"The funny thing is that there’s a playbook for overturning autocrats. It was written here in America, by a rumpled political scientist I knew named Gene Sharp. While little known in the United States before his death in 2018, he was celebrated abroad, and his tool kit was used by activists in Eastern Europe, in the Middle East and across Asia. His books, emphasizing nonviolent protests that become contagious, have been translated into at least 34 languages."
“I would rather have this book than the nuclear bomb,” a former Lithuanian defense minister once said of Sharp’s writing."
"A soft-spoken scholar working from his Boston apartment, Sharp recommended 198 actions that were often performative, ranging from hunger strikes to sex boycotts to mock funerals."
“Dictators are never as strong as they tell you they are,” he once said, “and people are never as weak as they think they are.”
"The Democrats’ message last year revolved in part around earnest appeals to democratic values, but one of the lessons from anti-authoritarian movements around the world is that such abstract arguments aren’t terribly effective. Rather, three other approaches, drawing on Sharp’s work, seem to work better."
"The first is mockery and humor — preferably salacious."
"Wang Dan, a leader of China’s 1989 Tiananmen Square democracy demonstrations, told me that in China, puns often “resonate more than solemn political slogans.”
"The Chinese internet for a time delighted in grass-mud horses — which may puzzle future zoologists exploring Chinese archives, for there is no such animal. It’s all a bawdy joke: In Chinese, “grass-mud horse” sounds very much like a curse, one so vulgar it would make your screen blush. But on its face it is an innocent homonym about an animal and thus is used to mock China’s censors."
"Shops in China peddled dolls of grass-mud horses (resembling alpacas), and a faux nature documentary described their habits. One Chinese song recounted the epic conflict between grass-mud horses and river crabs — because “river crab” is a play on the Chinese term for censorship. It optimistically declared the horses triumphant."
Yes - absolutely.
The authoritarian personality is actually weak and frightened and terribly insecure. That's a lot of what drives them - they have to have as much control as possible because the thought of not having control terrifies them.
Odd though it might seem, there's a great lesson in all of this in the movie Tank Girl.
The villain, fittingly played by Malcolm McDowell, is a cold, sadistic, arrogant manipulator. He's trying to turn the protagonist Rebecca, who he recognizes as a potential strong ally. And she not only defies him, but continuously makes fun of him and belittles him. He ends up sending her off for a particularly horrific psychological torture, at the end of which he calmly and malevolently expects her submission, and instead she's still making fun of him. His pose finally collapses and shaking with rage he grabs a gun and points it at her, and she just looks at him and smiles and croaks out, "I win."
The authoritarian has no sense of personal power. That's why they have to surround themselves with the trappings of their adopted and assembled power - because that's all they have.
There are two broad types of powerful personalities - the would-be tyrant, who preens and manipulates and schemes and struts and surrounds himself with conjured and desperately protected authority, and the stolid, quiet person who simply sits off to the side, wholly determined to manage their own lives as they see fit and wholly confident of their ability to do so.
And of the two, the latter is far, far stronger than the former. And the former know it.