270 Comments

It’s absolutely astonishing how often these days I read articles or interviews where people say such things as: “In 1989 when I was advisor to the Polish government,” or “When I was advisor to Yeltsin…” (both Mr. Sachs), or “When I was briefing President Kennedy…”(Ray McGovern), “When I exposed Mei Lai…” (Seymour Hersh),

Or even, “When I played basketball for Outer Mongolia…” (Taibbi), or, “When I was chief arms inspector in Iraq…”, (Ritter). The point is that none of these essential minds are available to readers of the TimesPostCNNo’sphere. No wonder those people are clueless. They’re left with Krugman abusing himself with his Nobel Prize.

To all of the people who were really there, took chances, made sacrifices, did good, hard, work, and just, fucking, mattered.

Thanks to all of you, and thank the Gods that there’s a home for your words still, sparse though the crowd may be, (for now).

Expand full comment

Well said, well said. It is professionally unforgivable that the high-status media did not send their best journalists to exactly these persons, in the thick of the events they analyse, with their insider knowledge, and did not open their pages to them. The NYT has slammed the door on Sachs. It has slammed the door on journalism. So journalism is not what it is about. It is an institution within a system, and it is a servant of the system. That system appears to be depend on US domination. Same for just about all the leading Western media (I live in Germany, and it is no different among the so-called status media here).

Expand full comment

The USA is a ripe goose to be plundered. There is money to be made hand over fist and the US government is doling it out. Do we want it to go to Russians or our own oligarchs??

Expand full comment

Oh great, now I'm thinking about autoeroticism involving old men and gold medals.

Expand full comment

“Hoped for better, turned out as always.”

Expand full comment

I don’t agree with Professor Sachs on everything, but he is over the target calling out the neocon warmongers. Like many other truth tellers, he has been black balled from MSM. Thanks for featuring him here. Hope he starts a Substack. Perhaps he can advise the Trump administration or even become Secretary of State…

Expand full comment

"They sought and until today seek a unipolar world led by a hegemonic US, in which Russia and other nations will be subservient."

And looking back with the benefit of history, their failure has been nothing less than catastrophic. Failed wars of choice, collapsing infrastructure, rejection of the dollar standard, and the usurpation of U.S. global hegemony by the BRICS, led by China.

Expand full comment

Pride goeth before the fall.

Expand full comment

I saw Sen Ron Johnson, Chair of Homeland Sec and Govt Affairs Cmmte, say in an interview with Greenwald, that we had pursued the same strategy in every conflict since since Vietnam and it always failed to meet any objectives. He was quite good and I don't know why we're stuck with insane neocons

Expand full comment

The reason we are stuck with the insane neocons is because they never suffer the consequences for their messes and failures, that, and that they are backed by the CMIC whose shares are owned by both neocons and neoliberals.

Expand full comment

"Entropy requires no maintenance."

Which is to say that my guess is that the foreign policy impetus was mostly laziness, of the sort associated with triumphalism and dominant power. Like, here comes Victor Capitalism. Let the Defeated sort their condition out for themselves, it's easier that way. For the Victorious, at least. In the short run.

Expand full comment

Yeah, the BRICS are going nowhere, but I do understand their desire to stick it to the US. They just won't be the instrument to do it.

Expand full comment

I think that's a bit premature, there is still some sorting out to be done but I wouldn't count it out.

Expand full comment

Some of Sachs’ liberal views don’t appeal to me, but isn’t his honesty refreshing? Honesty is now our most valued commodity since it’s been suppressed for too long.

Isn’t this why Matt, Walter, Dr Sachs, and Yuri have a loyal following?

Expand full comment

Valued and scarce!

Expand full comment

You can follow Jeffery Sachs on YouTube.

Expand full comment

Also with Glenn Diesen, Neutrality Studies and The Duran among others.

Expand full comment

he is a regular on Andrew Napolitano's podcast: Judging Freedom.

you can find it on youtube, but they are censoring assholes - so here is the rumble link to Napolitano's channel: https://rumble.com/c/JudgeNapolitanoFightingFreedom

Expand full comment

Congressional report - How the Clinton Administration Exported Government Instead of Free Enterprise and Failed the Russian People

Russia's rampant capital flight, estimated at as much as $500 billion since Russian independence, is another serious consequence of corruption and organized crime. The culmination of the Clinton administration's fatally-flawed macroeconomic policy for Russia occurred in August 1998, when Russia's default on its debts and devaluation of the ruble led to the nation's total economic collapse. Millions of ordinary men and women who had deposited their money in Russian banks lost everything. ATM and debit cards ceased to work. Dozens of banks became insolvent and disappeared. Angry depositors besieged Russian banks, only to learn they had been wiped out. Millions of senior citizens, whose meager pension income had been suspended for months, were cut off completely. When the dust finally settled in March 1999, the ruble--and with it, every Russian's life savings—had lost fully 75% of its value.

https://irp.fas.org/congress/2000_rpt/russias-road.pdf

Expand full comment

This suggests that what Putin said (he wanted to ally with the US and west) in his interview with Tucker was true.

Expand full comment

He proposed to Clinton that Russia join NATO! Clinton was intrigued at first, but the real powers promptly squashed that idea.

Expand full comment

We know that Hillary is a neocon's neocon. There is a special fire in Hades for Albright

Expand full comment

And what purpose would that serve? Intriguing and cute, certainly, but they could as well dismantle NATO. Was’t the idea of NATO to defend the West from a potential threat from the socialist block?

Expand full comment

NATO certainly could have used the help in Afghanistan.

Expand full comment

Do you realize that the US practically fought against the Soviet Army after they invaded the Afghanistan? The US supported and armed Taliban as their proxy against the USSR.

Expand full comment

And we re-armed them once again when Biden/Harris decided to pull

out of Afghanistan on the same schedule Trump had proclaimed during his tenure but without any planning whatsoever as to ensuring that nothing of value supplied to US-aligned insurgents would be left behind once a withdrawal began. Biden/Harris literally gave the Taliban the equivalent of Fort Knox in terms of small and major armaments when they simply said 'we're done, we won, we're leaving.'

Expand full comment

Yes.

Expand full comment

The front for NATO was defence but NATO has NEVER legally fought a defensive war, even when the wars were legally permitted, they were based on lies making those wars illegal.

Expand full comment

Clinton was smart enough not to cross the 6 ways from Sunday crowd that everyone with sense in Washington fears.

Expand full comment

Actually it was a dozen ways. Schumer to Trump

Expand full comment

Hell, Russia still would, if they could.

The West does not seek allies but vassals.

Expand full comment

Nah, I don't think so, Russia has been lied to and screwed over so many times there's zero trust left, Putin has sad as much and now he has the rest of the world at his back, admittedly to varying degrees..

Expand full comment

I hope you are right, but Russian eagerness to enter any kind of deal indicates otherwise.

Expand full comment

I was thinking the same thing.

Expand full comment

Too bad Putin violated the Minsk Agreement and invaded Ukraine. He views treaties as tools to control others but not binding on him. "Nov 2, 2023 (Reuters) - President Vladimir Putin on Thursday signed a law withdrawing Russia's ratification of the global treaty banning nuclear weapons tests, a step condemned by the organisation which promotes adherence to the landmark arms control pact."

Expand full comment

Odd, as Ukraine promptly broke the Minsk Accord, and had fullilled precisely none of its ob obligations under Minsk-2, which Poroshenko, holladne and Merkel all admitted was always a sham intended to buy Ukraine time.

Expand full comment

Odd. Then why did Putin feel a need to announce the end of Minsk 2 two days before invading? "Russia went on to officially recognise the self-proclaimed Luhansk and Donetsk people's republics on 21 February 2022.[9] Following that decision, on 22 February 2022, President Putin said that the Minsk agreements "no longer existed", and that Ukraine, not Russia, was to blame for their collapse, accusing Ukraine of genocide in Donbas in his comments[97][98][10] – a statement largely seen as baseless and factually wrong by the wider world, academics studying genocide, and the United Nations.[99][100][101][102] Russia then invaded Ukraine on 24 February 2022.[

Expand full comment

"Odd. Then why did Putin feel a need to announce the end of Minsk 2 two days before invading?"

Because Ukraine wasn't keeping its end of the deaL, and never intended to.

Expand full comment

When the bell rings and fighters are supposed to go to their corners, but one fighter follows the other and keeps pounding, it's no longer boxing. Is the second boxer expected to not notice or react? And when that same boxer whips out a knife and starts stabbing, after announcing he is no longer going to follow the rules, he admits he was taking advantage of the pretense of playing fair.

Expand full comment

Excpet that isn't what happened, and you know it.

All of the participamnts on the Ukrainian side admitted that Minsk (which Ukraine immedaitely broke) and Minsk-2 (which Ukraine never fulfilled a single condition of) were shams intended to benefit Ukraine.

Expand full comment

Is this projection?

Expand full comment

Yes-yes, it is.

Expand full comment

Yes, it's a news reel projection looking for a screen.

Expand full comment

I think I already saw it on CNN, MSNBC, FOX, NPR etc.

Expand full comment

What was your favorite part?

Expand full comment

Oh the part where they accuse Russia of all the stuff they do. I love that shit!

Expand full comment

Minsk had already been violated by Ukraine.

Expand full comment

Minsk 1 didn't work. Russia kept sending in more troops and Ukraine resisted.

Expand full comment

I believe the U.S., too, has withdrawn from treaties that no longer suited its purposes. This is not to say that Putin is in the right, only that there is nothing exceptional about a sovereign nation leaving a treaty.

Expand full comment

Believing something without referencing examples from reality asks me to engage in faith-based discussion. I'm not into faith-based anything.

Expand full comment

I don't love Jeffrey Sachs, but he makes a compelling case that our policy towards Russia was created and implemented by complete fucktards in a series of Administrations, both Republican and Democrat. The mess we now have on our hands is entirely the fault of these self-dealing neo-com imbeciles. Victoria Nuland - I'm looking at you.

Expand full comment

I read the comment that goes like yours, I don't love Sachs, or something of the kind, and why is that? I don't need anyone to tell me Russia bad since I grew up hearing that from my teachers and everyone else. I'm glad I never had such black and white thinking about things, even as a kid which the US depends on from it's people in it's vilification of Russia, all facts to contrary. In psychology such thinking is considered, well, sick. Your right about those neocons and they are in bed with the democratic party. They shifted from the republican party to the democrats and find themselves in love.

Expand full comment

Did they ever…Liz Chaney endorsed Kamala Harris today. The NPR crowd can finally come out of the closet.

Expand full comment

Russia is not bad. But the communists were pure evil. And Putin has become a corrupt autocrat. Problem is our neocons, State Dept clowns and CIA dipsticks are equally despotic and foul.

Expand full comment

Well, do you see them as pure evil when you think about the fact we would have lost WWII without them?

Expand full comment

The Russian people were forced to make that sacrifice. As Stalin and his commisars sat warm and well fed, far away from the front. What planet do you live on?

Expand full comment

Gee, you want me to hate Russia, because so many, millions and millions died in a war initiated by Hitler, by the Nazi's? No doubt you wouldn't be sitting on your ass writing the above statement on your computer if it wasn't for the fighting Russian forces during WWII. Tell me, name by name all the US political figures who weren't sitting cozy as they sent our young men and women off to fight in our Middle Eastern wars based on lies, Biden, Bush, Cheney, Obama, Clinton? Who????????????????????????????????????????????? What about those cheerleaders back home like Linsey? or McCain? Do you think Biden and those hand clapping politicians for Netanyahu deserve a pat on the back? Do you hate the US?

Expand full comment

You mean the Russians who were allied with Hitler till he turned on them?

Expand full comment

No I want you to hate the communists that enslaved and murdered the Russian people.

You can also hate the neo-cons but love the American people. Although the neo-cons are far less evil than the commies. The murder for profit, not sheer pleasure.

Expand full comment

Did you read the list of US debacles around the entire globe?? No one is equal to that!!

Expand full comment

Russia used to be bad because it was communist

Expand full comment

As I said to someone else who had the same slant on Russia do you at least appreciate the fact that with their profound loss of life and sacrifices during WWII they won that war for the world, and Nazi Germany did not?

Expand full comment

I think in recent ti.es we were far better off cooperating in fighting ISIS together, like we fought the Nazis together

Expand full comment

My public education didn’t teach me to hate Russia. Its focus was Hitler and Germany. It would have been good had I learned not hate, but at least some of the facts about the outcomes of Communism.

It is frequently true that it is the government, the elite who are responsible for evil and not the common person. Radical Islam infesting certain countries is an exception.

Expand full comment

This country has repeatedly told people to hate, to mistrust Russia, It did so in it's many drills that kids diving under their desks, pulling down window shades to protect children to blinding light of a nuclear attack or had them standing in the hall during one of those drills. They turned Russia into the boogie man for children. With adults they spewed their hate through the TV or the radio. All this during a period when we were rampaging through South America, a Korean war and one in one in Vietnam. Not to mention our assistance in Indonesia's communist purge that killed almost a million people. Who am I afraid of, well, I'm afraid of US.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the reply. You cover a lot of the ground in your response. The diving under desks was before my time. The Korean and Vietnam wars? Communism was a real threat and its current western variant is as well.

Do i think all we’ve done “just”? No.

As a citizen am I required to do what I can to make things better here? Yes.

I am not afraid of the typical American, “US”. I am afraid of the oligarchs and of those of our “elite” who are largely brainwashed, stupid, evil, or some mix of the three.

Expand full comment

You believe that the Vietnam war was justified, all that death and destruction on both sides was worth it? I'm not buying that and now thank goodness they are a united nation, and North Korea doesn't scare me one bit, but the US does. I don't come from a position that my loyalty my concern only resides with the US, but prefer a global perspective in that regard. Is what we are doing in Ukraine just, or are we using it's people to bring Putin down, and if you don't know the answer to that it is the latter. As Biden said from his return visit,"Putin has got to go." We're trying to do just that, and we're using Ukrainian lives to do it. A familiar tactic for the US. If you want to make things better hear don't believe all our BS. Read about the neocon agenda that drove our Middle Eastern wars and is driving the one in Ukraine. If you really care about your country you would get to know who we are.

Expand full comment

US Wants To Deploy Controversial Missile System to Japan

The US recently sent the Typhon missile system for drills in the Philippines, a move China viewed as a major provocation

by Dave DeCamp September 5, 2024 at 3:36 pm ET CategoriesNewsTagsChina, Japan, Philippines

The US wants to deploy a previously banned missile system to Japan for military drills, Nikkei Asia reported Thursday.

Beware the Military Industrial Comples, and Neocons,.

Expand full comment
Sep 5Edited

Seemed a bit self-serving. He did at least back stuff up with things he wrote at the time but a few mea culpas might make me doubt his sincerity less.

hint: there is never an easy fix and there are a lot more variables in the equation than any economist ever accounts for

Expand full comment

The whole piece is kind of a mea culpa, isn't it? He's admitting that he didn't recognise at the time what was really going on.

Expand full comment

Possibly but I read it as "the Cold Warriors screwed up my perfect solution." I guess the mea culpa is he lost out to them. I tend to agree with the pieces he cited that he wrote but there is a lack of humility that I find self-serving.

Expand full comment
Sep 4Edited

Using Ukrainian lives in our proxy war against Russia, and knowing full well there will be hundreds and hundreds of the thousand that are dead as a result to me is no different then a genocide. No wonder the US has no conscience in supplying weapons to Israel to carry out a genocide of it's own.

Expand full comment

It freaking kills me to see older people in the circles I frequent, people who were in vocal in the day opposing the Vietnam war, sporting blue and yellow stickers on the back of their cars like some badge of honor. I just want to shake them and yell, " I guess the MIC is just dandy if you aren't being drafted for it then you hypocrite!"

Expand full comment

Most people you talk to on this issue, have been raised to hate, or mistrust Russia, and it remains a given for the rest of their lives, a religion of sorts. So if the US lies as to it's reasons for this proxy war and Zelensky cries and bemoans what is happening, well of course it's all Russia's fault, since they are and always have been the enemy, except in WWII,

Expand full comment

I can see that. I also think it's because they don't have skin in the game. A traditionally vilified Boogeyman that one doesn't actually have to face certainly seems to give license to some to abstract and devalue other's lives.

on edit: Yeah, they were our WWII allies, but I remember hearing armchair generals in my childhood opining that Patton should have just pressed through to Moscow...

Expand full comment

It’s worst than immoral.

Expand full comment

They are also their own proxies. The Ukrainians don't want to be ruled (again) by Russia. Whether we are self-interested in helping them is not relevant to the fact that Ukrainians prefer self-government.

Expand full comment

SOME Ukrainians don’t want to be ruled by Russia, primarily the ones in the western half that used to be part of the Austrian Empire. But many of those in the eastern half, which was part of Russia for hundreds of years, not only want to be ruled by Russia but speak Russian, not Ukrainian, as their first language and identify as Russian rather than Ukrainian. It had been a divided country ever since it began its existence as an independent nation-state in 1991, which is why its neutrality between Russia and the West was written into its constitution—until, of course, the CIA-sponsored 2014 coup d’état that overthrew the democratically elected president that was trying to maintain its neutrality, which is when the war started.

Expand full comment

Speaking Russian does not equate to wanting to be ruled by Russia. Yanukovych was not neutral. He was a Russian puppet who fled to Russia. "In November 2013, a wave of large-scale protests known as "Euromaidan" began in response to President Yanukovych's decision not to sign a political association and free trade agreement with the European Union (EU), instead choosing closer ties to Russia. Euromaidan soon developed into the largest democratic mass movement in Europe since 1989."

The narrative that the CIA made Ukrainians want to trade with the EU and not be under Russia's heed is standard Putin propaganda. Sadly, many men in eastern Ukraine were pressed into service to die for the Russian invasion.

Expand full comment

Isn't Zelensky a U.S. puppet who's constantly on The Grand Tour throughout the west?

Expand full comment

To the uninformed, yes.

Expand full comment

That’s bullshit. Yanukovych was hardly a puppet. He was trying to maintain Ukraine’s traditional neutrality in the face of the USA pushing to get it to join NATO and the EU pushing it to join the EU, both of which posed obvious threats to Russia. He fled to Russia after he was overthrown by the CIA-backed coup because where else would he go? That’s when the war started because many of those in the eastern part of Ukraine, especially those whose first language is Russian, many of whom identify as Russian, didn’t want to be ruled by a Western-backed puppet government who were attacking the linguistic, political and cultural rights of Russian-speakers.

This isn’t Putin propaganda; it’s the truth, as Jeffrey Sachs, who knows more about the region than pretty much anyone else in the West, points out here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWYZpF2ngnc

Expand full comment

Yes, it was all the idea of the U.S. The CIA used a special hypno ray to force the Ukrainians to rise up. To this day they're convinced they want to be free of Russian influence and they're willing to die for independence. Of course, they don't have much choice because Putin has openly stated that he wants to erase the Ukrainian identity.

Expand full comment

Since Putin has never said that, I welcome you citing your supposed source, which is nothing but Western propaganda. You clearly don’t understand the history of or divisions within Ukraine. The 2014 coup d’état was undoubtedly funded and supported by the CIA (Victoria Nuland’s infamous leaked “fuck the EU” phone call is but one of the more obvious pieces of evidence), which doesn’t mean that Ukrainians didn’t play a role. Of course, some did. But those that did so were from Ukraine’s western half, which, having been part of the Austrian Empire, have always leaned west, resented being incorporated in the Soviet Union and viewed Russians as their enemy. In the eastern part of Ukraine, in contrast, the coup provoked a civil war as those whose first language was Russian, and who identified as Russian, fought back against an unconstitutional Western puppet government that had broken with Ukraine’s formerly constitutionally entrenched neutrality and was attempting to suppress the use of the Russian language and Russian culture. And the results are now clear: Ukraine is losing the war, having lost hundreds of thousands of its citizens and a significant amount of its territory, all because of the delusionally provocative desire of the USA to bring Ukraine into NATO, which Russia warned time and again was a red line that they viewed as an existential threat. The war was completely avoidable if only American leaders had respected Russia’s repeated warnings. The USA would have acted no different if China had sponsored a coup in Mexico and then proceeded to promise to make it a member of a Chinese-led military alliance.

Expand full comment
Sep 5Edited

Yeah good for them, however when the US helps implement a coup whose purpose was to use Ukraine to bring down Russia that's quite a different story. We've used them and hundreds of thousands of lives have been destroyed, a country has been destroyed. I don't blame Russia, but do blame the US. When Biden came back from his trip to Ukraine his senility certainly let the cat out of the bag when he said Putin has got to go, and really that's what it is all about. When we can help Israel implement a genocide, killing thousands upon thousands of children, kill their parents, their families, and put them as risk for communicable diseases and watch them go hungry, as Israel also cuts off their food supply, well, you know we're just no good. When our representatives can give Netanyahu a standing ovation you know we are bastards! By the way I don't want to negate the mothers and fathers they kill turning children into orphans. Also the death toll is no doubt three or four times higher since most of the dead, especially children rot under the rubble.

Expand full comment

All Ukraine would have had to do is to have upheld Minsk-2.

Expand full comment

Putin planned the invasion for years, building up a war chest. He had no intention of leaving Ukraine alone. He wanted a second bite of the apple. His miscalculation was that the West would ignore it again. Ooops. Now Putin is mired in sanctions, destroyed refineries, and losing troops and equipment in huge numbers. Of course, that could turn around if Ukraine doesn't continue to receive aid.

Expand full comment

Perhaps you can provide evidence for this, especially as the Ukrainian military was collapsing after Ukraine broke the origina Minsk Accord, It was Ukraine, not Russia, which begged for Minsk-2, which Poroshenko, Merkel and Hollande all agreed was a sham that Ukraine never intended to fulfill.

Expand full comment

The full-scale invasion of Ukraine was not a sudden whim. The burden of proof would be on anyone suggesting it was. Why would a country the size of Ukraine violate an accord with a superpower? Please refrain from victim blaming which is ugly and unjust. "Ukraine, what were you wearing that compelled Putin to attack you? And you must have known that your foolish bid for sovereignty would upset Putin and force Russian forces to torture and murder civilians?"

Expand full comment

Ukies will be ruled by corrupt authoritarian oligarchs regardless of the outcome.

A whole lot of people fled Ukraine to Europe not because they were in danger, but because it was an opportunity to go ahead and relocate with the hope of gaining permanent status.

Expand full comment

Hubris. Even after Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria, our betters think they can do no wrong

Expand full comment

That flips our narrative on its head. It leaves me wondering at this point, "Are we the baddies?"

Expand full comment

Yes, and have been since ‘45. We lost our minds over Russia in 1918, but the hegemonic delusion really kicked into overdrive after WWII. We broke bread with Nazis to help us subvert all things Russia, and that started before the war ended in Europe. We are the evil empire, much as it pains me to say it.

Expand full comment

Ignoring the fact that in 1917, "Russia" became an ethnic society within a Bolshevik totalitarian state ensures a one-sided and skewed view of history. Read Anthony Beavor's history of the Spanish Civil war, or any neutral study of soviet expansionism from 1917 on. International communism is and was a thing. The current Russian government, born out of the second Russian revolution, of 1989-1994, is a more or less "new" form of government never seen before during the Soviet period, or under the tsars.

The history of democratic traditions in Europe is worth studying. Polond, Romania, and almost all eastern European nations have almost no democratic tradition prior to the 1990s. Even in western Europe, the history of democracy is very short. Empire colonialism was practiced by Holland, Portugal, Spain, France, and Great Britain post-1945. Witness Dutch attempts post liberation from the Nazis to reimpose colonial authority over Indonesia and the resulting wars, or the French in Viet Nam. The former Soviet Union and the Chinese communist state funded and assisted nationalist/communist insurgencies across the globe.

We have managed to place ourselves on the threshold of nuclear conflagration at a point in history where there is less starvation, lack of potable water, or people dying from conflicts than at any point in modern history. Good for us!

Expand full comment

If you don’t think we’re practicing empire colonialism, you’re naive, or propagandized, or both. From countless wars, coups, terrorism via our support for right-wing dictators, undermining countless third world countries via sanctions or World Bank/IMF blackmail, we’ve caused far more death, misery, and destruction than all the communist insurgencies combined, and it ain’t close.

Read The Jakarta Method, read The Devils’s Chessboard, read Overthrow. We gave the world MacDonalds and Coke and a corrupt capitalism that threatens our very existence as a species. Good for us? Comedy gold, that.

Expand full comment

At no point did I dispute Sachs/Klein's contentions re: empire colonialism. I've stated for years that the way to think of US foreign policy in the 2020s is that of the Ohio Company of Virginia looking west at a continent controlled by "savages" and competing European economic interests north, south, and west, only in the 2020's the riches are all east of Germany's borders. Sachs on US "full spectrum dominance" in every area of the globe is very clear on this topic.

What I am saying, contra you, is that we need to place all the relevant facts within an accurate historical context. You omit all references to the totalitarian anti-freedom priorities at the heart of international communism, policies explicitly stated by defenders of communism over decades.

What does that totalitarianism mean in practice? No Substack, no capitalism, no private property, zero free speech, no freedom to travel. Gulags, poverty, incivility, corruption, inequality, and state censorship and state terrorism against the citizenry on a scale you clearly cannot imagine. We'd already be in camps, or dead, not posting on Twitter. Fact.

Putin is credited by Russian defenders for being kinda/sorta capable of curtailing some of the power of the oligarch/gangsters who actually control much of Russia's modern economy.

All of us, all nations, are doing our 'best' within the systems we've inherited, not designed. Can we do better? We're finding that out as we speak. Already, the first half of the 2000s is off to a much better start than the 20th century. The world is a much, much, much better place than in was even 50 years ago. Which is why the current conflicts, domestic and abroad, are so indefensible.

Expand full comment

Yeah, genocide, an increased threat of nuclear annihilation, and looming climate chaos are a helluva start.

Your propagandized speculation on totalitarian rule in ‘historical context’ is not fact, it’s a joke.

America is a totalitarian state, see Wolin, Sheldon. Even Carlin recognized our choice is basically limited to Pepsi or Coke.

Ask Scott Ritter about freedom to travel. Ask Julian Assange.

We put more value on private property than we do the general welfare of people. We have poverty, we have incivility, we have corruption, inequality and state censorship. Our state has terrorized plenty; mass incarceration much?

Get a clue.

Expand full comment