Anne Applebaum’s Autocracy, Inc. exposes a powerful paradox of our time: while autocracies consolidate power and manipulate capitalism to entrench their regimes, democracies are not immune to these same tactics. They, too, can manipulate markets, distort narratives and use economic might to impose their will. But there is then a risk that they will slide towards autocracy.
From my perspective—rooted in a commitment to democratic governance, industrial collaboration, and balanced sovereignty—the lessons of Autocracy, Inc. extend well beyond Russia or Hungary. They resonate strongly with the current posture of the United States, particularly in relation to its escalating commercial tensions and annexation threats towards Canada.
(LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/autocracy-inc-democracies-behaving-badly-benoit-marcoux-1c1re)
The core message of Autocracy, Inc.
Snyder’s thesis is that modern autocracies are less about ideology and more about control. They operate like corporations—hence “Autocracy, Inc.”—with:
- State power serving private interests
- Corruption replacing transparency
- Economic levers substituting military force
- Narrative control overshadowing truth
Rather than exporting ideology, these regimes export impunity. And troublingly, global financial and political systems often go along.
But Snyder’s most chilling insight is this: the methods of autocracy can spread to democracies, especially those trying to maintain dominance in a world of shifting power.
The U.S. as a reluctant shareholder of Autocracy, Inc.
In the current trade tensions with Canada, we can observe the autocratic playbook in action—even from a long-standing democratic partner.
The United States is:
- Using market access as leverage
- Interpreting “Buy American” policies in ways that disadvantage Canadian firms
- Exerting pressure to align Canada’s supply chains with U.S. priorities
- Blocking or undermining Canadian energy exports under the guise of self-sufficiency or security
These actions no longer even pretend to be part of a green transition or a shared democratic project. The U.S. is pursuing a narrow, nationalistic industrial agenda—prioritizing domestic control over international cooperation, even with its closest allies.
This isn’t partnership. It’s economic coercion in service of strategic dominance, echoing the same logic that fuels autocratic regimes: consolidate power, secure supply chains, and dictate terms.
From this vantage point, the U.S. behaves less like a cooperative ally and more like a dominant shareholder in Autocracy, Inc., leveraging its position to extract compliance—no ideology, just economic muscle.
What this means for Canada
This moment calls for strategic clarity.
Canada must:
- Strengthen sovereign capabilities—not to isolate, but to negotiate as equals
- Develop strong internal markets—by breaking down interprovincial trade barriers and encouraging regional value chains
- Build resilient partnerships—especially with Europe and democratic countries beyond the U.S. sphere
- Craft an industrial policy rooted in reciprocity and resilience—not just efficiency or convenience
We need to move beyond nostalgia for a postwar rules-based order that no longer exists. The question now is whether we can co-create a new model where small and mid-sized democracies are not vassals, but vital partners for each other—partners who not only support one another politically, but also provide reliable economic alternatives. Canada, in particular, can and should substitute for some of the products and resources that our allies currently rely on the U.S. for.
Conclusion: democracy is more than elections
Snyder’s warning is clear: Autocracy, Inc. isn’t just a diagnosis of authoritarian regimes—it’s a lens to understand how democracies can decay from within, or start mimicking what they once opposed.
The U.S.’s behaviour in this commercial war with Canada should concern us all—not because it mirrors Moscow or Beijing, but because it shows how quickly values can bend when power is at stake.
Canada can—and must—respond, not by imitating, but by standing firm in democratic principles, strategic autonomy, and a vision of industrial collaboration rooted in fairness and mutual benefit.
