Twilight of Democracy

Key takeaways:

- Regardless of political views (and I won't get into mine) claiming the ‘other side' is wrong, or ignorant isn't a good look. While some things are possible to prove false, many are not. Reading through this book I found it off-putting when Anne did that, even though I think we would probably agree on many stances. It didn't seem productive and is unlikely to result in meaningful conversation that would convince a person to rethink their views.
- I was fascinated by Anne's analysis of conspiracy theories and how they impact a group of people, specifically as it relates to an election
- Democracy is important, obviously. It was interesting to read about how democracy has been changed or valued in realtime.

“Democracy has always been loud and raucous, but when its rules are followed, it eventually creates consensus-the modern debate [social media, us-vs-them, etc.] does not.”

I see that a lot of people had an issue with the name dropping and evident establishment of the author's “polite conservative” street cred, I think she spent such painstaking time on that stuff because she is trying to reach a certain type of people. People on the left generally do not need to be warned about authoritarianism these days, we see it even if we suck at fighting it, both the one within (let us be honest with ourselves the left can be extremely carceral at times and thus we cannot ignore that these tendencies are within us too) and the one on the outside and she is aware of that. By and large this book does not offer solutions it tries to bring to people's attention the urgency in which we find ourselves and calls us to not fall into doomerism/apathy. Yes, it's from a vehemently center-right-liberal position which occasionally resorts to false adequations to offer a lukewarm takes that can range from the mildly-infuriating to the eyeroll inducing but I think it is done in full awareness of who it is attempting to speak to.
It's a decent book, at times it feels like having a chat with someone while you're both stuck waiting for something, you don't necessarily agree with them but they're not offensive or unpleasant enough that you would take umbrage to what they're saying and occasionally it gets a little deeper. It's a way of speaking/thinking that even the author recognizes as disappearing from public discourse and it's worth the read be it just to remember that there are times where it is still an option.

Svært interessant men litt for pludrete om fremveksten av polariserende politiske bevegelser - berører hele spekteret fra venstrepopulisme til høyrepopulisme, fra Moskva til Washington og hjelper til å forstå det som skjer akkurat nå i Vesten. Svært klokt og velskrevet men hakket for fragmentarisk til å treffe innertier. Om jeg blir optimistisk eller pessimistisk av å lese denne boken? Hvis jeg leser boken riktig, er det opp til meg å vurdere. Anbefales.

Besides the incredible writing, the picture of modern European and American authoritarian trends is presented in a brilliant, frightening fashion. Applebaum names the names we should all be wary of as we stumble deeper into the 21st Century hoping to preserve democracy.

Anne Applebaum draws on her years of reporting in Poland and England and continental Europe as well as the United States to explain the appeal of authoritarianism to people in a democracy. Her approach is chilling; she begins with her long experience in Poland, and later England, and I was horrified to watch the spread of authoritarianism in those countries, knowing all the time what has been happening here as well in the United States, unable to feel the little thrill of self-satisfaction that I once had, that “it can't happen here” belief.

Knowing what sparks it, knowing how it spreads, knowing it's happening in many other places—none of that quells the feeling of being bugs caught in a spider's web, of watching the spider circle and wrap us up.

Applebaum's book is a bit of a hot mess. Her underlying thesis mirrors that of The Narrow Corridor by Acemoglu and Robinson, but her approach is highly personalized and observational to the point that it feels at times to be just a venting of her internal monologue without a truly cogent structure. Much of the book is focused on a few public intellectuals she has known personally that have shifted from the center right to right wing nationalism. It's entertaining in a DC/Brussels parlour game type of way, but all feels a little too insular...

Applebaum is also a little too self referential to be taken seriously. In her point of view, she and her fellow travellers are the enlightened public thinkers, while others are cynical opportunists. The notion that the very nature of elite centrism that controlled the halls of power for generations might have its own problems, blindspots, and failures seems lost on her. Nevertheless, she makes some interesting arguments about how democratic institutions and norms can be subverted from within, with some interesting examples from central Europe.

Overall, an interesting thesis, but there many books that cover this issue more competently.