on overt violence and repression, today's autocracies have developed sophisticated smear campaigns that target not just the leaders of democratic movements but the very ideas they stand for.

understanding these tactics is critical to recognizing how these regimes maintain their grip on power.

one of the key strategies employed by autocratic regimes is the personalization of smear campaigns.

they don't just attack the ideas of democracy and freedom.

they go after the individuals who promote them.

by accusing activists of corruption, treason, or foreign allegiance, these regimes aim to undermine their credibility and isolate them from potential supporters.

this tactic was evident in zimbabwe, where activist evan mawariri's this flag movement, which initially galvanized widespread support, was systematically dismantled through allegations of financial impropriety and accusations of being a foreign agent.

these personalized attacks are often coupled with broader propaganda efforts that seek to delegitimize the very concept of democratic opposition.

in countries like russia, venezuela, and iran, the state uses its control over media and information channels to paint democratic activists as puppets of foreign powers rather than genuine representatives of popular discontent.

this narrative discredits the activists while also sowing doubt among the general population, making it harder for democratic movements to gain traction.

autocracies also employ legal frameworks to stifle opposition.

many regimes have passed laws that target ngos, civic organizations, and anyone receiving foreign funding, labeling them as foreign agents or extremists.

these laws provide a veneer of legality to what is essentially political repression, making it easier for the state to justify its actions, both domestically and internationally.

once again, modern technology is a powerful tool for autocratic regimes.

social media, once seen as a liberating force, is now a battleground where trolls, bots, and state-sponsored campaigns work to smear and harass activists.

this digital repression is often combined with physical threats and financial pressures, creating an environment of fear and uncertainty that stifles dissent.

today's autocracies have learned that while violence can be effective, it's often more efficient to destroy the reputation of an opponent rather than their body.

by understanding and exposing these tactics, those who stand for democracy can better prepare to defend against them.

the main takeaway the main takeaway of this chapter to autocracy, inc. by anne applebaum is that modern autocracies have evolved into sophisticated, interconnected networks that use corruption, disinformation, and strategic alliances to undermine democracy globally.

final summary#

Conclusion

their rise was fueled during the cold war, as western powers sought economic ties with their communist counterparts.

autocratic regimes, particularly under leaders like vladimir putin, manipulated these ties to solidify their grip on power, using western financial institutions to launder money and reinforce kleptocratic practices.

autocratic regimes today use technology, disinformation, and smear campaigns to silence dissent both domestically and abroad.

they are also actively reshaping international norms, pushing for concepts like sovereignty over human rights to avoid scrutiny and criticism.

this combination of economic entanglement, narrative control, and strategic repression poses a significant threat to global democracy.

understanding this is crucial in the fight to protect it.

okay, that's it for this chapter.

we hope you enjoyed it.

if you can, please take the time to leave us a rating.

we always appreciate your feedback.

see you in the next chapter.

Discover more book summaries in the same category or by the same author.

Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984)

Politics22 min read