Back At The War

 Until around last week, the only effects we Americans have seen from Putin's war against Ukraine were inflation, news stories about both the suffering of the Ukrainian people along with their fighting spirit, and stories about Russian humiliation on the battlefield. Of course, those who have relatives in the battle zones and those who live in Ukraine have been seeing the real effects of war. But for us, we could focus on other subjects like sports and the upcoming midterms.

But then Putin called up around 300,000 reservists and reissued a threat to use nuclear weapons. And that is when the subject of Russia's invasion of the Ukraine goes beyond regional concern to possible human extinction. And what Putin's announcement meant was this, for as long as the Russian military does not succeed, it will try, try, and try again. And if that doesn't work, then the use of nuclear weapons becomes a distinct possibility. And as I wrote in a previous blog article, when Putin threatens to use nuclear weapons, he is holding the world hostage.

The basic problem here is authoritarianism. Putin is a tyrannical authoritarian. He surrounds himself with people who tell him what he wants to hear. He regards critics and dissenters as enemies of the Russian people. And with Putin's authoritarianism, not is there just an intolerance for criticism and disagreement, he holds to a black-white world view which causes him to see the world in us vs. them categories.

In addition, Putin is playing the role of a vanguard leader for Russia similarly to how Lenin and his central committee played that role for the proletariat back in October of 1917 and the Tsars before him played the role for the Russian people. One of the consequences playing that role is that one must portray critics and dissenters as not just opposition to one's leadership, but as enemies of the people whom those leaders claim to represent.

We too have seen our fair share of vanguard leaders here in America. Besides the fact that the US plays that role for the western world, In addition, Donald Trump's with his claims that he is the only one who can fix our problems and that the critical Mainstream Media is the enemy of the people sounds quite a bit like Vlad Putin. With the perspectives of both of those men, it is easy to see the traits of authoritarianism (click here for a sampling of those traits and click there for a description of the authoritarian personality). 

But those are superficial symptoms for authoritarian leaders compared to the consequences of those who hide in echo chambers. The real consequence is that without anyone to correct them and give them honest feedback, authoritarian leaders can become delusional. That certainly was the case for Trump regarding his views of his abilities, his views of the pandemic, and his views of the 2020 election. He wouldn't even believe his own family members when they told him that he lost the election.

Putin's latest speech (click here for a transcript) blamed neo-Nazis and the West for Russia's military actions in Ukraine. Before that speech, he has called the Ukrainian government and its leader 'Nazis' despite the fact that Zelensky is Jewish. Putin sometimes talked as if Ukraine was part of Russia and Ukrainians were Russians while at other times talked as if only some were Russians. And for those who were Russians, Putin said that Russian forces were freeing them from the neo-Nazis there.

Putin stated that Western elites have been threatening Russia's security and territorial integrity. At the same time he said that if Russia's territorial integrity was threatened, then Putin would consider using all of the weapons at his disposal. Putin added that the West wants to divide Russia, but how has that been possible unless Putin believes that some of the nations that were formerly a part of Russia are still a part of Russia. The West can't divide the nation of Russia.

Putin claimed that the West has already conducted terrorist attacks on Russian territory. But unless Putin has Russianized America's working definition of terrorism, which means that every attack on Americans including its military are terrorist attacks, which civilian centers have been attacked? And was it Ukraine that attack Russian territories or Western nations?

Finally, Putin claims that it is the West that is threatening to use nuclear weapons against Russia. Who in the West has said anything close to that?

Let's make one thing perfectly clear, the West, the U.S. in particular, is not innocent regarding this war. Despite Russia's history of being invaded and attacked by the Western European nations, NATO has been advancing eastward since almost a decade after the fall of the Berlin Wall. That move toward the East was against the spirit of the agreement between George H. W. Bush and Mikhail Gorbachev. According to Gorbachev, Bush held to that agreement, but Clinton and others did not. Back when Obama and McCain were running for President, some American leaders openly talked about putting strategic weapons in nations that bordered Russia.  Such talk was under the guise of protecting some Eastern NATO members from a missile attack from Iran. But the immediacy of such a threat from Iran was greatly exaggerated. Regardless, top Russian military leaders threatened to use tactical nuclear weapons on those border nations that allowed US strategic military bases.

As Noam Chomsky has pointed out, the West has contributed to this war by provoking Russia with actions like those listed above. But there was no need to invade Ukraine. Many of Putin's claims are obvious false claims  with some of those claims seeming to be more like projections. 

We have seen statements like Putin made about why he is doing what he is doing before. There are too many similarities between Putin's stance against the West and Trump's pre and post election claims about Liberals, whom he mistakenly called the Left, and the MSM. The false claims about Liberals and 'The Swamp,' that the only way Trump could lose an election was through fraud, calling the MSM the enemy of the people are such examples of the similarities between Putin's speech and Trump-talk. And the frivolous election lawsuits and the January 6th Insurrection showed us that, like some of Putin's claims, Trump's claims about his political rivals was nothing more than projection.

Also, what is ironic is that while Putin claims to be fighting neo-Nazi forces in Ukraine in order to liberate Russians there, Nazi propaganda described Hitler's war to the East as a war for freedom and against  Bolshevism. 

In his speech, Putin accused the West of attacking a nuclear power plant in Ukraine when it was the other way around. He complained that the West had flooded Ukraine with long-range weapons, but that only occurred after the invasion. And didn't Russia use some of its new missile technology against Ukraine?

In short, Putin is trying to portray Russia as the reluctant hero. And Russian apologists in the West will certainly paint the same picture. The problem here is that we know from the testimony of people like Ana Politkovskaya and Nadya Tolokonnikova and poisoning of Putin's critics just what a monster Putin is. We know from the disappearances of many of Putin's critics and Putin's tight control over Russia's electoral process about his authoritarianism, something that Mikhail Gorbachev criticized Putin for in his book: The New Russia. And we know from Putin's actions in Chechnya how brutal he can be.

And so what are we to make of Putin's speech? It difficult to tell because it is hard to distinguish how much of his speech is PR and how much of it is from a delusional perspective. While the former  might ease our anxiety, the latter gives the world reason for pause. Because Putin has his finger on Russian nuclear button, we can't approach his aggression and atrocities like we might have done prior to the nuclear age or like we could approach nations that have no WMDs. Suppose Putin uses nuclear weapons in Ukraine. At what point do we return the favor? And how could we stop him from doing that?

From the beginning of the nuclear age up until now when technology is making the proliferation of WMDs inevitable, what was written in the Russell-Einstein Manifesto rings truer today than ever (click here for the source):

Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?1 People will not face this alternative because it is so difficult to abolish war.

Apparently, we, as a species, are not yet ready to put an end to war. But will we be ready to do so in time?

As for Putin, our only hope is that he is overthrown in some way, shape or form and replaced by a moderate leader.  That is because, as stated before, we can't challenge him as we would a nation that has no WMDs. In the meantime, perhaps we can reconsider America's and NATO's reach and how to ease the perception that we are threatening Russia's existence.

Will Ron DeSantis Become America's Putin?

For a while, I've been saying that if the US continues to support Trump-like conservatives in elected government offices along with their agenda, Russia's present will be America's future. Why did I pick Russia as a preview of our future? It is because Russia is led by a religious tyrant and that his hold on public office partially depends on popular support from the dominant branch of the Church in Russia: the Russian Orthodox Church. In return, elected officials in that government, especially Vlad Putin, have thrown enough bones to that  Church in order to maintain that support.

And so there are two comparisons to make here. The first one would Trump and Yeltsin and the second would be DeSantis and Putin. 

We should note that the first comparison is not as comparable as the second one. Part of that is because Trump's authoritarianism, and possibly his narcissism, compares more favorably with that of Putin than with Yeltsin. Also, Yeltsin allowed more criticism of his regime than Trump would have allowed if it weren't for the courts. 

However, both Trump and Yeltsin's personal problems often distracted them from what they were doing politically. Except, of course, Yeltsin's personal problem probably interfered more with his Presidential performance than Trump's. In the end, both leaders underwent the impeachment process twice and both leaders  left their respective nations hurting when they left office. With Trump, his lack of respect for the seriousness of the pandemic and the advice of medical science, starting in May of 2020, along with his insistence on the 'big lie' and his attempt to inspire an insurrection and coup left the US reeling. For Yeltsin, his incompetence at handling the economy left the Russian rouble in dire straights. 

In the end, however, the personal lives of both Yeltsin and Trump made them more-less into clowns who could still garner support from voters. 

But after Yeltsin came Putin and he is no clown. Putin demonstrated competence and then ushered in an autocratic rule that protects the interests of Russia's oligarchs, a group that he joined. Though not saying a word now, Gorbachev in one of his books once criticized Putin for his suppression of  alternative political parties and rival candidates. 

Putin has taken revenge on many of his critics and rivals. Putin surrounds himself with people who tell him what he wants to hear. And Putin presents himself as the protector, and even a savior, of his people. Also, he ties his religious faith to that self-image so that he sees himself, and those who agree with him, as having a monopoly on truth.

What have we seen from DeSantis? He has persecuted and is taking revenge on DisneyWorld for taking a public stand against DeSantis's what is commonly called 'Don't Say Gay' bill. DeSantis appointed a surgeon general for Florida that shared his views on the pandemic as Florida quit reporting pandemic information that was requested by the CDC. In addition, under that Surgeon General's leadership, Florida quit following CDC guidelines despite the heavy infection rate and loss of life. 

Currently DeSantis is trying to silence what is commonly called Wokism from being taught in schools and businesses. In fact, he seems to portray himself as this righteous crusader against wokism in the state of Florida. Like Putin, DeSantis is competent in his job.

But what will appeal to many conservative people in the US is that, like Putin, DeSantis projects an image of having much more self-restraint than his predecessor. And so DeSantis will enter a Presidential election without the social image baggage that Trump has in abundance.

But the dreaded trait that Putin, DeSantis, and Trump all share is their authoritarianism. With that authoritarianism is the eagerness to show hostility to those who disagree. All three portray themselves as champions who are defending traditional national values. And do you know what leader from the past did the same? If you answered with 'Adolf Hitler,' you would be correct. One of the campaign issues that Hitler and the Nazis ran on was the restoration of German traditional values.

Fortunately for us in the US, our judicial system has stopped both Trump and DeSantis from being as controlling and ruthless as they appear to want to be. But with a conservative SCOTUS and Trump's other judicial appointments, along with a slew of conspiracy-believing, authoritarian-loving, and January 6th supporting followers, some of whom are now in positions to perhaps interfere with elections as election officials or as legislators, such as those who have passed "colorblind" laws to make it more difficult for minorities to vote, we are seeing some very ominous storm clouds moving closer and closer to us from the horizon.

If DeSantis is elected President in 2024 and this article is correct about him being similar to Putin, we could expect to see a very controlled nation under the leadership of a power hungry authoritarian. If this article is correct, then we might very well be singing our own version of Pussy Riot's Police State.

Again, what has currently held back the authoritarianism of Trump when he was President and DeSantis as the current governor of Florida is our judicial system. Our judicial system prevented the legal side of Trump's coup attempt. But should Trump or DeSantis become President in 2024, all bets are off for whether our judicial system can save us again.

Putin Must Think That The World Is Unfair. And He Is right

 Put yourself in Putin's shoes before rightfully condemning his invasion of the Ukraine. If he invades a neighboring nation that is flirting with joining an adversarial nuclear power, almost the whole world unites against him. But let a superpower invade a nation thousands of miles away for questionable reasons, and hardly a word is said and no economic actions are taken against that invading nation. In fact, that hypothetical invading nation looked at the placement of ballistic missiles on its border as provocative while it had already done the same to its arch rival. And had Mexico joined the Warsaw Pact nations during the Cold War, that invading nation would have probably invaded Mexico to take control without a word of protest from the rest of the world.

Yes, compared to how the world treats the US for its interventions and invasions, how it is now responding to Russia's invasion of the Ukraine shows the double standard being followed by the West and most of the rest of the world.

We an also make a similar comparison between Russia and Israel even though more is said in protest against some of Israel's actions. But hardly anything is done about its plethora of violations of UN Resolutions and its invasions of Lebanon and Gaza as well as its confiscation of Palestinian land on the West Bank and past confiscation of land from Syria.

Yes, it has been said that Putin wants to restore Russia to its previous superpower status and be on par  with the US. Though its means of reaching that goal are horribly immoral, its actions in the Ukraine can find parallels in many of American foreign policies since the end of WW II. Only a case can be made that American policies have been even more immoral since it has intervened in or invaded nations thousands of miles from its border.

Much of the world has been unfair to Russia over its invasion of the Ukraine in a certain sense. It isn't in the sense that the world has been wrong in sanctioning Russia for its invasion. Rather, it is because it applies a double standard. The world is lenient toward America's atrocities while harshly condemning and reacting to Russia for its atrocities. And the disparity here isn't because America is wearing the white hat while Russia is wearing the black hat. After all, America has also supported more than its fair share of tyrannical dictators sometimes even replacing democracies with the rule of such dictators.

How can this unfairness be rectified? It cannot be rectified in turning a blind eye to Russia's sins. Rather it can be rectified in responding to America's interventions and invasions in the same way as it is responding to Russia's invasion of the Ukraine. And in that way, perhaps if Russia or some other emerged superpower wants to keep up with the US, it will have to keep up with a different future America than what it was in the past.