In On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century, historian Timothy Snyder distills the hard lessons of authoritarianism into twenty critical reflections for the modern age. Lesson 6, titled “Be wary of paramilitaries,” is particularly urgent in today’s American context. Snyder writes:

“When the men with guns who have always claimed to be against the system start wearing uniforms and marching with torches and pictures of a leader, the end is nigh. When the pro-leader paramilitary and the official police and military intermingle, the end has come.”

This warning, shaped by Snyder’s deep expertise in 20th-century totalitarian regimes, has uncanny resonance in 21st-century America. While the United States is far from becoming a dictatorship, several recent events reveal that Snyder’s concerns are not merely theoretical. The historical patterns he highlights—namely, the politicization of violence and the merging of unofficial armed groups with formal state forces—are appearing with alarming frequency in modern political life.

The Role of Paramilitaries in Authoritarian Histories

To understand Snyder’s lesson, we must first consider the historical foundation it rests upon. In Nazi Germany, Italy under Mussolini, and Romania during the fascist period, paramilitary groups were often the shock troops of authoritarianism. They acted outside the law but with state blessing, undermining opposition and intimidating dissenters before fully merging into state mechanisms of power.

• The SA and SS in Germany began as private militias for the Nazi Party. They created a climate of fear that aided Hitler’s rise, later evolving into key tools of oppression and genocide.
• The Iron Guard in Romania and the Arrow Cross Party in Hungary operated similarly—using violence to eliminate political rivals and to enforce ideological purity.
• These groups blurred the lines between party loyalty and state authority, paving the way for the collapse of democratic systems and the rise of totalitarian rule.

Snyder emphasizes that this trajectory—from private armed groups to an integrated militarized ideology—is the hallmark of a regime sliding into tyranny.

The American Context: Private Militias, Political Violence, and State Symbiosis

In recent years, the United States has witnessed a disturbing growth in political violence and paramilitary activity. Snyder’s description of “men with guns” echoing loyalty to a singular leader is no longer metaphorical—it’s factual.

Militia Activity and Far-Right Violence

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), over 500 active anti-government militias and hate groups exist in the United States today. Many of them are armed, organized, and deeply ideological.

• The Oath Keepers and Three Percenters, for example, both claim to defend the Constitution but have repeatedly engaged in violent activities intended to intimidate political adversaries or destabilize democratic norms.
• These groups were central to the January 6th, 2021 Capitol insurrection, where dozens of individuals connected to such paramilitary organizations stormed Congress in an effort to overturn a democratic election. As detailed in multiple federal indictments, their actions were not spontaneous but planned and coordinated【source: U.S. Department of Justice, 2022】.

Intermingling with Police and Military

Snyder’s second warning—“When the pro-leader paramilitary and the official police and military intermingle, the end has come”—is perhaps the most chilling and most relevant today.

• An investigation by Reuters found that at least 12% of those arrested in the January 6 riot had military or law enforcement backgrounds【source: Reuters, 2021】.
• Several police officers from various departments across the country were either involved in or expressed sympathy for the insurrectionists. In some cases, they used internal communication channels to spread disinformation about the election or to coordinate attendance at the rally preceding the riot.
• A 2020 Nation magazine report found that white supremacist and militia infiltration of law enforcement is a well-documented, long-standing issue, with little federal action taken to curtail it【source: The Nation, 2020】.

This intermingling is not yet complete, but it is underway. It reflects a dangerous tolerance for, and sometimes sympathy with, extrajudicial violence within institutions meant to uphold the law impartially.

Political Rhetoric and the Legitimation of Violence

Authoritarian leaders in history, as Snyder shows, do not begin their campaigns with gulags or concentration camps. They begin with language—language that legitimizes violence in the name of law, order, or nationalism.

During his 2016 campaign and presidency, Donald Trump made frequent references to violence at rallies:

• At a February 2016 rally in Iowa, he famously said of protestors: “Knock the crap out of them… I promise you I will pay for the legal fees.”
• In July 2020, during the George Floyd protests, Trump described protestors as “thugs” and advocated using “vicious dogs” and “ominous weapons” against them【source: CNN, 2020】.
• At another rally, when discussing protestors, Trump joked, “When the looting starts, the shooting starts”—a historically racist phrase first used by Miami police chief Walter Headley during the 1960s civil rights era.

These rhetorical signals embolden armed groups and create an environment where political violence is seen as a legitimate response to democratic outcomes.

Law Enforcement’s Relationship to Political Militancy

While most law enforcement officers are committed to the rule of law, incidents of complicity, tolerance, or active participation in far-right violence have grown too frequent to ignore.

• In Portland, Oregon, federal officers in 2020 deployed unmarked vans to detain protestors without charges or warrants. Legal scholars criticized this as an authoritarian tactic akin to practices in Turkey or Russia【source: New York Times, 2020】.
• In Kenosha, Wisconsin, police officers offered water and support to Kyle Rittenhouse before he fatally shot two protestors with an AR-15-style rifle in August 2020. Despite being a civilian armed with a military-grade weapon, Rittenhouse was allowed to walk away from the scene without being arrested immediately【source: Washington Post, 2020】.

These events demonstrate a blurring of roles—where official authority not only tolerates but occasionally supports vigilante justice.

Corporate Militarism and Privatization of Violence

Snyder also notes that the privatization of violence is a hallmark of declining democracies:

“Because the American federal government uses mercenaries in warfare and American state governments pay corporations to run prisons, the use of violence in the United States is already highly privatized.”

This insight resonates with the expanding role of private military contractors (PMCs) and for-profit prison corporations in American public life:

• Companies like Blackwater (now Academi) have been repeatedly implicated in human rights abuses abroad, yet remain contracted by the U.S. government.
• For-profit prisons, run by companies such as CoreCivic and GEO Group, have been incentivized to lobby for harsher sentencing laws and immigration detention—directly profiting from mass incarceration.

Such entanglements between state power and private violence degrade the rule of law and create environments ripe for political exploitation.

Where Are We Now?

It would be an exaggeration to say the United States has crossed the line Snyder describes in full. We are not yet living in a one-party police state or under the rule of paramilitaries. However, the indicators are accumulating:

• Armed political groups are normalizing their presence in public life.
• Sympathizers within law enforcement and the military are rarely purged.
• Political leaders continue to use rhetoric that glorifies violence and delegitimizes democratic norms.
• Violence is privatized and profit-driven, weakening the public’s trust in impartial justice.

The ongoing trials of January 6 defendants, and the scrutiny of figures like former President Trump for election interference, are tests not just of legal integrity but of national resistance to the very trends Snyder warns against.

Conclusion: Choosing Between History and Repetition

Timothy Snyder’s lesson is not a prophecy but a warning rooted in the repeated cycles of history. When “men with guns” pledge loyalty not to the Constitution, but to a leader, and when the lines between state and non-state violence dissolve, democracy stands on a precipice.

In America, the descent is not inevitable—but it is plausible. Whether the U.S. becomes a cautionary tale or a model of renewal depends on public vigilance, political accountability, and civic courage.

The lesson remains clear:

“When the men with guns who have always claimed to be against the system start wearing uniforms and marching with torches and pictures of a leader, the end is nigh. When the pro-leader paramilitary and the official police and military intermingle, the end has come.”

Let this not be a description of tomorrow, but a challenge for today.

---

Sources:

1. Snyder, Timothy. On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century. Tim Duggan Books, 2017.
2. Southern Poverty Law Center. “Active Antigovernment Groups in the United States.” SPLC Intelligence Project, 2023.
3. U.S. Department of Justice. “Capitol Breach Cases,” justice.gov.
4. Reuters. “Dozens of former military and police have joined extremist groups,” March 2021.
5. The Nation. “The Long History of White Supremacist Infiltration of U.S. Police Forces,” August 2020.
6. CNN. “Trump’s History of Incendiary Rhetoric,” June 2020.
7. New York Times. “Federal Agents in Unmarked Vans Detain Protestors,” July 2020.
8. Washington Post. “Kyle Rittenhouse’s Deadly Kenosha Protest Shooting,” August 2020.