The strength of the book is a good overview of authoritarian regimes that is well curated but not especially new in insight. The rest from the book suffers from a massively contorted so-called moderate tonetroll that has an an axiom (a) American democracy is great and (b) so far we had good politicians. That leads to incredible like stating that increasing polarization "paradoxically" followed the first "real" democracy in the US after 1965. The authors simply refuse to draw conclusions beyond the narrowest of margins, leading to their main recipes for fighting authoritarianism being the old "politicians need to respect each other" hogwash that fully ignores how human lives are impacted by inhuman policies. So, probably as much as you'd expect from Harvard professors that unironically cite David Brooks. Next time I need to put more work into googling authors...