When "anti-corruption" initiatives end up enabling authoritarian crimes, from Mussolini to Putin and Trump. And the hypocrisy of "anti-globalists" who rely on global finance networks to hide and launder their cash.
Even if autocracy works for a while (Pinochet in Chile) it substantially attacks and kills its own citizens who have a different view. Other than Lee Kwan Yew, a benevolent dictator always ends up a cruel dictator and perpetrates a family rule (Lee’s family still controls politics in Singapore).
Trump's proto-fascism was cheered on by our neoliberal economic order, in the hopes that they could finally have their cartel economic system seen in fascist nations. They wanted a grifter's paradise and would have gotten it, had Trump been reelected.
I can't help but think that over the last century the tragedy of the lessons not learned and in addition to 'disappeared' people and the cruelty that is inflicted on populations, the environment will have the last word with authoritarians moving forward. Monsanto, the oil companies, big pharma and big ag seem to be tightly woven with kleptocrats who care less about the planet. Maybe my grandparents said the same thing, but I don't see how this plunder with Putin, the RQP's and autocrats can continue for long. Either that or our climate emergency makes this exactly the moment for the autocrats with their toxic bitcoin to really solidify the world that was envisioned starting with Reagan. I feel like a Debbie Downer these days and everyone I know (intelligent and educated people) don't want to hear it.
Thank you for this Ruth and for your book. Following you, PressRun,Troy, Bandy Lee, and O'lear.
Thank you! I agree it is not sustainable, these strongmen are also no longer young and there will be a generational change - the Navalnys of the world.
Hello from Japan - I have been wondering, how would you analyze Japan's war against the China, Russia, the US, etc in the 20th century? I think we had a very totalitarian government but I can't think of anyone who can be described as 'strongman'.
Agree, not all authoritarian govts have "strongmen," for example Brazil's military dictatorship had no one commanding figure emerge from its junta, whereas Pinochet's in Chile did.
Are they then fundamentally different - authoritarian regimes with or without a strongman at the top - I heard of claims that such men are just convenient public figures for the real operatives below (I can't quite imagine that to be the case with Mr. Trump, though 😅)
The cockwomble, traitor, rapist, draft dodger, murderer, grifter, crook, inept, incompetent mentally deficient idiot will be in jail soon, with family and friends.
Is it true Mussolini was a rapist and, generalising, is it accurate to say authoritarianism is not “only” financially/economically corrupting but, by incarnating “the rule of man” vs the rule of law, violently reinforces patriarchy? Thank you.
The author makes an argument by bracketing Mussolini, Trump and Putin. Insofar as all three invoke national tradition and symbols as 'strange attractors' bonding the citzens into a 'body politic '. There is something of importance to these commonalities. On the other hand, these are three very different figures in three very different contexts. Mussolini was an idealogue in a way to which Putin only occassionally aspires. Neither Trump nor Putin like losing and share an embrace of warrior culture, but for Putin it seems alloyed to a very frightening strain of sadism for its own sake.
I am not aware of evidence that is true for Trump. Moreover, for Putin the warrior ethos is real; for Trump it seems more performative. Thus for Putin levelling Grozny seems a gratioutus excess of virulence. For Trump it was the conquest of Studio 54, where he successfully emerged as a 'Duke of Earl' fulfilling the role every metropolis needs of the brash playboy billionaire. The latter seems more like cosplay, the former something much darker. Thus Putin really is competitive in judo. For Trump it's more cosplay in the form of professional wrestling.
In terms of 'botching' COVID response. Really, it seems to me the authoritarianism came much more from the Public Health Bureaucracy than from our hapless, germophobe President at the time.
I'd been to Wuhan; I'd been in a genetics lab in Wuhan; I knew immediately that it came from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Consequently, I knew that almost all the advice coming from the Swamp as Trump aptly named them could be trusted. That wasn't Trump; he was genuinely flummoxed but he did manage to get a somewhat useful immunization off the ground in a year when all the 'experts were saying 3 to 10 years.
Sorry, this three card monte game of getting us to overfocus on Trump while hiding the pea under other cards is one by which only the willfully foolish should be taken in.
Even if autocracy works for a while (Pinochet in Chile) it substantially attacks and kills its own citizens who have a different view. Other than Lee Kwan Yew, a benevolent dictator always ends up a cruel dictator and perpetrates a family rule (Lee’s family still controls politics in Singapore).
Trump's proto-fascism was cheered on by our neoliberal economic order, in the hopes that they could finally have their cartel economic system seen in fascist nations. They wanted a grifter's paradise and would have gotten it, had Trump been reelected.
Agree, I'll write more about neoliberalism in the future
There is a connection between Ayn Rand (a sociopath) and our current neoliberal economics, as she influenced Alan Greenspan.
I can't help but think that over the last century the tragedy of the lessons not learned and in addition to 'disappeared' people and the cruelty that is inflicted on populations, the environment will have the last word with authoritarians moving forward. Monsanto, the oil companies, big pharma and big ag seem to be tightly woven with kleptocrats who care less about the planet. Maybe my grandparents said the same thing, but I don't see how this plunder with Putin, the RQP's and autocrats can continue for long. Either that or our climate emergency makes this exactly the moment for the autocrats with their toxic bitcoin to really solidify the world that was envisioned starting with Reagan. I feel like a Debbie Downer these days and everyone I know (intelligent and educated people) don't want to hear it.
Thank you for this Ruth and for your book. Following you, PressRun,Troy, Bandy Lee, and O'lear.
more good follows: Sarah Kendzior, Jennifer Cohn, Molly Mckew & John Sipher:)
Thank you! I agree it is not sustainable, these strongmen are also no longer young and there will be a generational change - the Navalnys of the world.
Hello from Japan - I have been wondering, how would you analyze Japan's war against the China, Russia, the US, etc in the 20th century? I think we had a very totalitarian government but I can't think of anyone who can be described as 'strongman'.
Agree, not all authoritarian govts have "strongmen," for example Brazil's military dictatorship had no one commanding figure emerge from its junta, whereas Pinochet's in Chile did.
Thank you for replying!
Are they then fundamentally different - authoritarian regimes with or without a strongman at the top - I heard of claims that such men are just convenient public figures for the real operatives below (I can't quite imagine that to be the case with Mr. Trump, though 😅)
The Emperor was literally God to them. Difficult to get any stronger than that. There was a definite cult of personality there.
The cockwomble, traitor, rapist, draft dodger, murderer, grifter, crook, inept, incompetent mentally deficient idiot will be in jail soon, with family and friends.
Looks like Vietnam era loser Bob Mueller really let you down.
Is it true Mussolini was a rapist and, generalising, is it accurate to say authoritarianism is not “only” financially/economically corrupting but, by incarnating “the rule of man” vs the rule of law, violently reinforces patriarchy? Thank you.
The author makes an argument by bracketing Mussolini, Trump and Putin. Insofar as all three invoke national tradition and symbols as 'strange attractors' bonding the citzens into a 'body politic '. There is something of importance to these commonalities. On the other hand, these are three very different figures in three very different contexts. Mussolini was an idealogue in a way to which Putin only occassionally aspires. Neither Trump nor Putin like losing and share an embrace of warrior culture, but for Putin it seems alloyed to a very frightening strain of sadism for its own sake.
I am not aware of evidence that is true for Trump. Moreover, for Putin the warrior ethos is real; for Trump it seems more performative. Thus for Putin levelling Grozny seems a gratioutus excess of virulence. For Trump it was the conquest of Studio 54, where he successfully emerged as a 'Duke of Earl' fulfilling the role every metropolis needs of the brash playboy billionaire. The latter seems more like cosplay, the former something much darker. Thus Putin really is competitive in judo. For Trump it's more cosplay in the form of professional wrestling.
In terms of 'botching' COVID response. Really, it seems to me the authoritarianism came much more from the Public Health Bureaucracy than from our hapless, germophobe President at the time.
I'd been to Wuhan; I'd been in a genetics lab in Wuhan; I knew immediately that it came from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Consequently, I knew that almost all the advice coming from the Swamp as Trump aptly named them could be trusted. That wasn't Trump; he was genuinely flummoxed but he did manage to get a somewhat useful immunization off the ground in a year when all the 'experts were saying 3 to 10 years.
Sorry, this three card monte game of getting us to overfocus on Trump while hiding the pea under other cards is one by which only the willfully foolish should be taken in.