In Chapter 12 of On Tyranny, author Timothy Snyder offers a simple request: “Make eye contact and small talk” (81). He carefully frames these seemingly small, insignificant moments as civic habits and the collective responsibility of a nation. In his words, these moments reveal the “psychological landscape of your daily life,” and are “a way to stay in touch with your surroundings, break down social barriers, and understand whom you should and should not trust” (Snyder 81). Snyder emphasizes democracy’s dependence on citizens who can recognize one another as human beings. This recognition begins with basic gestures, like eye contact or a greeting, whose presence reflects the atmosphere of a community, whether local or national.
Snyder writes that “People who were living in fear of repression remembered how their neighbors treated them” (82). In my Historiography of the Holocaust class, we discussed how exactly Nazi power relied not only on the state’s violence, but on the requisitioned as well. Requisitioned locals – whether out of fear, coercion, or opportunism – were forced into complicity, an attempt by the Nazis to ensure entire communities were implicated in the killings. By extending responsibility and guilt onto ordinary citizens, “everyone had to be implicated,” as Father Dubois states in The Holocaust By Bullets (55).
In moments like this, whether or not as extreme as the Nazi technique of requisitioning, it is often the behavior of ordinary people that is the most telling of tyranny. Nazi power relied on social isolation and the betrayal of neighbors to fulfill the “master narrative.” If authoritarianism relies on implicating locals in violence, democracy depends on the opposite: preserving small acts of community. Snyder’s lesson to “make eye contact and small talk” therefore extends beyond simple respectfulness and towards resistance to oppressive regimes (81).
That is why he insists that choosing to smile or say “hello” is an indicator of a safe environment. He writes, “if you affirm everyone, you can be sure that certain people will feel better” (82). When neighbors, friends, or colleagues greet one another, they resist the social isolation which authoritarian regimes depend on.
Today, social media has begun to reshape and potentially substitute the everyday interactions Snyder discusses. As of December 10th, 2025, the country of Australia mandated that age-restricted platforms must take “reasonable steps” to prevent Australians under 16 from creating or keeping social-media accounts (Unicef). This policy is explicitly geared toward protecting young people at a “critical stage” of development (Unicef). This governmental approach also shifts responsibility away from individual teens and families and to institutions. The law’s compliance burden therefore falls on the social media platforms, with no penalties for under-16 users or their parents if a child still has access to an age-restricted space. The country has made a major decision to treat social media less like a purely private choice and more like a public sphere that therefore falls under government regulation.
At the same time, many Australian school systems have shifted to restrict phones during the academic day. For instance, the state government of Victoria, Australia, requires public schools to ensure students’ phones are shut off and stored, with stated objectives to provide “greater opportunities for social interaction and physical activity” during breaks (Vic.gov.au). By 2025, these bans existed across all Australian public schools.
The United States has also begun to approach limiting digital technologies through public policy. In recent years, more than half of U.S. states have enacted laws restricting cellphone use in school, reflecting a growing belief that the digital environment for students should be governed by public regulation (ED week). Aside from state and federally governed schools, private schools have also begun to introduce phone policies. At Pingree, phone-use is limited through restrictive zoning on campus, with new regulations and enforcement measures when rules are violated. Phone use during school hours has become a global fight.
Australia’s policy therefore raises a larger question: is it ethically justified for a democratic government to restrict individual freedom in order to promote and preserve the social wellbeing of a nation? The severity of the policies in Australia suggest that the health of democracy depends on protecting both individual liberties and maintaining the social conditions that allow citizens to trust one another. If social media weakens everyday interaction, then governments may feel rightfully compelled to intervene in order to protect citizens’ social life, and, by extension, their democracy.
Civic engagement and responsibility cannot entirely rely on elections or bills; everyday habits that preserve relationships through basic greetings and gestures Snyder’s advice to “Make eye contact and small talk” is therefore a call for citizens, especially students, to hold themselves accountable for the health of their communities (81). Democracy depends on individuals who pay attention to the world around them by seeking political knowledge and communicating openly. Snyder writes that “having old friends is the politics of last resort. And making new ones is the first step toward change” (82). For students, this means recognizing that civic engagement begins with a willingness to learn and connect with one another, building the trust and strength democracies ultimately depend on.
