If this Krugman had any sense, he would stop writing this junk.
13
Russia today and the USSR before that are proof of the old saying “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
38
President Obama's handling of Bin Laden is my view of strength and restraint.
77
The Republican Party and Donald Trump have their differences, but the overriding goal that they share is money, and to get to that, power.
With power, as George W. showed us, gou can give huge tax cuts to the rich - tax cuts that weaken government and give more power to the rich. You can do whatever you feel necessary to continually increase profits.
The US to them is a great business opportunity, and nothing more.
With power, as George W. showed us, gou can give huge tax cuts to the rich - tax cuts that weaken government and give more power to the rich. You can do whatever you feel necessary to continually increase profits.
The US to them is a great business opportunity, and nothing more.
11
I can see Trump holding Putin as an idol of his admiration. Bereft of coherent thoughts and core democratic values, how can a narcisst like Trump attract universal adulation that he craves for - almost as badly as the greens? He displays his autocratic tendencies almost daily. He would blast the Iranians out of water for giving finger to US sailors. He would seize Iraqi oil without worrying about its effects on our alliances and the Arab street, indeed on the Muslim world at large. He wants to beat the crap out of hecklers at his rallies and dispatch them in body bags. It's a matter of daily, living shame for the country that a man like him has become the standard bearer of one of our two major political parties. Scarier yet is the spectacle of right wing throngs going gaga in his support. It's a nightmare that would be with us for years to come even if loses the elections. Historians would cite it again and again as a fleeting glimpse of McCarthyism whose second coming we somehow managed to abort.
9
Paul, Mr Putin's and Russia's grab of Crimea was much more valuable than you let on. That area of the Black Sea that comes under Crimea's control is vastly enriched with oil and gas. What country would'nt want to control it?
But with the advent of LENR technology, it won't be long before oil prices and the oligarchs that they supports will come crashing down and the whole world structure will change.
But with the advent of LENR technology, it won't be long before oil prices and the oligarchs that they supports will come crashing down and the whole world structure will change.
7
Russia annexed the Crimean peninsular to protect its naval base at Sevastopol after a hostile (to Russia) regime took over Ukraine. It did not have to invade the Crimea because its forces already occupied it. Similarly the Russian speaking parts of the Ukraine began to break away when the new regime took over.
This does not make Putin a good guy, but it undermines the credibility of the author when he chooses to misrepresent crucial facts in order to support his argument. The article becomes simply a polemic, with no useful information value.
This does not make Putin a good guy, but it undermines the credibility of the author when he chooses to misrepresent crucial facts in order to support his argument. The article becomes simply a polemic, with no useful information value.
9
Trump's former campaign head Paul Manafort has significant ties to the Ukraine and Russia so it's not surprising that Trump praises Putin, who like Trump is a master of political perception.
That Putin, a former KGB director, uses dubious tactics to keep critics in line or they disappear - is that the future for America under Trump?
That Putin, a former KGB director, uses dubious tactics to keep critics in line or they disappear - is that the future for America under Trump?
17
Secretiveness is the hall mark of most authoritarian regimes and especially for a Russian one. And secretiveness is the hall mark of trump's campaign. What does Trump believe if anything other than his right to lead. His followers constantly talk about his forthrightness and openness, but when you come down to it his campaign is nothing but a cloud of illusion and secretiveness.
23
Maybe I'm a sucker, but whenever he has a speech translated on You Tube I give a view. I get the impression that he is all about protecting Mother Russia from an ideology that he and others, and sometimes myself, is riddled with lies and falsehoods to promote prosperity for the upper elite. This while introducing more nations to materialism and never ending debt while taking advantage of their resources, cheap labor, and ignorance. Yet I am aware that like a certain imp in S Korea he could be about protecting his own hierarchy. If you listen to some of Castro's old speeches you may find yourself agreeing on many points. What it boils down to is trust no one and keep an open mind about all that you see and hear. Appearances can be deceiving in the hands of skilled politicians... PERIOD!
5
I agree with Professor Krugman's comment that "admiring Mr. Putin means admiring someone who has contempt for democracy and civil liberties."
With Donald Trump, we have a candidate in this election who has publicly done just that, not once, but on a number of occasions. I find this disturbing.
The question American voters should ask themselves before entering the polling booth in November is not which candidate do you like more or which candidate is supposedly more trustworthy. No, the question should be - Do you want a President who has publicly admired someone who has contempt for democracy and civil liberties?
With Donald Trump, we have a candidate in this election who has publicly done just that, not once, but on a number of occasions. I find this disturbing.
The question American voters should ask themselves before entering the polling booth in November is not which candidate do you like more or which candidate is supposedly more trustworthy. No, the question should be - Do you want a President who has publicly admired someone who has contempt for democracy and civil liberties?
27
The Right doesn't hate freedom, or hate President Obama. Or even hate Hillary Clinton. The Right is led by those who love money and power above all else. Those who believe that the acquisition of both is the main purpose and goal of life, and that exploiting the masses is a fully justifiable means of doing so.
The Right does not "love freedom," or want to "make America great again." Those are just buzz phrases, meant to stir up emotion and to pit us against each other. If we, the 99%, are at odds with each other over issues like gun control, abortion, immigration and the like, we are pushovers for the Right Wingers. They will pick our pockets by lowering taxes on the rich and eliminating the benefits we have paid for all our lives, like Social Security and Medicaid.
If only the men in pickups with TRUMP stickers on their bumpers knew how ironic their support was, life would be grand. But they don't know. And we all need to vote.
The Right does not "love freedom," or want to "make America great again." Those are just buzz phrases, meant to stir up emotion and to pit us against each other. If we, the 99%, are at odds with each other over issues like gun control, abortion, immigration and the like, we are pushovers for the Right Wingers. They will pick our pockets by lowering taxes on the rich and eliminating the benefits we have paid for all our lives, like Social Security and Medicaid.
If only the men in pickups with TRUMP stickers on their bumpers knew how ironic their support was, life would be grand. But they don't know. And we all need to vote.
54
Thank you for this extremely important question: "How crucial has Russian money been in sustaining Mr. Trump’s ramshackle business empire?" But with respect, it's a cop out to say "nobody really knows." Trump doesn't want the public to know, and won't release his tax returns or volunteer info, but that is why we have investigative journalists. Mr. Trump's ramshackle empire has stiffed and run over so many people; could the NYT interview former insiders? This should not be a tough "nut to crack."
39
If I recall correctly, Hillary, typical of her cheap-shot opportunism, called Putin 'another Hitler' while she was Secretary of State. Is that not worse than Trump saying he could 'get along' with Putin, detestable though the man may be? If you want to avoid a world conflagration it just might be worse. And no, Krugman, Russia is at least as powerful militarily as the old Soviet Union. They have ALL the missiles previously stationed in the old Soviet Union.
In view of her foreign policy 'historical context' as your Roger Cohen likes to say, I would keep my mouth shut.
In view of her foreign policy 'historical context' as your Roger Cohen likes to say, I would keep my mouth shut.
15
What I can't get my head around, Professor, is why you are charging up the wrong tree this late in the election year.
Almost none of your long time readers misunderstands or misplaces Russian government goals as anything other than the consolidation of power and furtherance of Mother Russia's imperial primacy. Some of this is understandable. The rest of Russian actions everywhere in the world is contrary to its own interests as a democratic country of empowered citizens with national goals that are no different from that of _any_ other country in the world.
To think that we need to be told about Russia is a waste of our time and waste of your precious column inches in the NYT.
You need to tell us not even about Mr. Trump. Instead you need to tell us what Mrs. Clinton needs to get right and how the Democratic Party will win the House and Senate.
I am so disappointed that you have so little to say about these things that matter to us and things that your readers can potentially do something about.
Focus, Professor ! Get your priorities right ! :-)
Almost none of your long time readers misunderstands or misplaces Russian government goals as anything other than the consolidation of power and furtherance of Mother Russia's imperial primacy. Some of this is understandable. The rest of Russian actions everywhere in the world is contrary to its own interests as a democratic country of empowered citizens with national goals that are no different from that of _any_ other country in the world.
To think that we need to be told about Russia is a waste of our time and waste of your precious column inches in the NYT.
You need to tell us not even about Mr. Trump. Instead you need to tell us what Mrs. Clinton needs to get right and how the Democratic Party will win the House and Senate.
I am so disappointed that you have so little to say about these things that matter to us and things that your readers can potentially do something about.
Focus, Professor ! Get your priorities right ! :-)
22
This regional power with nuclear capabilities certainly projects a hostile "will use first strike capability" as it sees fit if cornered. Tread carefully. If you have nothing, than you have that much too lose. especially with a meglomaniac at the helm.
10
Are you saying that the Russian "petrocrats" and our mega buck hedge fund players and their rich friends and have a similar hostility to civil right as may be expressed in the Bill or Rights"?
6
He humiliates our weak leader at every corner. He means and does what he says.
Maybe that's why people admire him.
Maybe that's why people admire him.
4
Putin, a former mid-level KGB functionary stationed in E. Berlin, has ordered hits on journalists. has appropriated the commodities of the former USSR for personal gain, has sanctioned the murder of innocent civilians .. the list goes on and on .
Not counting sociopaths, only persons who live on "fast food' politics (meaning they pay no mind at all to what is inside, and look only at the slick packaging and crave the grease and salt) could possibly hold this tyrant in anything but contempt.
Not counting sociopaths, only persons who live on "fast food' politics (meaning they pay no mind at all to what is inside, and look only at the slick packaging and crave the grease and salt) could possibly hold this tyrant in anything but contempt.
27
It looks like the photo that ran with this piece was staged or altered to make it look like Putin is a man of the people. Only his face is in focus, there are no apparent security guards around him, and no one in the crowd seems aware that he is standing there. Manufacturing such artificial populism based on misrepresentation is the hallmark of Putin, and Trump.
7
A spot on and blistering critique of the Putin fanboys.
Due to space restrictions, Mr. Krugman was unable to address how Mr. Putin manufactured a war on Chechnya so as to unify Russians behind him in a war against "the other."
Really though, I don't think we should be surprised that Trump would champion such a man as Putin. Clearly, he see Putin as a living example of "How It is Done."
Take note my fellow Americans. In our country, in 2016, Trumpo, the clown, with his golden wig and orange skin and tiny hands and big belly, has a real shot at winning this thing. I think that says much more about America than I can stomach.
Due to space restrictions, Mr. Krugman was unable to address how Mr. Putin manufactured a war on Chechnya so as to unify Russians behind him in a war against "the other."
Really though, I don't think we should be surprised that Trump would champion such a man as Putin. Clearly, he see Putin as a living example of "How It is Done."
Take note my fellow Americans. In our country, in 2016, Trumpo, the clown, with his golden wig and orange skin and tiny hands and big belly, has a real shot at winning this thing. I think that says much more about America than I can stomach.
11
Trump doesn't have a clue what Soft Power is. Just because Obama isn't a cowboy doesn't mean he's weak. And just because Trump, like Putin, is a bully doesn't mean he's strong.
12
In divining the leverage in Vlad’s game of chess,
An old hacker in France, with infinite regress,
Finds Putin so strong
That Trump goes along,
But without those tax filings, voters must guess.
An old hacker in France, with infinite regress,
Finds Putin so strong
That Trump goes along,
But without those tax filings, voters must guess.
3
Putin wrote his doctoral thesis on exploiting Russia's oil reserves to improve the Russian economy. When he became the modern-day czar of Russia, he implemented his thesis. Unfortunately, for Russians, Putin's failure to diversify, as Krugman points out, has been a tremendous drag on Russia's economy. And, Russia desperately needs a broader, more innovative economy in order to attract immigrants without which they cannot succeed in the future. Their population is aging. Their birthrate is negative, and without immigration, I'm afraid they are doomed. This is bad for Russia, and it's bad for the world. Putin is a total failure with respect to domestic economic policy. If he really cared about his country, he would change course, reign in his oligarchs and start doing what needs to be done to build an innovative, diversified economy. Mr. Putin, stop flexing your muscle and start building your country. And, frankly, the United States has a lot of internal work to do…INFRASTRUCTURE BANK!!!
4
I'm sure Trump would admire Hitler, as well, because he was a strong leader.
Herr Adolph convinced the German nation he could lead them to the promised land. He did for a while when the nation was desperate. What's the old saying about false prophets?
Herr Adolph convinced the German nation he could lead them to the promised land. He did for a while when the nation was desperate. What's the old saying about false prophets?
5
Stupid americans, prepare for a nuclear strike from a “regional power”
2
The rich white men who are voting for T have been convinced that he can say anything and still be fit for presidency, get over it.
The NYT just goes along, complicit as it was in W being given the presidency.
The NYT just goes along, complicit as it was in W being given the presidency.
3
Doesn't Bernie, and also Pelosi, openly admire Marxism? Scary stuff when leaders spout philosophies that have caused so much genocide and suffering.
1
Unfortunately, Dr. Krugman, like many, is overthinking the Putin-Trump issue. Remember, Trump is acting a part. Every time he "pulls our chain" his ratings and press coverage get a boost. Like Paul's column.
By the way, it looks like the US and Russian are in joint operations in Syria. It is a "regional thing". It is in our "national interest", and the world interest, to work together with other countries to solve problems.
Obama has been fairly good about this. You can bet it drives a lot of "neo-con" types (e.g.: Hillary) crazy.
By the way, it looks like the US and Russian are in joint operations in Syria. It is a "regional thing". It is in our "national interest", and the world interest, to work together with other countries to solve problems.
Obama has been fairly good about this. You can bet it drives a lot of "neo-con" types (e.g.: Hillary) crazy.
3
Dr. Krugman said: " ...while brutally suppressing opposition and criticism.
And that, of course, is what many on the right admire." Sorry, it is the left that is a fan of suppressing opposition and criticism. From PC to trigger warnings to campaign finance reform to constitutional amendments to restrict first amendment rights it is the left who are always trying to silence critics and opponents.
And that, of course, is what many on the right admire." Sorry, it is the left that is a fan of suppressing opposition and criticism. From PC to trigger warnings to campaign finance reform to constitutional amendments to restrict first amendment rights it is the left who are always trying to silence critics and opponents.
3
"I have always said that if Great Britain were defeated in war I hoped we should find a Hitler to lead us back to our rightful position among the nations."
- Winston Churchill
If Paul Krugman were to comment on this statement as he comments on Trump's Putin statements he would conclude thusly: Churchill is an apologist for the unspeakably evil Nazi leader. Yet it's as obvious what Churchill meant as it's obvious what Trump meant. Both were isolating strength of leadership, and only strength of leadership. To draw conclusions beyond that is to serve ones own political purposes - not the truth of the matter.
- Winston Churchill
If Paul Krugman were to comment on this statement as he comments on Trump's Putin statements he would conclude thusly: Churchill is an apologist for the unspeakably evil Nazi leader. Yet it's as obvious what Churchill meant as it's obvious what Trump meant. Both were isolating strength of leadership, and only strength of leadership. To draw conclusions beyond that is to serve ones own political purposes - not the truth of the matter.
2
Didn't Hillary introduce the 'Reset Button' with Russia just a few years ago? On the one hand she criticizes Trump for cozying up with Putin yet in the same breath says Trump will start an all-out nuclear war. With who? North Korea? Being 'friends' with the only other country holding more nuclear weapons than us isn't that bad of an idea.
4
Isn't there anyone in Clinton camp who knows a few facts about Russia of interest to us as well the world in general.
For example Russia today with the exception of few show case cities, is as industrialized as Russia was when Napoleon came calling 2 hundred years ago.
During the oil crises when Russia was the biggest oil producer, the price per barrel hovering around $140, Putin saw fit to squander it all on the weaponry
and little benefit. After the crash of ruble, it has defaulted a few times it is about 65 rubles to a dollar. The old pensioners are being made to choose to buy food or drugs.
Putin can keep the bad news from hitting the media as long as his goons keep murdering brave journalists. How long can he keep it up, just look at longevity of Stalin, his role model.
For example Russia today with the exception of few show case cities, is as industrialized as Russia was when Napoleon came calling 2 hundred years ago.
During the oil crises when Russia was the biggest oil producer, the price per barrel hovering around $140, Putin saw fit to squander it all on the weaponry
and little benefit. After the crash of ruble, it has defaulted a few times it is about 65 rubles to a dollar. The old pensioners are being made to choose to buy food or drugs.
Putin can keep the bad news from hitting the media as long as his goons keep murdering brave journalists. How long can he keep it up, just look at longevity of Stalin, his role model.
13
Simply put - is the world a better place for having the likes of Putin and Trump in it? And the answer is, of course, no. They are the same megalomaniacs whose interests have always been, first and foremost, about themselves. Trump doesn't get that. Putin never has. Even Romney didn't understand it.
8
I humbly propose the following: a swap. We will trade everyone in the U.S. who admires Mr. Putin to Russia for a like number of Russians who long to live in a democracy. Win-Win.
22
I think that Donald the Deal Maker is being manipulated by a very much more savvy, (In deal maker terms "savvy means ruthless, which means amoral, and smart to see and take advantage of the opponents weakness) Deal Maker. Putin is using the ego blinded Donald to boost his own image. As soon as Donald loses the election, which he is certain to do he will throw Donald under something probably a lot smaller than a bus because that's all that will be required.
Ergo, the best thing to do with this current journalist manufactured flap is to ignore it. Why do you all insist on giving Donald the attention he graves.
Please lets have some keen reporting on policy positions, and can someone please figure out why Donald has not been indicted for at leas 5 or 6 of the obvious frauds and other crimes he has committed?
Ergo, the best thing to do with this current journalist manufactured flap is to ignore it. Why do you all insist on giving Donald the attention he graves.
Please lets have some keen reporting on policy positions, and can someone please figure out why Donald has not been indicted for at leas 5 or 6 of the obvious frauds and other crimes he has committed?
16
Putin could stand right in front of the Kremlin and shoot someone and he wouldn't lose voters.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/28/world/europe/boris-nemtsov-russian-opp...
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/28/world/europe/boris-nemtsov-russian-opp...
9
In ancient Greece, strong men who took over their cities in a coup were called "tyrants" - the origin of our usage. Their regimes tended to last a generation to two before the oligarchs ousted by the tyrants returned or, in the case of Athens, a new form of government -- democracy -- was formed.
One interesting feature of the Greek tyrants is that they liked to make connections with each other, across what then were "national" boundaries of their respective cities. They did so for trade and political reasons, promising to back each other up if their regimes were threatened at home or offering sanctuary in the event of an expulsion.
It is therefore ominous that Drumpf, who already has financial ties to Putin's Russia, gushes with such enthusiasm about the leadership of a tyrant abroad. It says much about his attitude to governance and how he looks at the world. It offers no comfort to the citizens of a democracy.
Will we someday perhaps see Drumpf living in a gold-encrusted apartment in central Moscow?
One interesting feature of the Greek tyrants is that they liked to make connections with each other, across what then were "national" boundaries of their respective cities. They did so for trade and political reasons, promising to back each other up if their regimes were threatened at home or offering sanctuary in the event of an expulsion.
It is therefore ominous that Drumpf, who already has financial ties to Putin's Russia, gushes with such enthusiasm about the leadership of a tyrant abroad. It says much about his attitude to governance and how he looks at the world. It offers no comfort to the citizens of a democracy.
Will we someday perhaps see Drumpf living in a gold-encrusted apartment in central Moscow?
25
Mr. Krugman, as always, speaks the truth.
Trump and his followers are mistaken in their definition of strong--in Putin's case he's not so much strong as ruthless--lacking a conscience enables him to kill or imprison opponents. President Obama, on the other hand, epitomizes strength. He campaigned vigorously in spite of facing bigotry and hatred because of his color, and continues to struggle with a Republican Congress to get bills passed that will benefit all Americans.
Trump is most certainly not strong--he's just a bully picking on women and people of color among other groups, and lacks integrity, and honor and decency which all signify strength.
Trump and his followers are mistaken in their definition of strong--in Putin's case he's not so much strong as ruthless--lacking a conscience enables him to kill or imprison opponents. President Obama, on the other hand, epitomizes strength. He campaigned vigorously in spite of facing bigotry and hatred because of his color, and continues to struggle with a Republican Congress to get bills passed that will benefit all Americans.
Trump is most certainly not strong--he's just a bully picking on women and people of color among other groups, and lacks integrity, and honor and decency which all signify strength.
36
I strongly recommend to watch the PBS Frontline documentary on Putin. It gives interesting insides what might happen here if Trump becomes president.
Putin and Trump have a lot in common. Putin was involved in fraud and corruption even before he became president. In the beginning he was also funneling government funds through a charity and a web of companies to his own bank accounts. His only achievement is to have built a corrupt, kleptocratic system that has no comparison.
Putin and Trump have a lot in common. Putin was involved in fraud and corruption even before he became president. In the beginning he was also funneling government funds through a charity and a web of companies to his own bank accounts. His only achievement is to have built a corrupt, kleptocratic system that has no comparison.
24
Mr. Krugman, by the way, I'm surprised that you don't understand why Putin took Crimea. Their commercial industry is tourism, true. But the role that region played in the Soviet Union was to host Russia's one and only warm water naval base. A third of the people who live in Crimea are workers or retired workers from that base. And Russians have long been retiring to Crimea, since Tsarist days. It's like the Florida of Russia.
There's been drama over that base since the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 and Russians realized that now their only warm water port was in a completely separate country ruled by a rather anti-Russian group of people.
There are more chapters to be written here, I'm sure. But perhaps climate change will make the Crimean drama fade away. As the Arctic ice melts, Russians will find warm water seaports to their north, in Russia.
There's been drama over that base since the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 and Russians realized that now their only warm water port was in a completely separate country ruled by a rather anti-Russian group of people.
There are more chapters to be written here, I'm sure. But perhaps climate change will make the Crimean drama fade away. As the Arctic ice melts, Russians will find warm water seaports to their north, in Russia.
7
This is why, when The New York Times recommended books for summer a few months ago, I wanted to add one more, one I still recommend even though fall is coming: "It Can't Happen Here".
12
Regarding Russia's economic progress under Putin, Krugman writes "This growth can, however, be explained with just one word: oil."
This oft-repeated oversimplification merits scrutiny. In fact, when Putin assumed the Presidency of Russia in 2000 some 40 % of the country's GDP derived from oil and gas. Today oil and gas account for roughly 15 % of Russian GDP. Clearly some other sectors of the economy have grown under Putin. For a keen analysis see Hilary Appel's article "Is it Putin or Is it Oil?" linked here:
http://www.academia.edu/5239541/Is_It_Putin_or_Is_It_Oil_Explaining_Russ...
This oft-repeated oversimplification merits scrutiny. In fact, when Putin assumed the Presidency of Russia in 2000 some 40 % of the country's GDP derived from oil and gas. Today oil and gas account for roughly 15 % of Russian GDP. Clearly some other sectors of the economy have grown under Putin. For a keen analysis see Hilary Appel's article "Is it Putin or Is it Oil?" linked here:
http://www.academia.edu/5239541/Is_It_Putin_or_Is_It_Oil_Explaining_Russ...
8
This can hardly pass for an honest analysis. First and foremost, because it refuses to engage an alternative (to the liberal dogma) narrative. That creates more holes in this 'analysis' than Swiss cheese can bear.
1. Russia has always had plenty of gas and oil, but it was badly mismanaged before Putin.
2. Before Putin, the post-communist Russia had no international clout to speak of. Now, Putin has effectively thwarted the West in Syria, Ukraine, and Georgia.
Now let me fix it for you and dispel the 'mystery.' Yes, Putin is a dictator, but a clever one, which, yes again, makes him a strong leader. No, nobody (Trump included) admires him, but honest people are willing to give credit, where it's due.
1. Putin is a strong leader, because under his reign Russians have come together as a cohesive nationalistic society. His and his policies' approval has always hovered over 80%. Russian army's morale has dramatically increased.
2. Putin is a strong leader, because under his reign Russia has become a stable and functioning autocracy, as opposed to a mismanaged banana republic before him.
3. Putin is a strong leader, because he's able to throw wrench in the West's wheels at every move, skillfully playing the alliance w/ China (e.g. war games in S. China sea).
All one needs to see Putin's strengths (and weaknesses) for what hey are is drop the blinders of the liberal dogma.
"Liberalism is the most intolerant religion using political correctness for cultural genocide." VEK
1. Russia has always had plenty of gas and oil, but it was badly mismanaged before Putin.
2. Before Putin, the post-communist Russia had no international clout to speak of. Now, Putin has effectively thwarted the West in Syria, Ukraine, and Georgia.
Now let me fix it for you and dispel the 'mystery.' Yes, Putin is a dictator, but a clever one, which, yes again, makes him a strong leader. No, nobody (Trump included) admires him, but honest people are willing to give credit, where it's due.
1. Putin is a strong leader, because under his reign Russians have come together as a cohesive nationalistic society. His and his policies' approval has always hovered over 80%. Russian army's morale has dramatically increased.
2. Putin is a strong leader, because under his reign Russia has become a stable and functioning autocracy, as opposed to a mismanaged banana republic before him.
3. Putin is a strong leader, because he's able to throw wrench in the West's wheels at every move, skillfully playing the alliance w/ China (e.g. war games in S. China sea).
All one needs to see Putin's strengths (and weaknesses) for what hey are is drop the blinders of the liberal dogma.
"Liberalism is the most intolerant religion using political correctness for cultural genocide." VEK
13
Please do not misinterpret my comments, I have the utmost love and respect for Secretary Clinton. That said, if she is truly ill, I will vote for her. If she has to drop out and Pee Wee Herman is named as the new nominee of the Democratic Party, I will vote for him. If my neighbor Barb is named as the new nominee, I will vote for her. I think Donald Trump will end our constitutional democracy and his supporters are being led down a dark hole. I have lost all respect for Paul Ryan, who I thought was a promising young man. I hope he sees the light soon and denounces Trump once and forever.
28
I wasn't going to vote Green in this election, but I did have some admiration for their positions and commitment, until the subject of Putin came up.
I don't know whether Jill Stein admires Putin. But seeing the leader of what is essentially an environmental protest movement attend a state dinner for Putin, a petro-billionaire who doesn't tolerate protesters, unsettled me.
As it unsettled, it turns out, two Green women from Russia who felt compelled to pack up their families and seek asylum in the EU. These women called Stein out in a letter circulated on social media. There is no talking to Putin, they warn her in this letter. His language is brute force.
Not defending people in your movement who have been intimidated and harassed out of their homes -- shameful no matter what your politics are.
The Greens can forget me ever voting for a candidate of theirs ever.
I don't know whether Jill Stein admires Putin. But seeing the leader of what is essentially an environmental protest movement attend a state dinner for Putin, a petro-billionaire who doesn't tolerate protesters, unsettled me.
As it unsettled, it turns out, two Green women from Russia who felt compelled to pack up their families and seek asylum in the EU. These women called Stein out in a letter circulated on social media. There is no talking to Putin, they warn her in this letter. His language is brute force.
Not defending people in your movement who have been intimidated and harassed out of their homes -- shameful no matter what your politics are.
The Greens can forget me ever voting for a candidate of theirs ever.
21
The largest single-day point decline for the Dow occurred on September 29, 2008, when the index fell nearly 778 points as the result of Congress rejecting a bank bailout plan.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/29/markets/markets_new
What can we look forward to on November 9, 2016 and afterwards if Trump wins on November 8?
Stanton predicts that the Dow will immediately drop 1000 points and the markets will be forced to close early. A further drop will occur when the markets open the next day.
The debacle will be worldwide. No investor in securities anywhere will be spared and many will be wiped out permanently.
Eventually, the markets will recover some of
their losses.
But taxpayers everywhere -- those who still
have some money -- will not be disposed to
supporting the massive tax cuts, public works projects, defense expenditures and veteran’s benefit programs that Trump is proposing
because they are not fools and know that -- one way or another -- they would be made to pay for these programs and left holding the empty bag where they used to keep their money.
The results will not be pretty. When Trump’s true believers -- the ones who are counting on him to save them from a life of joblessness and economic misery -- catch on to the fact that no help is coming for them, the result will be pandemonium and chaos.
It was said best by the Ghostbusters:
"(If Trump wins) this city is headed for a disaster of biblical proportions."
http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/29/markets/markets_new
What can we look forward to on November 9, 2016 and afterwards if Trump wins on November 8?
Stanton predicts that the Dow will immediately drop 1000 points and the markets will be forced to close early. A further drop will occur when the markets open the next day.
The debacle will be worldwide. No investor in securities anywhere will be spared and many will be wiped out permanently.
Eventually, the markets will recover some of
their losses.
But taxpayers everywhere -- those who still
have some money -- will not be disposed to
supporting the massive tax cuts, public works projects, defense expenditures and veteran’s benefit programs that Trump is proposing
because they are not fools and know that -- one way or another -- they would be made to pay for these programs and left holding the empty bag where they used to keep their money.
The results will not be pretty. When Trump’s true believers -- the ones who are counting on him to save them from a life of joblessness and economic misery -- catch on to the fact that no help is coming for them, the result will be pandemonium and chaos.
It was said best by the Ghostbusters:
"(If Trump wins) this city is headed for a disaster of biblical proportions."
20
We heard the same economic doomsday predictions about Brexit, none of which came true.
1
The United States constitution was specifically designed to avoid the extreme consolidation of power Putin has managed to achieve. The press, nor individual critics can ever be silenced by the power of an American politician. If deviations should occur, they are eventually overcome by court rulings or other public action. It is Trump's inherent inability to accept the limits of his own childish bravado that leads directly to his enthusiastic admiration of the Putin way. His total misunderstanding of the constitution and its intent is on constant display. In private life, he repeatedly uses the courts as a sword for the personal conquest of others. As demonstrated by his comments and extensive legal track record, Donald J. Trump could be the most dangerous and destabilizing president in history.
27
When I was young my parents explained the ideal of communism to me:
"To each according to their need, from each according to their ability"
(I've replaced "his" for obvious reasons, our respect has added a female pronoun in general statements)
It is sad but not surprising in the era of Bernie to realize that this level of ideal will always be corrupted, and that there will always be people who take advantage of "the system" for personal gain.
Putin seems to have reclaimed the worst of the Russian bear without respect for the value of life or the individual. In this way he's quite like Trump, who is prepared to make the worst of things to gain power and adulation.
Like Aesop's Frogs Who Wanted a King, be careful what you wish for. A Trump presidency, even with US government checks and balances, will turn out badly.
No American would really like to live in Putin's repressive regime, unless they succeed at being an conscienceless oligarch. Like calls to like, but it is not good for children and other living things.
"To each according to their need, from each according to their ability"
(I've replaced "his" for obvious reasons, our respect has added a female pronoun in general statements)
It is sad but not surprising in the era of Bernie to realize that this level of ideal will always be corrupted, and that there will always be people who take advantage of "the system" for personal gain.
Putin seems to have reclaimed the worst of the Russian bear without respect for the value of life or the individual. In this way he's quite like Trump, who is prepared to make the worst of things to gain power and adulation.
Like Aesop's Frogs Who Wanted a King, be careful what you wish for. A Trump presidency, even with US government checks and balances, will turn out badly.
No American would really like to live in Putin's repressive regime, unless they succeed at being an conscienceless oligarch. Like calls to like, but it is not good for children and other living things.
19
Much like Freud's cigars, not everything is based on idealogy. I suspect that Trump's love of Putin relates to (a) money he has made on deals involving Putin's buddies, and (b) dirt that Putin has on Trump, a common KGB tactic. Evidence of (a) has been surfacing.
15
I have a somewhat unique perspective on Russia that I would like to share. I was a teacher in Russia in 1994-1996, married a Russian woman and then returned to the USA. Last summer, I spent two months in Moscow and St. Petersburg. This was my first trip back to Russia in almost 20 years, Thanks to the price of oil going from $10 to as high as $100 per barrel, the changes that I noted on my last trip were truly amazing. I could finally understand why so many people in the big cities were happy with Putin. But, now that the price of oil has remained for awhile at $30-50 per barrel, the ruble has lost half of its value, and the military is rapidly expanding, the economic future of Russia is in doubt. Will the people continue to support Putin?
6
The dumber we get as a people, the more inconvenient the Constitution becomes. This is terrifying because Trump is showing himself an incipient dictator, albeit not as sharp as his bro Putin. Even more terrifying, the American people don't have a clue that they're in danger. We are so uneducated now that we are sitting ducks for a "strong leader" to solve our problems. Putin grabbed power and became a "czar" while Trump may be blithely handed that position by an know-nothing public.
32
Judging the annexation of Crimea by its financial importance shows that Mr. Krugman uses entirely invalid set of criteria to understand that event (and also demonstrates the current American level of expertise in Russian affairs). There are virtually zero people in Russia who would consider that in financial terms. Did US consider expenses when troops were sent to invade Grenada to "protect" some American students who "could have been taken as hostages"? don't think so. Btw, almost all the excuses for that invasion were later shown to be unsubstantiated, more than 100 people were killed including 24 civilians, etc. Compare that please with the annexation of Crimea - just to get some perspective. I am not saying that to justify the actual annexation, but as such operations go, not only was it extremely quiet and done without loss of life, not only was it fast and easy (which also demonstrates the level of support among locals, as well as general disarray and confusion in the Ukrainian forces on the peninsula), but it also enjoyed extremely high level of approval in Russia and in Crimea itself. Naturally it was then followed by propaganda campaign, by closing of opposition offices, by some level of oppression against the most vocal minorities - what would you expect from Putin's government... after all, they are not known for being very considerate of international or even domestic law. That doesn't mean we should misunderstand their actions - then we will learn nothing.
7
Left out the word "kleptocracy" because if the assets of the former Soviet Union were sold to oligarchs for pennies on the dollar then that would be the very definition of kleptocracy. Is that why the former Soviet Union was balkanized? And as far as soft power goes is there any more converting influence than religion? The ministries were sent into Honduras as soon as the military coup successfully ousted the democratically elected leader with the help of DeMint and the Heritage Foundation. I like to think every leader wants whats best for his country and especially Putin has all the money he needs so why not make your people happy and prosperous. The need to keep the press in line probably stems from keeping it free from attempts to subvert it from outside interests and the need to maintain order. Are Russian police killing citizens on the street in cold blood the way our police are and subjecting them to a "let me see your papers" sort of tyranny black drivers know of? The NED is probably more active around the world than the CIA and its funded hugely. We're on a course where whenever the word "Freedom" is invoked it should be accompanied by footnotes; esp. in light of the disparity of wealth which would be the best and most authentic measurement. Trump wants to lower taxes for the wealthy, which seems to be the single most important reason any republican wants to get close to legislation ... their Organizing Principle.
6
Putin's confiscation and persecution of successful entrepreneurs scared off all foreign investors. The factories being built by Americans and others were quickly abandoned. Further, the cronies who took over the petroleum and other concerns were incompetent. Putin not only failed to diversify, he actively sabotaged Russia's long deferred opportunity for economic development. He not only spent capital, he went out of his way to kill the golden goose. Like Trump, Putin personally profits from the devastation he leaves behind.
5
And given the numerous kleptocracies* that Washington has supported (with the Times dutifully supplying intellectual cover), maybe that's why the Times is reluctant to specify ALL of Putin's crimes?
Iraq (pre-Desert Storm)
Iran (pre-revolution)
Marcos' Philippines
Venezuela (pre-Chavez)
Pinochet's Chile
(I have to go to work - partial list)
Iraq (pre-Desert Storm)
Iran (pre-revolution)
Marcos' Philippines
Venezuela (pre-Chavez)
Pinochet's Chile
(I have to go to work - partial list)
2
Bravo.
10
Crimea's economic value to Russia stems mainly from its role as a land bridge across half the Black Sea through which oil and gas pipelines could be drawn. (Sea bottom: expensive! Dry land: cheap! Not paying Ukrainian transit fees: even cheaper!) Plus there are some offshore gas fields in Crimea itself. Now that the oil/gas prices plunged it's a different calculation, but who'd thunk that back in 2014?
Number two factor is the location of the main base of the Russian Black Fleet. Number three is the pride: of the current Kremlin's occupants in having the same dachas as the Soviet leaders of old, and of the Russian populace at large at 'having their Crimea back!' (never mind the ordeal of getting there without the land bridge)
As for the Crimeans themselves and their puny tourist industry... who cares! The pipelines, the fleet, and the boss's dacha! Mother Russia to the 21st century!
Number two factor is the location of the main base of the Russian Black Fleet. Number three is the pride: of the current Kremlin's occupants in having the same dachas as the Soviet leaders of old, and of the Russian populace at large at 'having their Crimea back!' (never mind the ordeal of getting there without the land bridge)
As for the Crimeans themselves and their puny tourist industry... who cares! The pipelines, the fleet, and the boss's dacha! Mother Russia to the 21st century!
4
A delicious bit of disinfectant.
4
Y'know, all except for the guy in the middle of the photo - the one with the red tie and a head like a bowling ball - this could be an American crowd.
5
Great headline.
3
Logic doesn't work when you're dealing with an illogical and, more importantly, an irrational man in Donald Trump. Of course, the wannabe authoritarian oligarch would admire the real deal in Vladimir Putin. Putin embodies all the narcissistic grandiosity that is the hallmark of Donald Trump. He crushes anyone (aka "the losers") in his way and struts across the global landscape with a chip on his shoulder daring anyone to challenge him--in Ukraine or in Syria. This is Donald Trump's idol and ideal form of governance. It's pure oligarchy, not democracy. So, the country goes bankrupt; The Donald is the master at leaving others (aka all of us "losers") holding the bag. Crazy? Frightening? Despicable? And yes, perhaps even "deplorable."
18
It's incredible that a US presidential candidate like Trump is looking forward to help from a thug & bully like Putin of Russia in his bid to win the election! What a shame!
15
We have too long a list of leaders to hate. The prospects for future peace become more and more frightening as we add more and more to the list.
7
Message to Trump supporters:
Real Americans do not praise or show any allegiance to Vladimir Putin and his Russia. Real Americans are offended and disgusted by Donald Trump's bromance with Vladimir Putin and the perception he has allegiance to him. Real Americans are horrified that Donald Trump would cheer on Vladimir Putin in the Russian cyber attack on the US political institutions affecting the 2016 presidential election.
Real Americans will fight and conquer to defend this great nation no matter the depth of the struggle, and we will first begin politically at the ballot box, and use that form of diplomacy until other measures are required.
Real Americans do not praise or show any allegiance to Vladimir Putin and his Russia. Real Americans are offended and disgusted by Donald Trump's bromance with Vladimir Putin and the perception he has allegiance to him. Real Americans are horrified that Donald Trump would cheer on Vladimir Putin in the Russian cyber attack on the US political institutions affecting the 2016 presidential election.
Real Americans will fight and conquer to defend this great nation no matter the depth of the struggle, and we will first begin politically at the ballot box, and use that form of diplomacy until other measures are required.
13
"an authoritarian state, with a cult of personality around its strongman, that showers benefits on an immensely wealthy oligarchy while brutally suppressing opposition and criticism.
And that, of course, is what many on the right admire."
An astute comment that goes right to the core of evangelical magical thinking as well. De Toqueville warned of this possibility. Most people are afraid of taking responsibility for their actions, the true price of freedom, and this leave themselves open to the authoritarian,"just do what I tell you and stop thinking about it".
And that, of course, is what many on the right admire."
An astute comment that goes right to the core of evangelical magical thinking as well. De Toqueville warned of this possibility. Most people are afraid of taking responsibility for their actions, the true price of freedom, and this leave themselves open to the authoritarian,"just do what I tell you and stop thinking about it".
14
Western politicians supported Mussolini for the first decade that he took power. Even Churchill supported Mussolini late in events.
Mussolini was the early leader of opposition to Hitler. He formed the "Stresa Front" of nations to oppose the first aggressive moves made by Hitler. France and Britain backed down, and would not join Italy in confronting Hitler. That is one clue to why Churchill was supporting Mussolini even rather late.
Domestically, Mussolini led a revolt against standard democracy. He "made the trains run on time" (although really he didn't, but reality is not politics). Mussolini was NOT a democratic politician, even though he kept the forms of democracy, including a Parliament and parties, even opposition parties.
Putin is doing roughly what Mussolini did, the forms of democracy without the substance, in defiance of the failure of democracy as done by those before him (Yeltsin's drunken failure).
Internationally, Putin is also doing a Mussolini strong man, with about the same illusion of power without the substance of power. Mussolini had an air force and navy that looked impressive on paper, and an army that was big on paper. It just was not substance. Roughly, it was Russia's military compared to the US military.
So who likes a Mussolini? Many, for many reasons. Some have Churchill's reasons. Some have the reasons of those who "marched on Rome" alongside Mussolini, disgusted with the failure of what went before.
All of them end up disappointed.
Mussolini was the early leader of opposition to Hitler. He formed the "Stresa Front" of nations to oppose the first aggressive moves made by Hitler. France and Britain backed down, and would not join Italy in confronting Hitler. That is one clue to why Churchill was supporting Mussolini even rather late.
Domestically, Mussolini led a revolt against standard democracy. He "made the trains run on time" (although really he didn't, but reality is not politics). Mussolini was NOT a democratic politician, even though he kept the forms of democracy, including a Parliament and parties, even opposition parties.
Putin is doing roughly what Mussolini did, the forms of democracy without the substance, in defiance of the failure of democracy as done by those before him (Yeltsin's drunken failure).
Internationally, Putin is also doing a Mussolini strong man, with about the same illusion of power without the substance of power. Mussolini had an air force and navy that looked impressive on paper, and an army that was big on paper. It just was not substance. Roughly, it was Russia's military compared to the US military.
So who likes a Mussolini? Many, for many reasons. Some have Churchill's reasons. Some have the reasons of those who "marched on Rome" alongside Mussolini, disgusted with the failure of what went before.
All of them end up disappointed.
7
Trump, and then Pence confirmed, that Putin was a much "stronger" leader than Obama.
Well if Obama had the power to shutdown unfavorable media outlets such as Fox News, imprison political opponents like the Koch brothers then he would be a "strong leader" too.
Fortunately we have this pernicious thing called the Constitution and so Obama cannot do that.
It's very disturbing to find out the number of people in this country who yearn for a US President to have such powers. Of course that only works if the president is "their" president. Otherwise, the president is a tyrant overstepping his or her power. And the same people praising Putin for his strength have excused Obama of exactly that.
Well if Obama had the power to shutdown unfavorable media outlets such as Fox News, imprison political opponents like the Koch brothers then he would be a "strong leader" too.
Fortunately we have this pernicious thing called the Constitution and so Obama cannot do that.
It's very disturbing to find out the number of people in this country who yearn for a US President to have such powers. Of course that only works if the president is "their" president. Otherwise, the president is a tyrant overstepping his or her power. And the same people praising Putin for his strength have excused Obama of exactly that.
14
Paul Krugman, You know how to work with numbers. What do you make of the following comparisons between the Russia and US economies in relation to those of other highly industrialized states? Growing gap between rich and poor, incarceration levels, percentage of GDP directed to military spending, percentage of arms sales in relation to total exports, decreased funding of education, decreased public spending for health care, privatization of other public resources?
The problem is not Big Bad Bully Putin, or would-be Big Bad Bully Trump, it has to do with the disempowerment of citizenry.
Rights of free speech and assembly are under attack in Russia. We, in America, have more of the tools and traditions needed to defend democracy, but economic inequality makes it harder for us to use them.
The problem is not Big Bad Bully Putin, or would-be Big Bad Bully Trump, it has to do with the disempowerment of citizenry.
Rights of free speech and assembly are under attack in Russia. We, in America, have more of the tools and traditions needed to defend democracy, but economic inequality makes it harder for us to use them.
14
Conservative thought has always held democracy to be an unreliable and potentially chaotic form of government, they prefer a form of government where the best people, those most talented and successful should dominate government and the development of laws and policies. They've historically found representative government a way to achieve an acceptable alternative to democracy without actually sacrificing their own liberties in an aristocracy or an autocracy. Amongst conservatives is a subset of people who want to live in a strictly ordered and rule based society, a lot of people actually, and it makes them long for strong and firm rulers, authoritarians.
Russia for all it's land and people, never achieved the kind of society which can industrialize and product infrastructure and businesses which the rest of the world wants in any comparable way to far smaller and less endowed with resources lands, and so it relies upon commodities and weapons systems which are effective but less sophisticated than those of more advanced countries to offer for trade with the rest of the world. This is the perfect circumstances for a ruthless dictator and Russia has one in Putin.
We must deal with Russia and to respect who and what Putin happens to be but to compare him to an elected leader in a liberal democracy is fundamentally silly, there is no common set of circumstances which one can reasonably use to support that kind of comparison.
Russia for all it's land and people, never achieved the kind of society which can industrialize and product infrastructure and businesses which the rest of the world wants in any comparable way to far smaller and less endowed with resources lands, and so it relies upon commodities and weapons systems which are effective but less sophisticated than those of more advanced countries to offer for trade with the rest of the world. This is the perfect circumstances for a ruthless dictator and Russia has one in Putin.
We must deal with Russia and to respect who and what Putin happens to be but to compare him to an elected leader in a liberal democracy is fundamentally silly, there is no common set of circumstances which one can reasonably use to support that kind of comparison.
5
Say what you will about Putin, but Russia is now solidly on the world's political and economic radar because of him. Russia had been woefully on their knees after being a failed communist state. This year marks the 25th anniversary of the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
My Russian colleagues would tell you that their lives following the collapse of the Soviet Union was extremely difficult at best.
Very rapidly neighborhoods changed and people stopped going to "gosti" (visiting friends or neighbors). In the USSR people could visit without notice and that would be accepted as something ordinary. When that changed, people started drinking more than ever and they remember many of their mates at school started taking hard drugs, hallucinogen pills or inhaling some toxic glues.
Skilled scientists had to work construction sites or as taxi drivers to survive: some even fled to N. Korea to develop rockets and nuclear weapons. Schools and universities degraded into places where the professors made money by taking bribes from the non-attending scholars—and often had to take another job to survive. Corruption crept everywhere from law-enforcement agencies to health care authorities. Crime and gangs flourished. Many Russians starved and families went hungry.
Putin's policies have changed all that.
Say what you will about Putin's strong-armed tactics. Russians since Czarist times have traditionally appreciated such tactics. And Russian working-class and elite do these days as well!
My Russian colleagues would tell you that their lives following the collapse of the Soviet Union was extremely difficult at best.
Very rapidly neighborhoods changed and people stopped going to "gosti" (visiting friends or neighbors). In the USSR people could visit without notice and that would be accepted as something ordinary. When that changed, people started drinking more than ever and they remember many of their mates at school started taking hard drugs, hallucinogen pills or inhaling some toxic glues.
Skilled scientists had to work construction sites or as taxi drivers to survive: some even fled to N. Korea to develop rockets and nuclear weapons. Schools and universities degraded into places where the professors made money by taking bribes from the non-attending scholars—and often had to take another job to survive. Corruption crept everywhere from law-enforcement agencies to health care authorities. Crime and gangs flourished. Many Russians starved and families went hungry.
Putin's policies have changed all that.
Say what you will about Putin's strong-armed tactics. Russians since Czarist times have traditionally appreciated such tactics. And Russian working-class and elite do these days as well!
3
"is run by some of the same thugs" you mean like we have been run for the last eight years Krugman?
4
Not surprising that Trump admires Putin.
Both are billionaires (Putin could be worth ten times what Trump is worth),
both are demagogues and extremists and who believe that strength
is the only strategy that works. They are wrong.
Strength works in some situations but not all and blustering and
posturing just wastes time and energy and makes you look ineffective.
Based upon all the blustering he's done Trump looks very ineffective.
All Trump knows how to do is talk, bluster and blather.
And remember the Russian government is not a democracy and
being a strongman/despot might work in Russia which has a long history
of despots and dictators but would not work in America.
Is Trump planning to do a "Putin" in America and be a despot?
Wouldn't surprise me at all. Trump only cares about the deal. And himself.
Maybe Trump should move to Russia and be Putin's Vice President.
That would be most appropriate under the circumstances.
I'm sure they would get along and Trump could appear on
Russian TV all he wants and say whatever stupid thing he wants and
maybe Trump, Putin and the other traitor Snowden could all get together
and trade stories about the United States and how Trump
will sell out America to Russia if he's elected President.
Both are billionaires (Putin could be worth ten times what Trump is worth),
both are demagogues and extremists and who believe that strength
is the only strategy that works. They are wrong.
Strength works in some situations but not all and blustering and
posturing just wastes time and energy and makes you look ineffective.
Based upon all the blustering he's done Trump looks very ineffective.
All Trump knows how to do is talk, bluster and blather.
And remember the Russian government is not a democracy and
being a strongman/despot might work in Russia which has a long history
of despots and dictators but would not work in America.
Is Trump planning to do a "Putin" in America and be a despot?
Wouldn't surprise me at all. Trump only cares about the deal. And himself.
Maybe Trump should move to Russia and be Putin's Vice President.
That would be most appropriate under the circumstances.
I'm sure they would get along and Trump could appear on
Russian TV all he wants and say whatever stupid thing he wants and
maybe Trump, Putin and the other traitor Snowden could all get together
and trade stories about the United States and how Trump
will sell out America to Russia if he's elected President.
6
By praising the brutal. anti-democratic suppressor Putin, is America's right wing revealing their true colors?
The right always advertises itself as supporting "individual liberty". They don't mean it, except when it comes to taxes and government regulation of business. In truth, the hard right in America wants suppression, the kind that helped end the Occupy Wall Street protests a few years ago, the kind, active right now, that is working to turn the tables of the Black Lives Matter movement by claiming they are the real racists for even raising race in police treatment of black citizens.
Wherever there is force and power used against the individual, America's hard right stands by ready to cheer. There are, apparently, no limits on what they would like to see done for "security" at airports. Prisons from sea to sea was once actually part of their platform. The long shamming of those who avoided the Vietnam war is a disguised plea for suppression because behind it lurks a desire to take away any moral decisions of the individual and put it in the hand of the state, only.
We don't have a conservative party in America, not just in the narrow, classical sense of conservative, we don't even have a reasonable imitation of conservative values expressed through political ideas. We have a big business Republican party, carefully aligned with the wealthy and the mega-rich, dragging along religious and cultural retrogressive groups. The base desire is for power, used their way.
The right always advertises itself as supporting "individual liberty". They don't mean it, except when it comes to taxes and government regulation of business. In truth, the hard right in America wants suppression, the kind that helped end the Occupy Wall Street protests a few years ago, the kind, active right now, that is working to turn the tables of the Black Lives Matter movement by claiming they are the real racists for even raising race in police treatment of black citizens.
Wherever there is force and power used against the individual, America's hard right stands by ready to cheer. There are, apparently, no limits on what they would like to see done for "security" at airports. Prisons from sea to sea was once actually part of their platform. The long shamming of those who avoided the Vietnam war is a disguised plea for suppression because behind it lurks a desire to take away any moral decisions of the individual and put it in the hand of the state, only.
We don't have a conservative party in America, not just in the narrow, classical sense of conservative, we don't even have a reasonable imitation of conservative values expressed through political ideas. We have a big business Republican party, carefully aligned with the wealthy and the mega-rich, dragging along religious and cultural retrogressive groups. The base desire is for power, used their way.
17
Show us your tax returns, Donald, and prove you're not in Putin's pocket, or that you in fact have any real assets at all.
11
Please stop with all your transparent politics. We know you love Hillary and hate Trump.. Fine. Now please write about what you are best at, the economy and the changing future. Please write about jobs and tomorrow and the challenges any president will face as more and more jobs are lost or displaced by AI and the rise of the Robots. Please write about a Universal Income and why or why not your candidate Hillary should or should not be for it. Write about why or why not Hillary will be an effective president when it comes to fixing infrastructure which might create jobs as our economy transitions from a demand based consumption economy into one where hopefully we have more equality, and more liesure and more freedom to create ( not hillary's world I am thinking, at least she does not speak of it) Imagine. Please.
5
We need to see Trump's tax returns. How deeplin indebted is he to Russia, the Bank of China and the Deutsche Bank of Germany? Where will his allegiance lie?
13
His allegiance is to himself and to anyone in the world who will help enrich him.
5
Prof Krugman's close ('Strong!') and the overall tone of this column might be considered in some contexts. However, rudely denouncing this sort of praise of a bully is spot on. People once said Mussolini was a great leader "because he made the trains run on time". In a similar sense, Putin has used the powers of the Russian state to do some things of note, but few of those things are actually praise-worthy.
Trump loves Putin? Does Trump support the current round of sanctions against Russia over its invasion of Ukraine? Does Trump support the independence of the other former Soviet nations, or should Putin annex all of them, too? What does a strong leader do? What about Eastern Europe? "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" - who was the strong leader then?
Politeness is often an admirable quality, but not in the face of ruthless political pandering to powerful dictators. Trump thinks a great leader is one who gets stuff done, regardless of what that stuff is. You know, a great leader makes the trains run on time. Putin is Making Russia Great Again.
You may fire when ready, Professor Krugman.
Trump loves Putin? Does Trump support the current round of sanctions against Russia over its invasion of Ukraine? Does Trump support the independence of the other former Soviet nations, or should Putin annex all of them, too? What does a strong leader do? What about Eastern Europe? "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" - who was the strong leader then?
Politeness is often an admirable quality, but not in the face of ruthless political pandering to powerful dictators. Trump thinks a great leader is one who gets stuff done, regardless of what that stuff is. You know, a great leader makes the trains run on time. Putin is Making Russia Great Again.
You may fire when ready, Professor Krugman.
4
This essay on Putin and Russia is weak intellectually. All historically-accurate descriptions of Putin's rise to power give details about the Russian domestic situation during the decade before Putin. Krugman's essay includes nothing about that decade, the 1990's. Amazing! The essay touches on Russia's military confrontations while completely omitting Russia's experience with NATO? Amazing. The author has become a propagandist, obscuring rather than illuminating.
5
Please fill in the blanks for us. Your vague allusions do not advance a substantive dialogue. Because of their lack of specificity, they also fail as an attack on Krugman.
You have obscured rather than illuminated.
You have obscured rather than illuminated.
5
Although, to be fair @Glenn, despite the ample space you had left for your comment, you have not illuminated anything to refute the assessment that Putin is an autocratic (and possibly murderous) scoundrel. All you do is allude to the 90's and NATO. What of it? Did NATO and the 90's tell Putin to base nearly the entire Russian economy eternally high oil prices?
7
Just think: Donald Trump is so eager to emulate Putin that even now he may be preparing his own list of obstreperous journalists meriting assassination or prison.
Megyn Kelly, among others, may soon have blood coming out of more places than just her "wherever."
Megyn Kelly, among others, may soon have blood coming out of more places than just her "wherever."
5
The right wing love affair with Putin began with his open disdain for President Obama. The Right and the Republican Party stand for nothing except for "Notobama." Putin and the Republican Party are united in their shared animosity for the President. That the Right has similar aspirations to power as Putin is frosting on the cake. If Putin and Obama had developed a working relationship, regardless of his authoritarian attributes, the Russian oligarch would have been soundly rebuked by the U.S. Right.
5
Dr. Krugman asks, “How crucial has Russian money been in sustaining Mr. Trump’s ramshackle business empire?”
Therein lies the answer.
“Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets,” Trump’s son, Donald Jr., told a real estate conference in 2008, according to TPM.
Putin’s thugs might very well have suggested to the Trump campaign that they might leak some of the details of these assets, if Trump didn’t toe the Kremlin line?
Dr. Krugman is right in that “given Mr. Trump’s secretiveness and his refusal to release his taxes,” we will never know how deep the Putin connection to Trump is?
The American people deserve to know if their next president is likely to be taking his orders from Moscow. Trump must release his tax returns ASAP and clear the air.
Therein lies the answer.
“Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets,” Trump’s son, Donald Jr., told a real estate conference in 2008, according to TPM.
Putin’s thugs might very well have suggested to the Trump campaign that they might leak some of the details of these assets, if Trump didn’t toe the Kremlin line?
Dr. Krugman is right in that “given Mr. Trump’s secretiveness and his refusal to release his taxes,” we will never know how deep the Putin connection to Trump is?
The American people deserve to know if their next president is likely to be taking his orders from Moscow. Trump must release his tax returns ASAP and clear the air.
22
America is rapidly becoming a "service economy." What do you have in a service economy? You have "serfs," a majority of the population who are the servants of those with power and money. The rest of us - almost all the rest - are "wage slaves" who, now and then, have the "luxury" of some free time to be waited on in restaurants and vacation spots whenever we can afford a few hours or days of playing at being masters. Capitalists like it this way. Putin has the image of being a confident, powerful master. He's their kind of guy. And, it seems, we have a large contingent, too, of serfs and slaves who like it too. He has something in his eyes that we would fain call "Master." Trump has it too.
5
Many American and British intellectuals admired the rise of Hitler's Third Reich during its formative years. They quantified the results without looking more closely at the horrific means used to achieve them. Note that Vlad the Impaler was also admired by princes of 15th century western Europe for the success of his civil order and crime prevention program The Devil was in the details. Mr. Trump is no different in his admiration of Mr. Putin. Russia is a business empire ruled by thuggish oligarchs, much like the Mafia or Mr. Trump's own modus operandi.
11
Good call. Strong and manly; not like Merkel. Oligarchy leadership, not those dirty 'unions'. So, they support 'We the Few' rather than 'We the People'. Their choice. Let's just make it clear what that actually says about democracy and equality.
7
You will find many fine examples below of the kind of Americans who love Putin. Judging by their recommends I would say there are about 60 of them reading. They all talk about Putin's admirable traits. It's amazing how often they admire the things PK said they would even when they attempt to disguise it with a different choice of words. And they often take a self congratulatory swipe at PK without any awareness that they have confirmed his hypothesis.
4
“Oh, how happy they would be if they could find their own Vladimir Putin to run for president in 2016.” - David Horsey, Los Angeles Times (2014)
Former republican candidate Mitt Romney declared during the last presidential election race that Russia is our greatest threat but he also declared that “corporations are people” (Citizens United) and dismissed 47 percent of Americans. Now the republicans have Donald Trump proposing somewhat the opposite that Mr. Putin is a great leader and that he (Trump) is using his own money for his campaign and wants to help American workers. The common denominator here, even when they flip 180 degrees, is (surprise!) rich guys proposing tax cuts for the wealthy.
The better we understand where the republicans anti-democratic movement is rooted the better we can protect our rights and not fall for the lies. Jochen Bittner describes well in his NYTimes op/ed what is drawing fearful Americans and Europeans into the “orderism” offered by strongmen leaders.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/02/opinion/the-new-ideology-of-the-new-co...
Almost everyone gets Russia wrong apart from Obama
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/08/almost-everyone-ge...
Former republican candidate Mitt Romney declared during the last presidential election race that Russia is our greatest threat but he also declared that “corporations are people” (Citizens United) and dismissed 47 percent of Americans. Now the republicans have Donald Trump proposing somewhat the opposite that Mr. Putin is a great leader and that he (Trump) is using his own money for his campaign and wants to help American workers. The common denominator here, even when they flip 180 degrees, is (surprise!) rich guys proposing tax cuts for the wealthy.
The better we understand where the republicans anti-democratic movement is rooted the better we can protect our rights and not fall for the lies. Jochen Bittner describes well in his NYTimes op/ed what is drawing fearful Americans and Europeans into the “orderism” offered by strongmen leaders.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/02/opinion/the-new-ideology-of-the-new-co...
Almost everyone gets Russia wrong apart from Obama
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/08/almost-everyone-ge...
5
"[A]n authoritarian state, with a cult of personality around its strongman, that showers benefits on an immensely wealthy oligarchy while brutally suppressing opposition and criticism."
At the risk of sounding ill-informed: wasn't that true in practice of Russia (or the USSR) even when it WAS communist (see, e.g., "nomenklatura")?
At the risk of sounding ill-informed: wasn't that true in practice of Russia (or the USSR) even when it WAS communist (see, e.g., "nomenklatura")?
4
I think of Trump and Putin as evolutionary aberrations, both demonstrating behavior that we will hopefully outgrow as a race.
But wouldn't it be interesting to see them cage-fighting? We could see how macho The Donald really is...
But wouldn't it be interesting to see them cage-fighting? We could see how macho The Donald really is...
3
Perhaps Putin represents what Trump honestly believes being President is all about: absolute authority.
Trump often seems taken aback when confronted with any kind of legal obstacles to his will. When he unveiled plans to torture people or to punish the families of terrorists (as opposed to terrorists themselves), it seemed as if he never considered whether such actions were legal or not. It was only later that he flippantly talked about "changing the laws" to allow such things. How due process might accommodate punishing innocent family members for the crime of being related to a terrorist overseas is an open question.
Side note: Does ethics/morality matter to anyone anymore? Or is it just logistics at this point?
He has also made repeated "jokes" about how he would deal with his detractors and political rivals. He imagines 2nd Amendment enthusiasts have special ways of dealing with a potential Clinton presidency. He would like to expand slander/libel laws to muzzle the press. He clearly enjoyed it when protestors were harmed at his rallies. When he looks at Putin, he sees that authoritarian power in action. Putin CAN (and DOES) control the Russian media. Putin decides what stories are allowed and woe to those in defiance. As for Putin's political rivals, they are lucky if they are merely bankrupted, exiled or incarcerated (more than one have conveniently died). He decides who rises and who falls under his regime. How could Trump not be attracted to that?
Trump often seems taken aback when confronted with any kind of legal obstacles to his will. When he unveiled plans to torture people or to punish the families of terrorists (as opposed to terrorists themselves), it seemed as if he never considered whether such actions were legal or not. It was only later that he flippantly talked about "changing the laws" to allow such things. How due process might accommodate punishing innocent family members for the crime of being related to a terrorist overseas is an open question.
Side note: Does ethics/morality matter to anyone anymore? Or is it just logistics at this point?
He has also made repeated "jokes" about how he would deal with his detractors and political rivals. He imagines 2nd Amendment enthusiasts have special ways of dealing with a potential Clinton presidency. He would like to expand slander/libel laws to muzzle the press. He clearly enjoyed it when protestors were harmed at his rallies. When he looks at Putin, he sees that authoritarian power in action. Putin CAN (and DOES) control the Russian media. Putin decides what stories are allowed and woe to those in defiance. As for Putin's political rivals, they are lucky if they are merely bankrupted, exiled or incarcerated (more than one have conveniently died). He decides who rises and who falls under his regime. How could Trump not be attracted to that?
79
Initially, I thought it was suspicious when FoxNews commentators began effusively praising Putin and contrasting him to "mom jeans" Obama a few years ago. I mused to myself that if liberal commentators had done something similar to a conservative president, they would have been labeled as seditious at best, or more likely, traitors.
In the intervening years, we have seen that the Russian government has financed many far right (and some far left) political parties in Europe as a means to destabilize the continent. And now, in the US, the rise of the "Alt-Right" coincides with the Trump's thusfar successful rendering of right wing dog-whistling into red meat gravy train.
Hollywood should just start making movies where the Russians are the bad guys again. We're pretty good at that.
In the intervening years, we have seen that the Russian government has financed many far right (and some far left) political parties in Europe as a means to destabilize the continent. And now, in the US, the rise of the "Alt-Right" coincides with the Trump's thusfar successful rendering of right wing dog-whistling into red meat gravy train.
Hollywood should just start making movies where the Russians are the bad guys again. We're pretty good at that.
3
For years, Donald J. Trump has wanted to build a Trump Tower in Moscow, Well, given Trump's past history of taking many contract disputed to Bankruptcy Court, that would make for great Reality TV when he gets in from of the "Judge"!
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
2
For some right wingers like me, it's not so much that we like Putin. It's that we don't understand why the US insists on pushing NATO and or the EU all the way up to the Russian border. Why are we meddling so much in the Ukraine when it seems to so antagonize the Russians which have a very close emotional connection with it (and among some Ukrainians the feeling is mutual). People who during the Cold war dismissed the horrors of Russian control of Eastern Europe now seem to feel we desperately need to come to Ukraine's aid even as Russian influence has become such more benign. This is a place they probably never new was a country until a few years ago. It's just weird how the American and European left seems to feel the need to humiliate Russia. It feels like there is a huge contingent of diplomatic and intelligence people whose life work was opposing Russia now matter what and even if these people have retired there's an institutional memory that lives on. It's just weird.
2
By the way, would anyone perceive Angela Merkel as a strong leader ?
Angela Merkel is the longest – governing leader in Europe. She continues to hold power despite the unpopularity of many of her domestic positions.
Sounds pretty strong to me.
Sounds pretty strong to me.
12
You bet!
4
Anything trump says is nonsense, so why write a column about his palaver? It just elevates trumpisms to the status of actual words. So many people being lead around by the nose!
2
"Thugs and Kisses"indeed. Trump's admiration of Putin shows an incredible lack of understanding of geopolitics or a very dangerous candidate sure to get us in deep trouble.
11
One of Putin's appeals to the far right is his draping himself in masculine values. Even if Hillary Clinton was no the Democratic Party candidate the right and many Republicans seem to have a real feminine problem. The idea of the "daddy party" (Republican) and the "mommy party" (Democratic) is not new. Putin lets it be expressed fully.
7
Sure, Russia does fail the Guns vs. Butter dilemma; however, they and Russia closed the technological gap while our military has been fighting two unnecessary wars in the Middle East. While we were distracted from development, and depleting our budget, the Russia and China were: expanding their budgets; building state-of-the-art weapons systems and stealing our defense technology improvements through Cyberwarfare.
Check-out the DoD's new military defense strategy, the "Third Offset Strategy".
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
Check-out the DoD's new military defense strategy, the "Third Offset Strategy".
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
1
What is most frightening of all is that Trump admires Putin because he aspires to be like him. Which means that if he gets into power, he will do everything he can to eviscerate the Constitution and replace it with one-man rule. "I alone can fix the country's problems." He has already said that he doesn't like the existing system, and presumably will try to replace it with something more to his liking.
We all ought to be terrified by that prospect.
We all ought to be terrified by that prospect.
5
Perhaps the cult following of Putin is similar to the cult following of Reagan. Look at the similarities: both leaders took credit for economic changes they did not cause, for Putin the rise in oil, for Reagan the fall in oil. Both leaders were used the popularity to push forth changes: in Putin's case strengthening government, in Reagan's case the weakening of government.
2
There's no way to gloss over Donald Trump's unabashed adulation of Vladimir Putin.
Nor is there any way of denying that Putin is an absolute autocrat.
The fact that these two facts coincide, is reason enough to question what Donald Trump would be like as President of the United States.
Would theat mean the end of Press freedom, and Freedom of speech?
Would dissenters quietly disapper into the night?
Would the there be new Gulags built in addition to the wall between here and Mexico?
This may sound ridiculous, even funny. But if this happens, no one will be laughing.
Least of all, Americans.
Nor is there any way of denying that Putin is an absolute autocrat.
The fact that these two facts coincide, is reason enough to question what Donald Trump would be like as President of the United States.
Would theat mean the end of Press freedom, and Freedom of speech?
Would dissenters quietly disapper into the night?
Would the there be new Gulags built in addition to the wall between here and Mexico?
This may sound ridiculous, even funny. But if this happens, no one will be laughing.
Least of all, Americans.
5
Reality is that the former USSR unhappily could not become an enlightened social-democratic success story.
The nation has apparently evolved (devolved) into authoritarianism.
A petro-state.
I don't know if it's defined as an autocracy, a plutocracy, an oligarchy or a mixture or one-person popularity or inexactly what.
I grant "mixtuire" or "combination of the above" can describe any country
Glasnost & perestroika just don't function as one in an ivory tower idealizes/theorizes/hopes.
What is the Peoples Republic of China other than a complex de facto mixture.
And our USA is really a de facto mixture too.
The nation has apparently evolved (devolved) into authoritarianism.
A petro-state.
I don't know if it's defined as an autocracy, a plutocracy, an oligarchy or a mixture or one-person popularity or inexactly what.
I grant "mixtuire" or "combination of the above" can describe any country
Glasnost & perestroika just don't function as one in an ivory tower idealizes/theorizes/hopes.
What is the Peoples Republic of China other than a complex de facto mixture.
And our USA is really a de facto mixture too.
1
This column fails to give Putin sufficient credit. On the apparently powerful leader side of the ledger, Putin has absolutely filled the vacuum in Syria. True, his task is easy compared to ours. He can support a despotic and brutal regime against all of its opponents and he can partner with Iran and Hezbollah to accomplish that. We can't simply oppose Assad. We need to find among those opponents any who could actually lead a post-Assad Syria to prevent it from becoming another Libya. And we can't partner with Turkey to oppose Assad without also destroying our Kurdish allies.
On the domestic front, Putin has had many chances to appear tough by directly attacking terrorists on his own soil, because unlike America, Russia has plenty of violent internal opponents, although admittedly many of those opponents were created by Soviet or Russian policies.
On the ruthless autocrat side of the ledger, Putin's accomplishments go beyond those stated by Paul Krugman. Putin has completely subverted Russia's nascent democracy by crushing his political rivals, by destroying any semblance of a free press and by removing any independence from Russia's judiciary. It's not hard to visualize a president-for-life Putin in the future.
So what part of all that wouldn't Donald Trump like?
On the domestic front, Putin has had many chances to appear tough by directly attacking terrorists on his own soil, because unlike America, Russia has plenty of violent internal opponents, although admittedly many of those opponents were created by Soviet or Russian policies.
On the ruthless autocrat side of the ledger, Putin's accomplishments go beyond those stated by Paul Krugman. Putin has completely subverted Russia's nascent democracy by crushing his political rivals, by destroying any semblance of a free press and by removing any independence from Russia's judiciary. It's not hard to visualize a president-for-life Putin in the future.
So what part of all that wouldn't Donald Trump like?
4
Thou doth fret too much Herr Professor. Rest easy, Trump's only doing what's politically fashionable and all the rage these days: snubbing Obama. It all started in March, when the president, against all conventional wisdom plus all-caps Senate messages, nominated Justice Garland. It gathered speed after the Supreme Court kept intact an appeals court ruling that included, among other things, Obama's nth breach of executive authority. It became unstoppable after the justice department translated Title IX to Swahili, then French, and finally back to English, and issued a nationwide bathroom rule on the basis.
You don't have to join the party, but do lighten up/ignore. It's all harmless time passing until Jan 20 when Trump finally takes office, and gives us weary people the break we've waited so long for and deserve.
You don't have to join the party, but do lighten up/ignore. It's all harmless time passing until Jan 20 when Trump finally takes office, and gives us weary people the break we've waited so long for and deserve.
1
If Trump wins the presidency, you'll get the break you deserve but not the one you're expecting.
5
I can only hope you speak on n jest.
3
@wanderer
Bar's real low: all we ask today is for an executive branch, any executive branch. Not one that's been out of commission for an entire year and has little work left except a pardon list, nor one that'll collapse without warning in full world view.
You voting Trump or abstaining? Both work. See you here for the celebration, Jan 20.
Bar's real low: all we ask today is for an executive branch, any executive branch. Not one that's been out of commission for an entire year and has little work left except a pardon list, nor one that'll collapse without warning in full world view.
You voting Trump or abstaining? Both work. See you here for the celebration, Jan 20.
1
Insightful. This column fires a shot across the bow of the American public.
Russia under Putin leadership is less stable economically because of its reliance on oil and natural gas exports. Their economy needs to diversify before it is too late.
The economic death rattles can be heard by the market and it appears despite what those who are in denial on global warming (Mr. Trump's coal revival promise), rising sea levels from melting ice and thermal expansion of the oceans) is threatening many urban areas. There is a limited time for the World to act. Scientists know that once the Arctic permafrost thaws and releases its billions of tons of frozen methane to the atmosphere, the game is over.
The entire international community must respond to this existential threat if we are to live a better life. Everyone knows that we must put most of the World's capital into creating new energy sources to replace fossil fuels. And this replacement, which will happen, is a huge challenge for the fossil energy dependent states, Russia included. It can be a great economic/market opportunity to bring a new wave of prosperity, even to the oligarchies.
We cannot and should not turn to a military response to this major global change but we must pursue technologies that will help humans continue toward broadly shared flush times which can be possible by harnessing the current flow of energy from the Sun that is 10s of thousands times more than human societies will require.
Russia under Putin leadership is less stable economically because of its reliance on oil and natural gas exports. Their economy needs to diversify before it is too late.
The economic death rattles can be heard by the market and it appears despite what those who are in denial on global warming (Mr. Trump's coal revival promise), rising sea levels from melting ice and thermal expansion of the oceans) is threatening many urban areas. There is a limited time for the World to act. Scientists know that once the Arctic permafrost thaws and releases its billions of tons of frozen methane to the atmosphere, the game is over.
The entire international community must respond to this existential threat if we are to live a better life. Everyone knows that we must put most of the World's capital into creating new energy sources to replace fossil fuels. And this replacement, which will happen, is a huge challenge for the fossil energy dependent states, Russia included. It can be a great economic/market opportunity to bring a new wave of prosperity, even to the oligarchies.
We cannot and should not turn to a military response to this major global change but we must pursue technologies that will help humans continue toward broadly shared flush times which can be possible by harnessing the current flow of energy from the Sun that is 10s of thousands times more than human societies will require.
3
Trump states that he admires Putin's "strength". Trump loves strength. Strength to Trump means power, and he wallows in it. As head of his corporation, the power of a dictator, the power of a ruthless demagogue, reigns supreme. Trump does acknowledge that Putin's strength cannot be used in the US. Well, thanks for your brilliant assessment, Donny. We didn't know there was a difference between US and Russia until he pointed this out to us.
I think it's Trump who fails to spot the difference. One gets the feeling that Trump secretly idolizes Putin's power. There are many here in our government who probably wish they could exert their influence in a more dictatorial way. But they can't, and despite wanting a leader who can make the trains run on time, we can't allow our democratic process, as slow and frustrating as it can be, to be subverted for promises of efficiency. Democracy is a messy thing and may be the worse system of governing, but it still is far superior to the alternatives.
DD
Manhattan
I think it's Trump who fails to spot the difference. One gets the feeling that Trump secretly idolizes Putin's power. There are many here in our government who probably wish they could exert their influence in a more dictatorial way. But they can't, and despite wanting a leader who can make the trains run on time, we can't allow our democratic process, as slow and frustrating as it can be, to be subverted for promises of efficiency. Democracy is a messy thing and may be the worse system of governing, but it still is far superior to the alternatives.
DD
Manhattan
10
It was Bush 43 who looked into Putin's eyes, detected a soul and said he realized that this was a man with whom he could do business.
Putin is a despot. We get that. But Sec. of State Kerry is meeting with Sergey Lavrov on a daily basis -- Putin's right hand man. We will have to do more business with Putin in the future not less. We cannot dismiss him because we don't like his opportunistic grasps of peoples and terrain, yearnings for the formerly USSR.
If I can get 60-80% of an agreement I want from the devil. I will do it. [we didn't get that much from Iran]. Rather than waving our hands and gasping at Trump's favorable attitude toward Putin, I think we need to look down range and say where do we go from here.
We broke the Middle East by invading Iraq and triumphantly presuming that we could install democratic values in Islamic states. The Arab Spring was our hallucination -- we harvested failed states. Millions of displaced people living and dying on the fringe of civilization. Putin did not create our mess.
In Europe just as Bush planning the invasion. I could not get away from people -- from cabbies to ministers of government -- all wanting to know if we had lost our humanity and sanity in going after a phantom -- WMDs.
I just completed reading two books on Eisenhower by Ambrose. Very unsettling. At no time during my life have we been in such a dangerous world since WWII. Political Correctness -- take a powder.
Putin is a despot. We get that. But Sec. of State Kerry is meeting with Sergey Lavrov on a daily basis -- Putin's right hand man. We will have to do more business with Putin in the future not less. We cannot dismiss him because we don't like his opportunistic grasps of peoples and terrain, yearnings for the formerly USSR.
If I can get 60-80% of an agreement I want from the devil. I will do it. [we didn't get that much from Iran]. Rather than waving our hands and gasping at Trump's favorable attitude toward Putin, I think we need to look down range and say where do we go from here.
We broke the Middle East by invading Iraq and triumphantly presuming that we could install democratic values in Islamic states. The Arab Spring was our hallucination -- we harvested failed states. Millions of displaced people living and dying on the fringe of civilization. Putin did not create our mess.
In Europe just as Bush planning the invasion. I could not get away from people -- from cabbies to ministers of government -- all wanting to know if we had lost our humanity and sanity in going after a phantom -- WMDs.
I just completed reading two books on Eisenhower by Ambrose. Very unsettling. At no time during my life have we been in such a dangerous world since WWII. Political Correctness -- take a powder.
1
It's the Republicans that got us in this mess, and they and especially Trump are not capable of getting us out of it. They have become the 'wannabe' Nazi Party.
2
I completely agree, Dr Krugman.
Russia, in contrast to Soviet Union, is a regional power and it tries to assert it in Middle East (their neighborhood just across Turkey and Iran) and in Eastern Europe. Elevating it to a higher status is not a smart thing to do, either by describing it as a major US foe (Romney) or as a essential partner to solve Middle East problems (Trump). With Putin in charge there is no sense to build any long lasting partnership with Russia.
I like Obama's approach in Middle East very much because it does ensure minimal US involvement but it does not necessitate major expense and troops deployment. It allows other ME players to develop natural and more lasting alliances. If Russia is part of that new order to some extent, fine, just make sure their meddling is not undermining US goals. In long run it is Russia who will feel the burden of their overreach and expense in ME. US can control that (and oil pricing to some extent) by engaging extensively in green energy, partner with China, and in 5-10 years leave Russia with their collapsing economy. In economic terms Russia now is a Soviet Union in 1970s: still capable but on the brink of collapse, let them deploy their troops in Syria. Let them make it a bit more costly to them. They want to win a regional agreement now that will not have a lasting significance. We may test them, we may sign cease fire agreements, but we better just wait. Patience is something they can't afford. We can.
Russia, in contrast to Soviet Union, is a regional power and it tries to assert it in Middle East (their neighborhood just across Turkey and Iran) and in Eastern Europe. Elevating it to a higher status is not a smart thing to do, either by describing it as a major US foe (Romney) or as a essential partner to solve Middle East problems (Trump). With Putin in charge there is no sense to build any long lasting partnership with Russia.
I like Obama's approach in Middle East very much because it does ensure minimal US involvement but it does not necessitate major expense and troops deployment. It allows other ME players to develop natural and more lasting alliances. If Russia is part of that new order to some extent, fine, just make sure their meddling is not undermining US goals. In long run it is Russia who will feel the burden of their overreach and expense in ME. US can control that (and oil pricing to some extent) by engaging extensively in green energy, partner with China, and in 5-10 years leave Russia with their collapsing economy. In economic terms Russia now is a Soviet Union in 1970s: still capable but on the brink of collapse, let them deploy their troops in Syria. Let them make it a bit more costly to them. They want to win a regional agreement now that will not have a lasting significance. We may test them, we may sign cease fire agreements, but we better just wait. Patience is something they can't afford. We can.
8
"...I. mention all of this because Donald Trump’s effusive praise for Vladimir Putin — which actually reflects a fairly common sentiment on the right — seems to have confused some people...."
The confused person in this scene is Paul Krugman. Trump's offhand comment about Putting was neither "effusive", nor really even "praise", but an observation about a hard-nosed leader who is passionate about his country.
The rest of Krugman's analysis of Russia is typically shallow.
The confused person in this scene is Paul Krugman. Trump's offhand comment about Putting was neither "effusive", nor really even "praise", but an observation about a hard-nosed leader who is passionate about his country.
The rest of Krugman's analysis of Russia is typically shallow.
2
If you wish "logic" to in fact "rule," you would do well to acquaint yourself with the wide range of remarks Trump has made about Putin.
6
You just proved Krugman's point about the right's(alt-right's?) admiration for Putin.
5
You are contradicting yourself, logic rules. Every dictator or ruler has been praised at some point of being "passionate" about his country. Is North Korean leader any different? It didn't work for any of these countries. That is a reason we have Democracy in ALL most successful countries in the world, not dictatorships. Think about that using logic, Logic Rules.
5
Paul, what happened to Hillary's "reset" button? What happened to Obama's statement to Medvedev that he ((Obama) would have more flexibility after he was reelected. It looks like Hillary and Obama tried to do plenty of sucking up to Putin and Russia, and threw Putin lots of kisses.
3
My dad, an ardent Republican, loved the south american dictators.
13
True strength isn't afraid to look reflective; thoughtful; considerate of others. I prefer Obama's true strength to Putin's crude imitation.
14
Trump pictures himself a "strong man", but that is mainly the movie that's playing in his head. He has nothing of substance to back up anything about him. He is just an empty suit bully that is not even an interesting human being. Can you imagine having to bow down and pay tribute to this man?
11
First, Donald Trump, is ignorant about many things and, as usual, his ideas are incoherent. Hoe can "The Donald" claim that Colin Kaepernick's action, in not standing for the National Anthem, disgraceful, when he suggests that the Nation is in a shambles, the Military is broken, and the Generals are worthless.
So, which is it, Donald: Can it be disgraceful not to honor a Nation that needs work, or is America already Great. Your bromance with Vladdie Putin seems to suggest as much: You point to him as a truly great leader, failing to acknowledge that the former KGB agent controls the Media, which takes the polls, and nay-sayers are buried in a remote plot in Gorky Park.
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
So, which is it, Donald: Can it be disgraceful not to honor a Nation that needs work, or is America already Great. Your bromance with Vladdie Putin seems to suggest as much: You point to him as a truly great leader, failing to acknowledge that the former KGB agent controls the Media, which takes the polls, and nay-sayers are buried in a remote plot in Gorky Park.
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
5
I am confused about the dichotomy between Trump-- the GOP candidate for the Presidency and Fan Number One of Putin-- and the GOP propaganda machine and war-monger leaders who constantly call out Obama for not doing anything to control Putin's actions in Crimea and Ukraine. I also struggle with the contrast between GW, who got a complete pass for saying he "looked into Putin's eyes and saw his soul" (what?) and the GOP propaganda machine and leaders, including Romney who say Russia is the enemy. Which is it? Friend or Foe?
9
“today’s Russia isn’t Communist, or even leftist; it’s just an authoritarian state, with a cult of personality around its strongman, that showers benefits on an immensely wealthy oligarchy while brutally suppressing opposition and criticism” which is the kind of country the megalomaniac psychopath yearns with the help of his basket of deplorables.
12
" praise for Vladimir Putin — which actually reflects a fairly common sentiment on the right — seems to have confused some people."
Yes, Krug, you most certainly ARE confused. Equating what trump and others have said about Putin with apporval of him only shows your total lack of critical thinking, and your blind partisanship.
Good lord.
Yes, Krug, you most certainly ARE confused. Equating what trump and others have said about Putin with apporval of him only shows your total lack of critical thinking, and your blind partisanship.
Good lord.
1
Wait.... so, praising a dictator who murders his rivals is NOT the same thing as approval? If praise and approval are separate in this case, is that more akin to loving the sinner but hating the sin? What, exactly, is being praised? Strength of character? Yes, indeed... good lord. As in, save us all from such circuitous thinking. Putin is a murderer. Period. How many people have suffered torture and death by his hand?
3
Have you even read or heard the praise the Republicans have been giving Putin over last few years?
Good Lord indeed!!
Good Lord indeed!!
4
The continual demonizing of Russia from 1917 on , when we invaded The USSR , has been one of hostility . We encroach on their territory, surround them with missiles and constantly try for regime change. Trump likes Putin - better than Clinton's readiness for regime change. We need to tamp down the anti Russia hysteria, it will only lead to another senseless war.
2
Come again on the US invading Russia/Soviet Union???
2
US sent the Allied Expeditionary Force to Russia in 1917 in an effort to defeat the Bolsheviks.
1
Don the Con's real agenda was on display with his speech at the Republican National Convention in which he stated numerous times that only HE could fix America's problems! Vote a straight Democratic ticket to expunge the Republican party and Don the Con from American politics forever!
11
The right apparently likes swaggering bullies who ride horses sans shirts. Someone please photoshop a picture of Donald Trump shirtless with an AK-47 slung over his shoulder atop a stallion. Be sure to get the physique correct. The right would go mad for it. Oops they already have gone mad.
People are confusing being a bully with being strong. Being strong is withstanding 12 grueling hours of being battered by members of Congress over Benghazi and coming out with your head held high. Being strong is listening instead of insulting. Being strong is thinking before you act.
Trump knows nothing about strength of character and everything about being a bully. Clinton personifies the very strength of character needed in a President as does President Obama. To people on the right: Never confuse quiet reflection with weakness. "Exercise intelligent forethought ....sufficiently far in advance of any likely crisis" to paraphrase Teddy Roosevelt. Not thinking Trump would be likely to do that.
People are confusing being a bully with being strong. Being strong is withstanding 12 grueling hours of being battered by members of Congress over Benghazi and coming out with your head held high. Being strong is listening instead of insulting. Being strong is thinking before you act.
Trump knows nothing about strength of character and everything about being a bully. Clinton personifies the very strength of character needed in a President as does President Obama. To people on the right: Never confuse quiet reflection with weakness. "Exercise intelligent forethought ....sufficiently far in advance of any likely crisis" to paraphrase Teddy Roosevelt. Not thinking Trump would be likely to do that.
127
Here's your pic of a shirtless Trump on a horse, although they didn't get the physique correct: http://www.macleans.ca/news/world/trumputin-the-disturbing-parallels-bet...
1
Thanks for the picture. Obviously Trump's head was put on someone else's body. Agree that physique did not belong to Trump!
That was a very good critique of Putin, and important in context of Trump's worship of Putin. Make America Great Again? ... means make Trump a ruthless US dictator.
12
I read a passage recently declaring that certain Americans "don't like Putin because he's a competitor." Really? I hardly think I'm alone in saying that I despise Putin because he's a murderous thug, bully, liar and kleptocrat with a long list of corpses, not to mention broken nations, in his aggressive wake. He is an accessory to war crimes in Syria as well as a war criminal in his own right in Ukraine.
Ask thousands of Georgians and Ukranians, even more Syrian about Putin's "leadership." Ask Alexander Litvinenko's widow or the families of Galina Starovoitova, Sergei Yushenkov, Yuri Shchekochikhin, Yuri Shchekochikhin, Nikolai Girenko, Paul Klebnikov, Andrei Kozlov, Anna Politkovskaya, Stanslav Markelov, Anastasia Barburova, Natalia Estemirova and Boris Nemtsov to name just a few. Poisoned or gunned-down, all of them.
This is what the "competition" looks like: a graveyard of slain dissidents and smashed countries led by the "real leader" so revered by the likes of Rudy Giuliani and Donald Trump.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
Ask thousands of Georgians and Ukranians, even more Syrian about Putin's "leadership." Ask Alexander Litvinenko's widow or the families of Galina Starovoitova, Sergei Yushenkov, Yuri Shchekochikhin, Yuri Shchekochikhin, Nikolai Girenko, Paul Klebnikov, Andrei Kozlov, Anna Politkovskaya, Stanslav Markelov, Anastasia Barburova, Natalia Estemirova and Boris Nemtsov to name just a few. Poisoned or gunned-down, all of them.
This is what the "competition" looks like: a graveyard of slain dissidents and smashed countries led by the "real leader" so revered by the likes of Rudy Giuliani and Donald Trump.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
7
Nobel laureate in economics , yeah and all Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize , unleashing the world more wars than any of his predecessors , under Obama the US debt has increased by 79 % , it can be seen in the success of the economic " miracle"
The usual pattern of anti-Russian propaganda article ,where all the political success of Russia deliberately downplayed or not mentioned.
The usual pattern of anti-Russian propaganda article ,where all the political success of Russia deliberately downplayed or not mentioned.
1
Yes, they have "nukes". So do you. I'm sure you'll both use them responsibly.
1
This essay of Krugman is long on innuendo but short on fact.
When the Soviet Union dissolved 25 years ago, Russia was in decline. But a new superpower was in the making---China.
Deng Xiaoping had in China taken the studies of a few Western "nut cases" too heart. He had instituted a one-child program which enabled China to replace the famines under Mao by a growing standard of living for a population that grew less rapidly.
Now it is China not Russia that has surpassed the US economy by some measures.
But what Russia and China share is disdain for American chauvinism.
You see it is not just Krugman, but also Obama, who lectures the world on its need to replicate itself in America's image.
Recall that our own Vice President Joe Biden lectured the Chinese on the "repugnance" of the one-child policy.
While Obama has lecture the Middle East on the need for democracy when the real problem was too much population growth, which makes democracy unattainable.
So the US lost when Mubarak was replaced by al-Sisi and Gaddafi and al-Assad were replaced by the chaos of ISIS.
Compared to Obama, Putin is at least a realist. He doesn't try the impossible task of remaking the Middle East in America's image.
And he follows the interests of Russia, not the US. No surprise there.
Meanwhile, the arrogant Obama lectures Putin and Xi Jinping. And the Chinese refuse to provide his plane with stairs when he visits.
We need a REAL CHANGE, not lectures on how we are all racist.
When the Soviet Union dissolved 25 years ago, Russia was in decline. But a new superpower was in the making---China.
Deng Xiaoping had in China taken the studies of a few Western "nut cases" too heart. He had instituted a one-child program which enabled China to replace the famines under Mao by a growing standard of living for a population that grew less rapidly.
Now it is China not Russia that has surpassed the US economy by some measures.
But what Russia and China share is disdain for American chauvinism.
You see it is not just Krugman, but also Obama, who lectures the world on its need to replicate itself in America's image.
Recall that our own Vice President Joe Biden lectured the Chinese on the "repugnance" of the one-child policy.
While Obama has lecture the Middle East on the need for democracy when the real problem was too much population growth, which makes democracy unattainable.
So the US lost when Mubarak was replaced by al-Sisi and Gaddafi and al-Assad were replaced by the chaos of ISIS.
Compared to Obama, Putin is at least a realist. He doesn't try the impossible task of remaking the Middle East in America's image.
And he follows the interests of Russia, not the US. No surprise there.
Meanwhile, the arrogant Obama lectures Putin and Xi Jinping. And the Chinese refuse to provide his plane with stairs when he visits.
We need a REAL CHANGE, not lectures on how we are all racist.
3
Yes, with Donald Trump you'll get REAL CHANGE, as in PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR when he "negotiates" with treasury bond holders, leaving you to wonder how you got screwed when you go to collect your social security.
3
It is not just Obama who has promoted or touted American "exceptionalism". Most presidents have. And one cannot mention remaking the Middle East without acknowledging nearly 100 years of American meddling, along with other axis powers, often to disastrous result. This was certainly the case with Bush-Cheney... the bait-and-switch from Afghanistan to Iraq, and all the lies about WMD. That was not even about imposing American-style democracy, as claimed. Just a thinly veiled attempt to control Iraq's oil and to prevent Saddam from further oil-for-cash deals with non-Western-friendly countries.
Thank you Dr. Krugman. Fantastic column! In the case of Russia, we already have the real life demonstration of how the authoritarian "strong man" does NOT make his country great again. And "ramshackle" business empire hits the nail on the head with regard to The Donald's accomplishments.
3
Imagine if President Obama ''executed'' the same powers that Putin does.
~ All republicans would be gone.
~ There would be no such thing as a filibuster
~ Stuff would be made up on the internet as usual , but positive.
~ There would be no free press
Well, maybe that last one is not such a bad thing ...
~ All republicans would be gone.
~ There would be no such thing as a filibuster
~ Stuff would be made up on the internet as usual , but positive.
~ There would be no free press
Well, maybe that last one is not such a bad thing ...
7
All true. But if Putin did have a ideology it would be Fascism.
5
There are always two sides to every coin, just to be "fair":
Tens of billions of dollars have flown to Russia, via weapons and technology purchases, from Iran, using the money this administration gave to Iran.
“Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta sat on the executive board of a small energy company called Joule Unlimited. “Two months after Podesta joined the board, Vladimir Putin’s Rusnano announced that it would invest up to one billion rubles ($35 million) into Joule Unlimited.
The Clinton foundation made over $150 million from a Russian businessman and the banks involved in the Uranium One sale.
Shortly after the Uranium One deal Bill Clinton was given a fee of $500k for a speech in Moscow.
It seems like Trump and Hillary are both courting Putin so what's the big deal? Don't we all want to live is peace and "prosperity."
Tens of billions of dollars have flown to Russia, via weapons and technology purchases, from Iran, using the money this administration gave to Iran.
“Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta sat on the executive board of a small energy company called Joule Unlimited. “Two months after Podesta joined the board, Vladimir Putin’s Rusnano announced that it would invest up to one billion rubles ($35 million) into Joule Unlimited.
The Clinton foundation made over $150 million from a Russian businessman and the banks involved in the Uranium One sale.
Shortly after the Uranium One deal Bill Clinton was given a fee of $500k for a speech in Moscow.
It seems like Trump and Hillary are both courting Putin so what's the big deal? Don't we all want to live is peace and "prosperity."
3
Putin 's personality and ruling ways are red herrings (no puns intended). Russia reacted to 25 years of NATO expansion and the overthrow of Ujraine's elected president--developments demonstrating an insane US foreign policy objective, which is to break and subjugate Russia.
1
Putin clearly prefers Trump to Clinton. Is this because Putin wants America to be great again?
5
Better the Marxist Ideology, by far, Paul.
Being Putin means you don't pay taxes. Maybe that is some of the appeal.
67
It wouldn't surprise me that Trump admires Putin so much because he wishes he WERE Putin.
Which would bode very badly for the US if Trump won the election.
Which would bode very badly for the US if Trump won the election.
2
Why does Trump lavish praise on Putin but disdain the equally authoritarian President Xi of China? Could it be because Putin is white and Xi is not? Just asking.
1
Another possibility:
Chinese businessmen took Donald Trump to the cleaners on that west side real estate deal.
Russian business interests and oligarchs are rumored to have help to prop up Donald Trump's empire. (We will know more about that when we see Donald Trump taxes. LOL.)
Chinese businessmen took Donald Trump to the cleaners on that west side real estate deal.
Russian business interests and oligarchs are rumored to have help to prop up Donald Trump's empire. (We will know more about that when we see Donald Trump taxes. LOL.)
3
Must confess I always associate Russia with Britain ... both shrunken countries packed with nationalists who still half believe they control an enormous empire ... on which the sun never sets. And they act like it. Because they're deluded.
Thank god American voters are never deluded.
(Kidding.)
Thank god American voters are never deluded.
(Kidding.)
3
It is loony to compare the actions of the government of Great Britain with those of Russia under Putin.
Paul, Paul, Paul. How soon you forget the 'ol "Restart" button Hillary gave Mr. P. And remember POTUS whispering to Medvedev he'd have more flexibility (kiss, kiss) after winning re-election? Now, he's the boogeyman. I suppose Putin gave Hillary pneumonia too.
1
Please be honest to agree or disagree to the constitution right to FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION.
The democratic right is ruined by dictatorial leadership style whether the leadership is good or bad to its country.
Please ask all children, adults, workable and disable human beings if they enjoy being loved, cared and respected by authority like parents, educators and direct-in-charge bosses or if they prefer to live under a DEPLORABLE leadership.
Being strong, weak, experienced or idiocy is far better than being bullied, DEPLORABLE, dictatorial and greedy in any leadership from a family unit to workforce and to governmental affairs. Back2basic
The democratic right is ruined by dictatorial leadership style whether the leadership is good or bad to its country.
Please ask all children, adults, workable and disable human beings if they enjoy being loved, cared and respected by authority like parents, educators and direct-in-charge bosses or if they prefer to live under a DEPLORABLE leadership.
Being strong, weak, experienced or idiocy is far better than being bullied, DEPLORABLE, dictatorial and greedy in any leadership from a family unit to workforce and to governmental affairs. Back2basic
Trump's enthusiasm for Putin has one base and one base only:
Putin is someone who can get things done as he has the will and the power to get his way.
But as Trump does not understand anything, chances are that here too he does not understand what he is talking about.
Putin is the right person for a culture like the one in Russia with no democratic history or tradition.
But Putin is no role model for a democratic society like the one the West has.
Just like the character Otto from the movie "A Fish Called Wanda" trying to explain this to Trump is futile as he lacks the intellect to understand the finer point of everything.
So it seems to be easier for most commentators, like e.g. Krugman, to bash Putin than to try and show a way to keep Trump from making more points in the election race.
Which will release some pressure in their minds but not help to change anything with Trump.
So this article serves the only one issue and that is for Mr. Krugman to let off some steam.
Putin is someone who can get things done as he has the will and the power to get his way.
But as Trump does not understand anything, chances are that here too he does not understand what he is talking about.
Putin is the right person for a culture like the one in Russia with no democratic history or tradition.
But Putin is no role model for a democratic society like the one the West has.
Just like the character Otto from the movie "A Fish Called Wanda" trying to explain this to Trump is futile as he lacks the intellect to understand the finer point of everything.
So it seems to be easier for most commentators, like e.g. Krugman, to bash Putin than to try and show a way to keep Trump from making more points in the election race.
Which will release some pressure in their minds but not help to change anything with Trump.
So this article serves the only one issue and that is for Mr. Krugman to let off some steam.
1
Mr Putin is playing Trump. Putin is shrewd, he could have been working on this plan for years, reeling in the donny boy.
Trump, not so shrewd, always having started out ahead, with a stacked deck, willing to screw people and unable to see beyond his own glory.
He, nor his following, has no clue they're Putin's stooges.
Is a vote for Trump really a vote for Putin?
Trump, not so shrewd, always having started out ahead, with a stacked deck, willing to screw people and unable to see beyond his own glory.
He, nor his following, has no clue they're Putin's stooges.
Is a vote for Trump really a vote for Putin?
3
Here in Quebec, the papers spell Putin`s name ``Poutine,`` which is also the name of a popular junk food concoction of french fries, unmelted cheese and gravy. Now, there`s Trumpine, a mix of sour grapes and hot air.
6
"Here in Quebec, the papers spell Putin`s name ``Poutine,`` which is also the name of a popular junk food concoction of french fries, unmelted cheese and gravy. Now, there`s Trumpine, a mix of sour grapes and hot air."
Inventing poutine is the only thing I hold against the French Canadians, an otherwise great people.
Inventing poutine is the only thing I hold against the French Canadians, an otherwise great people.
1
Make America Great .... by selling out to Russia
1
When the discussion is about how the right shares Putin's "the ends justify the means" in order to suppress anyone's views that differs with theirs, it rings completely true in both theory and in practice. Thanks, to a large degree, to institutions that are more faithful to the rule of law than to hate speech, the US doesn't suborn as much of the sort of activity that Putin "executes."
However, as the NYT wrote a year ago (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-a..., Mrs. Clinton and the Clinton foundation have done well by allowing the Russians to take ownership of 20% of the US uranium supply. Bubba took $500K to speak to Russian banksters.
While commenters like John from Hartford bemoan the Bush CIA torture program, Clinton builds/meets with national security "working groups" (https://theintercept.com/2016/09/08/hillary-clintons-national-security-a... that are a who's who of Bush era, hardline, 'ends justify the means' criminals & torture cheerleaders.
While Trump talks big, Clinton has the connections and has walked - and continues to walk - the war walk.
Sure, when crossing the street where traffic is controlled by amoral, wannabe dictators, look to the right for an oncoming bus. But if you don't take a long, wary look to the left, you'll just as surely be run over... Krugman's millions & propaganda can't save you from it.
However, as the NYT wrote a year ago (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-a..., Mrs. Clinton and the Clinton foundation have done well by allowing the Russians to take ownership of 20% of the US uranium supply. Bubba took $500K to speak to Russian banksters.
While commenters like John from Hartford bemoan the Bush CIA torture program, Clinton builds/meets with national security "working groups" (https://theintercept.com/2016/09/08/hillary-clintons-national-security-a... that are a who's who of Bush era, hardline, 'ends justify the means' criminals & torture cheerleaders.
While Trump talks big, Clinton has the connections and has walked - and continues to walk - the war walk.
Sure, when crossing the street where traffic is controlled by amoral, wannabe dictators, look to the right for an oncoming bus. But if you don't take a long, wary look to the left, you'll just as surely be run over... Krugman's millions & propaganda can't save you from it.
Be afraid of turning into Denmark. Be very afraid.
Pretty accurate description of a thug and his oligarchic mafia, controlling its long-suffering people by feeding them propaganda as News, distorting strength into brute force, a tactical advance for the short term but an awful delay for the population at-large in their aspirations, needs and wishes. We all know why "oil" is considered a liability, even a curse, as it allows a strongman (Putin, in this case) to abuse his state capitalism for personal gain (kleptocracy) and to the detriment of everybody else. A sham and a shame. All this authoritarian, crooked mess is what Trump, mistakenly, takes as strength; and no doubt to be emulated, should he ever hold the reigns of the presidency (Ughhh!). Of course, by controlling the Press, Trump would surely have an 82% approval rate, a must for his egomaniac needs. Trump is a poor rich guy, that never had a chance to grow up, nor educate himself about the beauty of telling the truth, for a change; he is so, but so weak.
1
The Donald is a loudmouthed bully with a bouffant hairdo. He hangs around with jocks because that's what tough guys do. Oppose The Donald and you're likely to end of sued or FIRED!
Putin purposefully cultivates a tough-guy image and, unlike The Donald, really does tough-guy things. Wimps do not become Lt. Colonels in the KGB. Wimps avoid the draft because of sore feet.
Take heed, Donald, "Oppose the Putin regime, and you’re likely to end up imprisoned or dead."
Putin purposefully cultivates a tough-guy image and, unlike The Donald, really does tough-guy things. Wimps do not become Lt. Colonels in the KGB. Wimps avoid the draft because of sore feet.
Take heed, Donald, "Oppose the Putin regime, and you’re likely to end up imprisoned or dead."
2
I doubt The Donald knows anything about Putin jailing and murdering his political opponets, or anything about the russian federation economy. He saw some poll number that impressed him. "82% and Putin" is about the limit of a string of thought he can hold in his mind. His orange head is as empty as his suit....
3
Trump's admiration for Putin clearly reflects his pathological personality, but what of Clinton's admiration for Henry Kissinger? It would be hard to argue that Putin has committed as many war crimes as Kissinger - or that Putin's actions have caused nearly as many deaths as Kissinger's. At this volatile point in geopolitics, one would hope for a choice between two level-headed, wise leaders. Unfortunately, our choice is between scary and much scarier.
For those not fully aware of Kissinger's criminal record and why Clinton's praise for him is cause for alarm:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/crimes-against-humanity-why-is-henry-kissin...
For those not fully aware of Kissinger's criminal record and why Clinton's praise for him is cause for alarm:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/crimes-against-humanity-why-is-henry-kissin...
1
Let's be clear here: if Obama was a "strong leader" like Putin, Sean Hannity would have mysteriously disappeared a long time ago.
2
Donald Trump: Hair today, Ka-Putin tomorrow.
1
And if "orange Caligula" gets elected: like putin, it will crush "its'" domestic rivals: Oppose the "orange Caligula" regime, and you’re likely to end up imprisoned or dead. (make America)Strong!(Again) SIC!!!
1
Dr Krugman, I'm sorry to say that this bit of foolishness tops even what comes in grocery store magazines. Russia annexed Crimea? You put out that nonsense when some 95% of the Crimeans voted (when has the USA come even close to that voting record?) and some 93% of that vote was to succeed from Ukraine and RE-join Russia? That same Ukraine, subverted by Victoria Newland and her State Department gang that fostered US backed Nazis like the Azov battalion (you can see them on Google - key in "ukraine nazi images"). Get real! You are spinning straight MSM propaganda. You have proven yourself to be just another prestitute for the oligarchs that control this nation.
Let's leave aside the legitimacy of the "vote" of the Ukrainian people and go at this from another direction:
Virtually 100% of those people legally enfranchised within the former Confederate states supported secession in the lead up to the Civil War. Should the US therefore have simply dissolved itself?
(I'm a little afraid of what your answer might be….)
Virtually 100% of those people legally enfranchised within the former Confederate states supported secession in the lead up to the Civil War. Should the US therefore have simply dissolved itself?
(I'm a little afraid of what your answer might be….)
2
Ah, yes, "...Mr. Trump’s ramshackle business empire". Notice that no one calls him a billionaire these days? Perhaps the scrubbing operation taking the orange off his face has also removed some of the gilt off the surface of his bidness genius.
3
Where did you find a photo where 5' 7" Putin stands above the people next to him?
Stalin was 5'4".
Since Yeltsin left office we have treated Russia as an enemy. Building bases on its borders. Supporting hostile neighbors and turning a blind eye to discrimination against ethnic Russians in the various territories of the former Soviet Union. Surprise, Russia has become an enemy. I don't particularly like Putin but are we really going to make life in Russia better by our hostility?
1
Let's see some possible connections and a reason why tRump admires Putin... Murdoch owns most global media (tRump would love to do this) - Murdoch hacked into emails/phones (tRump would love to do this)- Murdoch is Aussie like Assange - Assange hacked into emails/servers - Putin seems to control Assange (tRump would love to do this) - Putin net worth over 100 BILLION from stealing from his gov't, the people of his country and then the very wealthy ppl that helped him steal from gov't & citizens (tRump would love to do this) - he would love to control media and rob from everybody with help from little puppets.
59
Forget Pence....
Trump/Putin 2016
Trump/Putin 2016
1
I don't think you're painting a full picture of why the right and Putin are now BFFs: much of it has to do with Putin's open dislike for Obama. The same reason the right loves Netanyahu.
6
Paul: one question: what's this column about?
If Obama was as "strong" as Putin purportedly is Paul Ryan would have been poisoned, Mitch McConnell would be in an Alaskan Gulag and Donald Trump would have the choice of either kicking back 85% to the President's friends or being bankrupted by a state-owned conglomeration.
10
Ask Osama bin Laden if President Obama is a 'strong' leader. Or ask other terrorist leaders that have been killed or captured in the last seven plus years. And President Obama's strength led to the Iranian deal which keeps military nuclear capability at bay in Tehran for a decade and establishes that international economic sanctions (such as the ones imposed on Russia for the invasion of Crimea) work to rein in bad actors. The alt-right, or whatever the regressive conservatives may be called these days, have only one solution to everything: the military. How did that work for the U.S. in Iraq (a debacle the Right would very much want to blame on liberals). Trump's Putin luv is no surprise. He sees himself as just such a strong man, mocking those with a disability and encouraging his supporters to beat up protesters (why has the media stopped covering this, by the way?)
2
Dr K, you really should stick to economics as it is obvious that politics is not your forte.
You say:
"Russia has a horrible regime, but as Mr. Obama said, it’s a “regional power,” not a superpower like the old Soviet Union."
But earlier you said:
"Russia does, of course, have a big military, which it has used to annex Crimea and support rebels in eastern Ukraine."
Logical fail. A big military makes you a super-power no matter how much President Barack Obama says it isn't so.
Instead of criticizing Boris Putin why not criticize President Obama's failures? Believe me there are plenty of them to criticize.
Like lying about ending the war in the Middle East and thus taking the Nobel Peace Prize under false pretenses?
http://userctl.com/BlueVsRed/012.png
Still hoping for change, but at this point it is obvious that President Obama is a small man. Great men use the Presidency to make this a better country for all, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D Roosevelt come to mind.
President Obama will only be remembered for one thing, being the first non-White President in our nation's history. His push for incrementalism instead of real, lasting change proves that he is not now nor has ever been a great man.
Dr. K, here is your chance to prove that you are a great man too.
But you will never be recognized as one if you don't stop writing these hack, content-free political columns that sound like they were written by a college intern.
You say:
"Russia has a horrible regime, but as Mr. Obama said, it’s a “regional power,” not a superpower like the old Soviet Union."
But earlier you said:
"Russia does, of course, have a big military, which it has used to annex Crimea and support rebels in eastern Ukraine."
Logical fail. A big military makes you a super-power no matter how much President Barack Obama says it isn't so.
Instead of criticizing Boris Putin why not criticize President Obama's failures? Believe me there are plenty of them to criticize.
Like lying about ending the war in the Middle East and thus taking the Nobel Peace Prize under false pretenses?
http://userctl.com/BlueVsRed/012.png
Still hoping for change, but at this point it is obvious that President Obama is a small man. Great men use the Presidency to make this a better country for all, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D Roosevelt come to mind.
President Obama will only be remembered for one thing, being the first non-White President in our nation's history. His push for incrementalism instead of real, lasting change proves that he is not now nor has ever been a great man.
Dr. K, here is your chance to prove that you are a great man too.
But you will never be recognized as one if you don't stop writing these hack, content-free political columns that sound like they were written by a college intern.
1
"Believe me".
A dead give-away
A dead give-away
4
So, by your logic, North Korea is a superpower by virtue of its large military?
Taking five seconds to look at Wikipedia:
"Superpower is a word used to describe a state with a dominant position in international relations and which is characterised by its unparalleled ability to exert influence or project power on a global scale. This is done through the combined-means of technological, cultural, military and economic strength, as well as diplomatic and soft power influence. Traditionally, superpowers are preeminent among the great powers."
"Not your forte" indeed!
Taking five seconds to look at Wikipedia:
"Superpower is a word used to describe a state with a dominant position in international relations and which is characterised by its unparalleled ability to exert influence or project power on a global scale. This is done through the combined-means of technological, cultural, military and economic strength, as well as diplomatic and soft power influence. Traditionally, superpowers are preeminent among the great powers."
"Not your forte" indeed!
4
Apologies for the previous note; I think I may have misinterpreted your statement.... I had assumed you were taking about Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, rather than "Boris Putin".
What a logical fail on my part!
What a logical fail on my part!
3
The NYT should run a headline every day demanding Trump's tax returns. Ceaselessly until released.
8
Russia simply took back Crimea, which it had for centuries, and which was foolishly given to Ukraina by Khrushchov believing the Soviet Union was eternal. It's vital for Russia's naval presence in the Black Sea.
Krugman ignorantly trivializes; most Americans similarly are real dumb when discussing Russia.
The rest of his column makes more sense. Especially interesting is his point about Russian techies moving to Israel. I was amazed at how computer savvy they were when I visited Moscow in 1994.
Krugman ignorantly trivializes; most Americans similarly are real dumb when discussing Russia.
The rest of his column makes more sense. Especially interesting is his point about Russian techies moving to Israel. I was amazed at how computer savvy they were when I visited Moscow in 1994.
Dear Professor Krugman,
OK, so Trump admires Putin - so what? Is that worse than being actual military allies with countries who have authoritarian governments and societies less free than our own? Is it worse than taking donations from countries that treat the LGBT community considerably worse (prison or death) than here?
You failed to mention that many Americans (politicians included) in the 20s and 30s admired Hitler and Stalin. Before they became part FDR's administration, people like Rex Tugwell and Samuel Chase made a trip to the Soviet Union. Joe Kennedy, Sr. was a fan of Hitler.
So criticize Trump all you want. He's not the first to admire a morally/ethically challenged leader. Besides, we have quite a few such leaders here.
OK, so Trump admires Putin - so what? Is that worse than being actual military allies with countries who have authoritarian governments and societies less free than our own? Is it worse than taking donations from countries that treat the LGBT community considerably worse (prison or death) than here?
You failed to mention that many Americans (politicians included) in the 20s and 30s admired Hitler and Stalin. Before they became part FDR's administration, people like Rex Tugwell and Samuel Chase made a trip to the Soviet Union. Joe Kennedy, Sr. was a fan of Hitler.
So criticize Trump all you want. He's not the first to admire a morally/ethically challenged leader. Besides, we have quite a few such leaders here.
1
"authoritarian state…cult of personality…strongman…immensely wealthy oligarchy…brutally suppressing opposition/criticism"
Clinton America. Precisely.
Thugs & the Mrs. Political assassination is in the air. Assange adumbrations… Hillary "deplorables"…Fans/fanatics/fantasists who don't flinch at HER reckless endangerments say HIS quips are a hanging offense…
Political assassination transcends the particular. It is not about the "death." It's about the jackboot on the living.
To work, it has to be clear who ordered the hit. Take offing of Russian spy Litvinenko. Like assassination of Trotsky 60 yrs earlier, the death was uniquely traceable to the Kremlin & but for standard-issue cutouts, to its head—Putin in this case
As w/ Putin & other Stalinists, the Clinton functional assassination weapons of choice are drummed up charges of tax evasion/character assassination. Barrett Report documents routine Clinton abuse of IRS/DOJ to silence critics
If functional assassination is a Clinton staple, the reputation for assassination-in-fact is Clinton coup de grâce. To ensure their reputation always precedes them, Clintons never miss an opportunity to spread rumors around themselves. By repeating every allegation of murder & mayhem—while affecting an incredulous air of course—they intimidate/silence critics as they marginalize enemy…
The outrageousness of Clinton crimes will always work to their advantage, making the disabling of these flagrant psychopaths all the more challenging.
Clinton America. Precisely.
Thugs & the Mrs. Political assassination is in the air. Assange adumbrations… Hillary "deplorables"…Fans/fanatics/fantasists who don't flinch at HER reckless endangerments say HIS quips are a hanging offense…
Political assassination transcends the particular. It is not about the "death." It's about the jackboot on the living.
To work, it has to be clear who ordered the hit. Take offing of Russian spy Litvinenko. Like assassination of Trotsky 60 yrs earlier, the death was uniquely traceable to the Kremlin & but for standard-issue cutouts, to its head—Putin in this case
As w/ Putin & other Stalinists, the Clinton functional assassination weapons of choice are drummed up charges of tax evasion/character assassination. Barrett Report documents routine Clinton abuse of IRS/DOJ to silence critics
If functional assassination is a Clinton staple, the reputation for assassination-in-fact is Clinton coup de grâce. To ensure their reputation always precedes them, Clintons never miss an opportunity to spread rumors around themselves. By repeating every allegation of murder & mayhem—while affecting an incredulous air of course—they intimidate/silence critics as they marginalize enemy…
The outrageousness of Clinton crimes will always work to their advantage, making the disabling of these flagrant psychopaths all the more challenging.
2
The American right, conservatives, Republicans, ..., admire those that crush their enemies, regardless of any other consideration. This is not new. It is not restricted to the political arena. They are Orc Americans. But as with any aggressor in any war, they have to be fought on their terms. They will not go away; they have to be politically crushed; there is no negotiations, no compromises to be had.
7
The Russian people seem to agree with Trump. In terms of popularity, taking Crimea and the continued beat down of the Ukraine are a success so far. The Crimea was not about dollars and cents but rather national pride (and security).
That said, yeah, I think Trump admires Putin's authoritarian power and ability to quell dissent. Not something you want the President spending a lot if time admiring.
That said, yeah, I think Trump admires Putin's authoritarian power and ability to quell dissent. Not something you want the President spending a lot if time admiring.
1
Somebody please reply to this comment and tell me that I'm being paranoid and conspiratorial but...Putin is reputed to have resorted to the assassination (including the poisoning) of his political rivals.
Trump's electoral opponent is Hillary and she has now taken ill.
Trump's electoral opponent is Hillary and she has now taken ill.
4
You are not being paranoid. Suspicious, certainly, but not outlandishly so, under present conditions. The right has been truly terrified of Hillsry for decades. They have good reason. She is a formidable enemy
2
Wow, what a thorough trashing of Russia and Putin. Don't get me wrong I am no fan of his hegemonic regime. I believe that he is one of the worst world leaders alive. But I wish the New York Times would do such an effective job of applying criticism when discussing Iran or Saudi Arabia who make Russia appear like a "pussycat"
1
Another stupid article from Mega Leftist, Prof Krugman, ostensibly about Russia, but really just a hack job against King Donald. What are you worried about, Krugman? That Donald might win and demand the Times fire you? Donald doesn't have to release his taxes. You should probably release yours and reveal how much money you take in speaking to leftist groups (i.e. students). As an economist, you should talk about Trump's ideas on economics and not about his psychological profile. Psych out Hillary instead.
1
Have to quibble with the statement that, "Crimea, in particular, isn’t much of a conquest..."
In terms of economic capacity, perhaps not. But strategically it occupies a very important spot from which Russia can dominate the Black Sea and the Bosporus.
In terms of economic capacity, perhaps not. But strategically it occupies a very important spot from which Russia can dominate the Black Sea and the Bosporus.
1
One of the few things Mr. Putin does right is to select competent people.
The defense ministry is one example, Russia's Central Bank an other.
To quote from The Economist "Putin's right hand woman" (4/16/2016)
"... more recently Russia’s economy has been held back by Western sanctions and the low price of oil and gas, the country’s main exports. Yet the Central Bank of Russia (CBR) is a model of competent, technocratic policymaking. Since Ms Nabiullina became governor in 2013"
Watching the Hamlet gyrations of the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates - or not , there is something to be said for Mr. Putin's selection.
The defense ministry is one example, Russia's Central Bank an other.
To quote from The Economist "Putin's right hand woman" (4/16/2016)
"... more recently Russia’s economy has been held back by Western sanctions and the low price of oil and gas, the country’s main exports. Yet the Central Bank of Russia (CBR) is a model of competent, technocratic policymaking. Since Ms Nabiullina became governor in 2013"
Watching the Hamlet gyrations of the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates - or not , there is something to be said for Mr. Putin's selection.
Let me be the first to bring up Mussolini and reliable railroad schedules.
4
I though it was astonishing and rather scary when Mike Pence had a quote about the Putin admiration. "I think it's inarguable that Vladimir Putin has been a stronger leader in his country than Barack Obama has been in this country. And that's going to change the day that Donald Trump becomes president," The reason Putin is a 'strong' leader is he imprisons and kills critics. Is Mike Pence saying that is what Trump is going to do? Did he just reveal what the Trump/Pence administration is planning?
6
Why are we talking about a third rate country with a fourth rate leader? Is it because one of our presidential candidates from the Cirque du 17 is a fourth rate leader too?
1
In this article if you replaced Putin's name with Trump's and replaced oil with Casinos and questionable business deals, you would be describing Trump --thus Trump's fondness for a leader who mirrors his manner and his way of doing business.
61
"In this article if you replaced Putin's name with Trump's and replaced oil with Casinos and questionable business deals, you would be describing Trump --thus Trump's fondness for a leader who mirrors his manner and his way of doing business. "
Actually, Russia has plenty of casinos too.
Actually, Russia has plenty of casinos too.
Crimea is a bigger prize than Dr. Krugman allows. The Black Sea has reserves of oil and gas, and annexing Crimea annexed the adjacent seabed with its resources.
1
What has Hillary Clinton or President Obama done to curb Russian Power. Hillary Clinton and Clinton Foundation donors worked to create a mini Silicon Valley outside of Moscow. President Obama in his 2012 with his debate with MItt Romney replied to Romney's warning on Russia that the "1980s called, and they want their foreign policy back." One thing is clear about Putin: He does not respect either President Obama or Hillary Clinton, and does not think that he is dealing with serious people.
Trump is in a reality TV show "Dancing With the Tsars!" trying to score high for the "judges."
4
Not to be overlooked is how Putin uses crises (both random and self-inflicted) to further his agenda. As I attended a memorial gathering for a friend who died on 9/11 yesterday, I remembered how Bush and Cheney used the attacks as justification for invading Iraq. We may never recover from that.
Have you noticed? - it's always a crises with the Republican party now. Borrowing too much money, so we have to cut assistance to the poor. Not enough economic growth, so we have to let the banks run wild. Gays getting their proper rights - not enough "religious freedom". Blacks standing up for themselves - threatens civil society because the police have to be held accountable.
It boggles the mind, but it's right out of Putin's playbook.
Have you noticed? - it's always a crises with the Republican party now. Borrowing too much money, so we have to cut assistance to the poor. Not enough economic growth, so we have to let the banks run wild. Gays getting their proper rights - not enough "religious freedom". Blacks standing up for themselves - threatens civil society because the police have to be held accountable.
It boggles the mind, but it's right out of Putin's playbook.
105
Putin is more than just an object of admiration for Trump; he's a template for a Trump administration.
4
Once again, an incisive exposition of Putin's attraction to Trump and the Alt-Right. Thanks Mr. Krugman for your limpid thinking.
The intolerance on the left of Mr. Putin is a little hypocrytical considering that they are in love with the Deal that gave Iran ransom money, interest and a gauranteed Nike in 10 years.
1
"First of all, let’s get this straight: The Russian Federation of 2016 is not the Soviet Union of 1986."
And yet on Obama and Hillary's watch we have a Cold War Part II. Way to go.
And yet on Obama and Hillary's watch we have a Cold War Part II. Way to go.
It is quite easy to find that Trump is wrong about something. He can correct himself afterwords and still be wrong. I look forward for someone to show me that Trump is right about anything.
6
In 2020, I am running my dog in the republican primaries. I believe he could win; he is better looking and smarter than Donald Trump.
1
Trump said he could shoot someone and not lose any votes. I'll bet you could show a clear, verifiable direct connection to Putin and it wouldn't bother his cult of followers at all. Facts are irrelevant to the deplorables.
2
I for one am getting tired of digs at the left. A few people on the Left are anti-anti-Putinists. We; I can't imagine that there aren't a few people in the Center-Left who share the same view.
The USA lust like Russia covers most of the same territory and is run by some of the same thugs.
Russia, at present, is a dream come true in the minds of people like Trump, the Koch brothers, and the GOP base.
Putin's Russia appeals to Trump, who relishes the idea of being a strongman, someone to whom no one can rebuke or deny, someone who can steamroll and silence all the "Sad" "Crooked" and "Low Energy" opponents in their midst.
Russia appeals to the Koch brothers and the people like them, who bankroll and run the GOP behind the scenes. This is because Russia is a fairground of laissez-faire crony capitalism, where the country is strip-mined and sold off for the benefit of a handful of oligarchs. For those who haven't been paying attention since the Reagan years, that is the goal of our domestic oligarchs and their GOP puppets as well.
As for the GOP base, they don't do nuance, intelligence, and restraint. They like big, clearly defined and delineated cartoonish leaders. They don't like policy, they like slogans. They like tough guy posturing. They don't do compromise. It's "My way or the highway." "Might makes right." "If it don't make dollars, it don't make sense."
Three clear reasons, among many, why we need to put Clinton in the White House, and flip as much of the Congress back to Democratic control as possible.
Putin's Russia appeals to Trump, who relishes the idea of being a strongman, someone to whom no one can rebuke or deny, someone who can steamroll and silence all the "Sad" "Crooked" and "Low Energy" opponents in their midst.
Russia appeals to the Koch brothers and the people like them, who bankroll and run the GOP behind the scenes. This is because Russia is a fairground of laissez-faire crony capitalism, where the country is strip-mined and sold off for the benefit of a handful of oligarchs. For those who haven't been paying attention since the Reagan years, that is the goal of our domestic oligarchs and their GOP puppets as well.
As for the GOP base, they don't do nuance, intelligence, and restraint. They like big, clearly defined and delineated cartoonish leaders. They don't like policy, they like slogans. They like tough guy posturing. They don't do compromise. It's "My way or the highway." "Might makes right." "If it don't make dollars, it don't make sense."
Three clear reasons, among many, why we need to put Clinton in the White House, and flip as much of the Congress back to Democratic control as possible.
106
When it comes to American corporation the head is similar to Putin. There is little democracy nor have employees have any rights unless they have a union. So our country is a mixed bag that votes for a president but not head of corporation. At best most people have little power and are controlled by their boss. This is likely to create economics that is unstable for many people and little security. So being lead by thugs seems to be a way of life.
3
I'm sure someone has already made this point, but it bears repeating. If Obama was a "strong" leader like Putin, Trump would be dead or in jail for his laughable claims that Obama was not born in America.
10
Real Leaders persuade—not compel.
5
The thing that should concern everyone about Donald Trump's admiration for Vladimir Putin is this. Trump has never held a government office. Putin is his role model on how to do it.
9
Very simplistic view of US-Russia relations by an Economist.
Irony how the supporters of the party of getting the government off our backs want a dictator on their backs instead. It is also a party that does not want to "think" - just "believe" - let the thinking be done by the strongmen they believe in.
Just as Putin sees himself as the CEO of Russia, free to make "takeovers" of Crimea, etc. Trump sees himself as the CEO of the USA with bigger armed forces as his private security apparatus to plunder and pillage at will. Why should Putin be the only one to get away with that?
How long will he remain buddy buddy with Putin before each tries to stab each other in the back? Remember how short Trump's friendships last. Loyalties are all for themselves.
Just as Putin sees himself as the CEO of Russia, free to make "takeovers" of Crimea, etc. Trump sees himself as the CEO of the USA with bigger armed forces as his private security apparatus to plunder and pillage at will. Why should Putin be the only one to get away with that?
How long will he remain buddy buddy with Putin before each tries to stab each other in the back? Remember how short Trump's friendships last. Loyalties are all for themselves.
3
Excellent point, PAN. Remember the Trump/Cruz bromance before it went sour? And Trump/Carson before Trump compared him to a child molester? Oddly, Carson came back into Trump's fold. Is it akin to Stockholm syndrome?
1
Putin is just perfect for "ready-to-be-left-out" white people, in the US, who think this kind of thing will stop the immigration of non-white people, who will have lots of non-white babies, eventually becoming the majority in this country. Onward!
1
Dr Krugman is absolutely right.
The word 'strong' is key to understanding the support for Trump. But the fallacy here is that this support is actually based in ignorance.
So many people are badly informed in our country that this is dangerous to our national security. How is it possible that George Bush convinces the majority of americans that Saddam Hussain and Osama Bin Laden were working together. And how is it possible that so many Trump supporters believe that we should have a leader like Vladimir Putin. It is all based in ignorance, plain and simple.
The word 'strong' is key to understanding the support for Trump. But the fallacy here is that this support is actually based in ignorance.
So many people are badly informed in our country that this is dangerous to our national security. How is it possible that George Bush convinces the majority of americans that Saddam Hussain and Osama Bin Laden were working together. And how is it possible that so many Trump supporters believe that we should have a leader like Vladimir Putin. It is all based in ignorance, plain and simple.
2
I somehow don't see a bare-chested Mr Trump shooting bears in Alaska. Or even riding a horse at a polo place in Wellington, Florida.
Nor do I see Trump restoring hundreds if not thousands of neglected churches, as Mr Putin's government has done.
Krugman's comments about Russia's lost technology may extend to rocketry, an area where Russia excelled. Apparently many unemployed Russians went to work for the North Korean military missile program. I haven't heard of an exodus to the US.
Nor do I see Trump restoring hundreds if not thousands of neglected churches, as Mr Putin's government has done.
Krugman's comments about Russia's lost technology may extend to rocketry, an area where Russia excelled. Apparently many unemployed Russians went to work for the North Korean military missile program. I haven't heard of an exodus to the US.
I'll just leave this here: https://www.thenation.com/?ssearch=putin&post_type=article
I think Mr. Krugman has missed out on one of the most important qualifications for deciding if Mr. Putin is a good leader or not. What do the common people think of him; are they happier now than before he came into power?
Every poll I can find, even those not conducted by official organizations, give him favorable ratings in the 80+ per cent range. Mr. Obama's ratings, for contrast, have hovered around 50% for quite a while. If a good leader is one who does what his people want, I contend that Mr. Putin is the better of the two.
Every poll I can find, even those not conducted by official organizations, give him favorable ratings in the 80+ per cent range. Mr. Obama's ratings, for contrast, have hovered around 50% for quite a while. If a good leader is one who does what his people want, I contend that Mr. Putin is the better of the two.
Russia is a petrostate. On a recent tour of the Baltic, the dearth of solar panels and windmills in Russia stood out. Tsar Putin and pals wring every last kopec out of the peasants.
4
I think the reason the right likes Putin is that he stands up for his people. Unlike too many politicians on the Euro-American left, he doesn't treat them as irritating grains of sand in the gears of cosmopolitan justice.
1
The GOP/Fox News/right wing has existed since Obama was elected. Sarah Palin made her famous Mom Jeans comment about Obama I think around the time of the shirtless on horseback photo. The guy who took out OLB is still "feckless." It is just partisanship on steroids.
That said, we won't see the taxes. But Junior already said the company has Russian investors. I find it very hard to believe that there isn't a connection. Journalists should be relentless in asking for the taxes and a list of his creditors every time he comes to the microphone and I sure hope it is brought up during the debates.
That said, we won't see the taxes. But Junior already said the company has Russian investors. I find it very hard to believe that there isn't a connection. Journalists should be relentless in asking for the taxes and a list of his creditors every time he comes to the microphone and I sure hope it is brought up during the debates.
5
Mitt Romney was right - Trump said he could shoot people without consequence because of his strong supporters - so what is he afraid his taxes will reveal. Who cares if he didn't pay tax? He would wear that as a badge of honor - a savvy businessman taking full advantage of the tax laws. He - the King of Debt - has admitted manipulating the bankruptcy laws to his advantage.
2
"But the Marxist ideology is gone, and so is the superpower status... although admittedly a big one that happens to have nukes."
Paul,
I disagree with about Russia not being a super power anymore. If Superman were to lose some of his strength so that he could no longer throw a locomotive from Metropolis to Gotham, but could only throw a semi form Metropolis to the suburbs, would you say he was no longer a super-man?
Fact is, if you have nukes - and lots of them - then you are still a superpower.
It's been so long since nuclear weapons have been used in anger that we tend to forget how monstrously powerful they are. And how much muscle they give a nation.
Paul,
I disagree with about Russia not being a super power anymore. If Superman were to lose some of his strength so that he could no longer throw a locomotive from Metropolis to Gotham, but could only throw a semi form Metropolis to the suburbs, would you say he was no longer a super-man?
Fact is, if you have nukes - and lots of them - then you are still a superpower.
It's been so long since nuclear weapons have been used in anger that we tend to forget how monstrously powerful they are. And how much muscle they give a nation.
3
"Russia...it’s just an authoritarian state, with a cult of personality around its strongman, that showers benefits on an immensely wealthy oligarchy while brutally suppressing opposition and criticism."
This is what Trump and the GOP want to do to United States of America. This is why they admire Putin. They want the same deal here.
Texans for Hillary 2016
This is what Trump and the GOP want to do to United States of America. This is why they admire Putin. They want the same deal here.
Texans for Hillary 2016
5
The right wing has grown frustrated with Democracy. The don't have it in their businesses, and we all know they want government to be run like a business.
4
The Russian kleptocracy has produced a magnificent estate for Putin on the Black Sea in Russia's Krasnodar region near the village of Praskoveevka. It shows well on Google Earth; zoom in on "Mys Idokopas", near the shore. The home has landing pods for three simultaneous helicopter arrivals.
1
It won't take very long, sometime next year, for most Americans to realize what a great President we had.
3
And if Hillary Clinton is elected, the American public will realize what a great new president we have elected about 2-3 years after she is elected.
2
Supporters of Trump want - desperately it seems - a Big Daddy who has that authoritarian 'strong man' element (though I think he's one of the weakest, most childish men I've ever observed) that will make everything better. But sometimes Big Daddy gets out 'the belt'. And that isn't so fun. But I guess his supporters see other people getting the belt, not them. That is their mistake. Any desire to go against Big Daddy brings the threat of The Belt. They don't seem to understand that not only others might come under the sting of The Belt, but they might, too.
I had an authoritarian father who brought out The Belt frequently. I want nothing to do with any Big Daddy who might save me but who also might threaten me depending on his mood.
How can evangelicals, who profess to follow a man of peace, support this man? This man-baby Trump says that when he's hit on the cheek he won't turn it, no, he'll punch back ten times harder. He loves the dictator Putin and he wants to be him. So I ask again, how can evangelicals support him? I do not understand it.
Putin is a thug and Trump is a thug. I guess thugs like to stick together so they can double their Big Daddy bullying.
I had an authoritarian father who brought out The Belt frequently. I want nothing to do with any Big Daddy who might save me but who also might threaten me depending on his mood.
How can evangelicals, who profess to follow a man of peace, support this man? This man-baby Trump says that when he's hit on the cheek he won't turn it, no, he'll punch back ten times harder. He loves the dictator Putin and he wants to be him. So I ask again, how can evangelicals support him? I do not understand it.
Putin is a thug and Trump is a thug. I guess thugs like to stick together so they can double their Big Daddy bullying.
3
The issue of Trumps laudatory comments about Putin is troubling.
They should spend time together, perhaps go on a nice cruise.
Both are dictators. Let them dictate to each other.
They should spend time together, perhaps go on a nice cruise.
Both are dictators. Let them dictate to each other.
1
Interestingly, if Obama's real buddy buddy relationship with Putin were publicly known, Putin would be considered to be a great world leader.
1
NIS chief James Clapper has advised naming Russia as the culprit in the hackings, yet Clintonistas have been running about, hair on fire, yelling "The Russians are Coming! "The Russians are Coming!" ad nauseum. This, apparently, is easier than accounting for embarrassingly huge lapses in tech security among its own outposts. Dr. Krugman is merely adding to the combustibles of a fire in want of a flame.
No sensible person finds Mr. Putin or his regime admirable, nor would many of the insensible enjoy living under its dictas very long. Indeed, their own current protestations against government would likely be harshly suppressed. Dr. Krugman's screed of the moment may not be classic red-baiting in the absence of Communism, but it amounts to the same thing. It adds little to a worthy debate.
No sensible person finds Mr. Putin or his regime admirable, nor would many of the insensible enjoy living under its dictas very long. Indeed, their own current protestations against government would likely be harshly suppressed. Dr. Krugman's screed of the moment may not be classic red-baiting in the absence of Communism, but it amounts to the same thing. It adds little to a worthy debate.
America Love it or Leave it. Those that think Vladimir Putin's Russia is a better place to live should move there. Donald Trump should lead the way. If Trump and his followers all moved to Russia that would certainly make America Great Again.
6
Putin is smart, powerful, rich, vengeful, very good at getting his own way, doesn't waste time and energy on the deplorables, and doesn't make excuses. There are politicians who admire him openly, and politicians who admire him secretly, but they all think the world would be a better place if they could
be just like him.
be just like him.
Sixteen years ago, the country had a choice between a smart, boring, technocratic candidate and an incurious, brash, incoherent candidate. The nation claims like the former qualities, and certainly knows what it means to elect someone with the latter qualities. Hopefully, people will remember the history of 2001-2008 when going to vote this November.
6
We should have no surprise that Trump has a man crush on Putin. He has cozied up to other thugs in his business dealings and his mentality is to idolize brute strength regardless of the wake of destruction it leaves. But his immaturity is what continues to surprise me. His remark that if someone says something nice about him he will say something nice about them is what one hears at an elementary school playground.
5
If Russia is such a "regional power", why all the saber rattling for war with Russia? It is not Russia that must be stopped, it's the USA. In a country that incarcerates 25% of the world's prisoners, performs state murder on its own citizens, and has militarized local police, hypocrisy is the order of the day. The yahoos admiring Putin are pining for an authoritarian state that is already here. The speciousness or your argument, Paul, is of a piece with the Washington consensus.
2
I honestly expected a more informed and intelligent Mr Krugman comment. It seems written by Kasparov.
Putin has done much more for Russia than its predecessors from the fall of communism. Mr. Krugman does not mention the chaos that had Russia from 1990, an absolute absence of law and order, thanks among others to US advisers. Putin has brought order and as Goethe said "I prefer injustice to disorder".
Nor is it true that has only grown by oil, Nigeria or Venezuela swimming in oil but have not taken advantage of this wealth, per capita income in Russia is now 4 times that of the separatist Ukraine and almost like Portugal, may seem not mauch but it is a huge leap. The standard of living of Russians has increased a lot and millions of Russians traveling abroad more that , for example, the Spaniards. Unfortunately due to sanctions against Russia, and to lower oil, why not sanctions against China? the rate of increase in standard of living has decreased.
Finally Crimea is not just a number square meters, is vital to the security of Russia to preserve its naval bases and control the Black Sea, not to mention their historic rights. Russia is now to the defensive and reject USA aircrafts in the Black Sea , what they do there? There is still no Russian planes off the coast of California.
In short an unworthy Mr Krugman article.
Putin has done much more for Russia than its predecessors from the fall of communism. Mr. Krugman does not mention the chaos that had Russia from 1990, an absolute absence of law and order, thanks among others to US advisers. Putin has brought order and as Goethe said "I prefer injustice to disorder".
Nor is it true that has only grown by oil, Nigeria or Venezuela swimming in oil but have not taken advantage of this wealth, per capita income in Russia is now 4 times that of the separatist Ukraine and almost like Portugal, may seem not mauch but it is a huge leap. The standard of living of Russians has increased a lot and millions of Russians traveling abroad more that , for example, the Spaniards. Unfortunately due to sanctions against Russia, and to lower oil, why not sanctions against China? the rate of increase in standard of living has decreased.
Finally Crimea is not just a number square meters, is vital to the security of Russia to preserve its naval bases and control the Black Sea, not to mention their historic rights. Russia is now to the defensive and reject USA aircrafts in the Black Sea , what they do there? There is still no Russian planes off the coast of California.
In short an unworthy Mr Krugman article.
1
Among his other symptoms, Mr. Trump has tyrant envy. I find it both laughable and sad that the definition of "tough" has changed from so radically over the years.
When I think of tough, I think of my late father, who passed away on 9/11/12 at 89, having retired from his volunteer job as a clinic physician a few years earlier, because he felt it wasn't fair to his patients that he wasn't keeping up with latest in medicine. Naturally, given his age, he did military service, which paid for his education including medical school. My dad was athletic, a rugby player, but took his physical prowess for granted and never consciously used it to intimidate others; he didn't have to -- my boyfriends got it at hello. Sure, he had his faults, including an old school attitude about women; on the one hand he could be imperious and clueless, on the other, I never, ever heard him say anything vulgar or derogatory about a woman or women. He didn't brag; he showed up.
Perhaps that's why I wouldn't use the word "tough" to describe either Putin or Trump. Tough people don't flaunt their power, wage covert wars against critics or "enemies", crow about their successes or behave like elementary school bullies, because they don't have to.
When I think of tough, I think of my late father, who passed away on 9/11/12 at 89, having retired from his volunteer job as a clinic physician a few years earlier, because he felt it wasn't fair to his patients that he wasn't keeping up with latest in medicine. Naturally, given his age, he did military service, which paid for his education including medical school. My dad was athletic, a rugby player, but took his physical prowess for granted and never consciously used it to intimidate others; he didn't have to -- my boyfriends got it at hello. Sure, he had his faults, including an old school attitude about women; on the one hand he could be imperious and clueless, on the other, I never, ever heard him say anything vulgar or derogatory about a woman or women. He didn't brag; he showed up.
Perhaps that's why I wouldn't use the word "tough" to describe either Putin or Trump. Tough people don't flaunt their power, wage covert wars against critics or "enemies", crow about their successes or behave like elementary school bullies, because they don't have to.
4
Trump admires Putin simply because Putin (a wily, former KGB man) has praised him and given him a tiny bit of perceived legitimacy. The problem is this means U.S. policy could someday be thwarted with just a little effusive flattery.
All sorts of bad actors could be free to violate international law or go against U.S. interests by building military bases on the Spratly Islands, invading NATO allies with impunity, overfishing the oceans, letting elephants go extinct for their ivory, strip-mining entire rainforests, or any number of far worse atrocities.
Would Trump be able to bring himself to end the genocides of Cambodia's Pol Pot, Romania's Nicolae Ceaușescu, or Bosnia's Radovan Karadzic, if any of them had lavishly praised him as being a brilliant genius or a smart guy? His ego wouldn't allow it and they'd almost certainly get a pass.
Trump has said as much: If they are praising him, he'll praise [them] right back, as long as they are saying nice things. So in fact, Trump can never be strong or like Reagan on foreign policy: Trump is a big softee who will let his still-grounded teenagers borrow the car, as long as they show him pretend-respect (and sham praise) during dinner.
All sorts of bad actors could be free to violate international law or go against U.S. interests by building military bases on the Spratly Islands, invading NATO allies with impunity, overfishing the oceans, letting elephants go extinct for their ivory, strip-mining entire rainforests, or any number of far worse atrocities.
Would Trump be able to bring himself to end the genocides of Cambodia's Pol Pot, Romania's Nicolae Ceaușescu, or Bosnia's Radovan Karadzic, if any of them had lavishly praised him as being a brilliant genius or a smart guy? His ego wouldn't allow it and they'd almost certainly get a pass.
Trump has said as much: If they are praising him, he'll praise [them] right back, as long as they are saying nice things. So in fact, Trump can never be strong or like Reagan on foreign policy: Trump is a big softee who will let his still-grounded teenagers borrow the car, as long as they show him pretend-respect (and sham praise) during dinner.
1
What's the big surprise here? Bullies like bullies. If this country becomes all about valuing street smarts and winning dirty over strength of character and protecting the vulnerable, we have really gone into the ditch.
4
We should not equate Mr. Putin to Russia. Remember, in 1990, the agreement to not advance NATO? Sure, not a formal treaty and said with fingers crossed. Defined borders is critical to peace; such as it is. The break up of the USSR left the old administrative borders in place. The Crimea was for centuries a part of Russia and its people wanted, in overwhelming numbers, to be part of Russia. The will of the people should be considered in addition to borders. If the West acted with more of a sense of justice and not ideology, the West might have more influence in Russia's future progress.
Advertised ideology and actual behavior are two different things, not just in the US, but everywhere in the world.
2
If Trump disavows everything Putin stands for, if he should anger him or distance himself, there is one consequence he fears, which would probably be revealed in a scrutiny of his tax returns. Putin would call in his oligarchs and direct them to default Trump's considerable loans they granted him.
2
Trump is the real life Manchurian Candidate. He will be easily manipulated by Putin to allow whatever Putin wants to do. It may very well be that Trump is getting financed by Russian oligarchs. This entire situation is insane- as insane as Trump is.
Putin would love to have this moron in the WH. His power would run amok and Trump will fawn all over him.
Putin would love to have this moron in the WH. His power would run amok and Trump will fawn all over him.
2
Hawks on the right and the left are quick to rattle swords and flout military intervention as a "cure all". Therefore, their infatuation with the strongman image of Mr. Putin is consistent with that mind set. However, its instructive to note that, these are not the ones that have to pick up a weapon, board planes and ships, travel half way around the world to face bloodthirsty, determined foes and an uncertain outcome. Neither does Mr. Putin.
1
"..admiring Mr. Putin means admiring someone who has contempt for democracy and civil liberties." Precisely why Republicans and particularly Trump admire Putin. That's what they want here. I've said it again and again, read the Republican Platform and Ryan's bats... crazy Ayn Randy budget. The GOP is authoritarian crazy, although Trump won't be the authoritarian. It will be Ryan and McConnel and the party. Trump will be flying around the world "making deals" and producing the most anti-American world in history.
If all those people, like the woman from Appalachia in yesterday's Times said she just wanted a change would actually read the GOP Platform and Ryan's budget, they'd see change alright- total subjugation of women, elimination of the Dept. of Education and many other federal agencies, turning over federal land to the states (read developers), near elimination of civil rights especially for brown people, elimination of Social Security and Medicare (read elderly on the streets begging)... It will be a change alright, and a change that would please Putin.
If all those people, like the woman from Appalachia in yesterday's Times said she just wanted a change would actually read the GOP Platform and Ryan's budget, they'd see change alright- total subjugation of women, elimination of the Dept. of Education and many other federal agencies, turning over federal land to the states (read developers), near elimination of civil rights especially for brown people, elimination of Social Security and Medicare (read elderly on the streets begging)... It will be a change alright, and a change that would please Putin.
3
Basically, the 2006 Alfonso Cuarón movie "Children of Men," which depicted everything you mentioned in a dystopian England characterized by bewildered and impoverished elderly and most notably, giant concrete walls to separate the upper classes from the poor.
Can anyone out there find one item in their home one item that has on it the words: "Made in Russia," (excluding souvenirs of travel to that country)? I can't. Oh, wait, I can. Sort of. The antivirus security software on my laptop is of Russian origin. It either works extremely well or it is a very accomplished liar regarding the unseen goings on of my hard drive.
From Russia, with love.
From Russia, with love.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but both Putin and the oligarchical system that supports him, are very much creations of the same US foreign policy establishment that now regards him as the America’s greatest geopolitical threat. The West had only admiration for the “strong leadership” of Boris Yeltsin, as he created the oligarchy with a fire sale of state assets to the well-connected. With the West’s full support, he changed the constitution to centralize authority in the President, and passed that authority on to his hand-picked successor, Mr. Putin.
1
Thanks for the great summary. But it is a regional power with nuclear weapons that can reach the United States. So superpower in some ways. (Would Pakistan fit the same definition with that thinking?)
1
Unbelievable that one American Presidential candidate could get away with admiring a thug and despot and appear on Russian TV with no accountability whatsoever and maybe even engage in treason and that is not investigated but we must endlessly and ad nauseam microscopically analyze and investigate the other candidate's every move. Totally unfair and sexist and I'm a man and not gay. If I were a woman I'd be very annoyed by this relentless "indirect sexism" where the male candidate can say whatever dumb and stupid thing he wants even to go so far as to consort with a thug and despot, refuse to release his tax returns and hand the American people a slick line of male cow manure and get away with it.
Trump is a fraud, Trump is a con man, Trump is a Russian sympathizer, Trump is a demagogue, Trump is a racist, Trump is a traitor. Clinton is only a liar---MAYBE. Clinton wins---Trump -6, Clinton -1. Trump proves everything he is by opening his mouth. How any sane and intelligent person can vote for Trump is beyond my comprehension.
Trump is a fraud, Trump is a con man, Trump is a Russian sympathizer, Trump is a demagogue, Trump is a racist, Trump is a traitor. Clinton is only a liar---MAYBE. Clinton wins---Trump -6, Clinton -1. Trump proves everything he is by opening his mouth. How any sane and intelligent person can vote for Trump is beyond my comprehension.
3
When Obama is decisive he gets smacked down by a Republican House and Senate that is committed to his failure. Putin's decisions are implemented because he has no political opposition. Therefore his "strength" and his political system are inextricably linked.
Teddy Roosevelt once famously stated:
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who Rees; who comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds..."
While Trump throws out insults; criticizes the president; and makes ridiculous promises, Clinton is that "strong man" in the arena; "who spends herself in a worthy cause." Reject the con man in November.
Teddy Roosevelt once famously stated:
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who Rees; who comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds..."
While Trump throws out insults; criticizes the president; and makes ridiculous promises, Clinton is that "strong man" in the arena; "who spends herself in a worthy cause." Reject the con man in November.
2
The Republicans have had some very admirable presidents, leaders that both Democrats and Republicans could utilize as chief executive paragons for our democracy, e.g., A. Lincoln, T. Roosevelt, D. Eisenhower.
So, why would D. Trump offer up V. Putin as his ideal leader, someone that manifests the qualities of leadership he finds admirable? My guess is that he knows himself to have much more in common with Putin than he does with a Lincoln, Roosevelt or an Eisenhower. This tells me that Putin is a leader that he hopes to emulate, rather than prior Republican presidents held in high esteem by both Democrats and Republicans. The current Republican nominee clearly has no real connection to prior Republicans that served the nation in a stellar manner as POTUS.
Hope voters paying attention.
So, why would D. Trump offer up V. Putin as his ideal leader, someone that manifests the qualities of leadership he finds admirable? My guess is that he knows himself to have much more in common with Putin than he does with a Lincoln, Roosevelt or an Eisenhower. This tells me that Putin is a leader that he hopes to emulate, rather than prior Republican presidents held in high esteem by both Democrats and Republicans. The current Republican nominee clearly has no real connection to prior Republicans that served the nation in a stellar manner as POTUS.
Hope voters paying attention.
2
Visit Manhattan Beach in Brooklyn. Look at the new McMansions being built by Russians. They have millions of dollars, all "made" in Russia. When Communism collapsed, the government handed out undervalued shares of the publicly owned businesses to the general public. Neither understanding the value of stock nor the grossly under-priced aspect of the shares, a few astute investors were able to essentially buy the country. Now they are living in Brooklyn and buying New York. How could a real estate mogul get involved with these characters? Let me count the ways,
2
"it’s just an authoritarian state, with a cult of personality around its strongman, that showers benefits on an immensely wealthy oligarchy while brutally suppressing opposition and criticism." That's it in a nutshell. I lived in St. Petersburg in the nineties, when Putin was on the up in that, his home city. It was like Chicago in the thirties. Russia is owned and run by thugs. The kind of 'strong' men Trump admires and would love to be able to behave like.
3
I find Trump's enthusiasm for advertising his adoration of Putin more concerning than his actual admiration for the man.
Trump's greatest love is money, and Putin has a lot of it. Way, way more than Trump has in his wildest boasts. That alone makes him a god to Trump. But most Americans are not Putin fans, and are suspicious about Russia in general. We aren't exactly old pals. We don't want to live like Russians, or be controlled like or by Russians. So why is Trump yapping about a sore topic when he's running for president?
Bad judgment. Envy. The complete inability to keep his mouth shut about anything. And probably indebtedness. All terrible reasons.
Trump's greatest love is money, and Putin has a lot of it. Way, way more than Trump has in his wildest boasts. That alone makes him a god to Trump. But most Americans are not Putin fans, and are suspicious about Russia in general. We aren't exactly old pals. We don't want to live like Russians, or be controlled like or by Russians. So why is Trump yapping about a sore topic when he's running for president?
Bad judgment. Envy. The complete inability to keep his mouth shut about anything. And probably indebtedness. All terrible reasons.
98
"Bad judgment."
That goes for Hillary Clinton in spades.
"The complete inability to keep his mouth shut about anything."
Hillary Clinton's problem is the opposite one, that she refuses to trust the American people by telling us important stuff like the state of her health.
"And probably indebtedness.:
This is not Hillary Clinton's problem as she is rolling in huge amounts of dark money now, dark money she is supposedly against.
"All terrible reasons."
Yes all terrible reasons to vote for Hillary Clinton.
And we could have had Bernie Sanders instead.
http://userctl.com/BlueVsRed/061.png
That goes for Hillary Clinton in spades.
"The complete inability to keep his mouth shut about anything."
Hillary Clinton's problem is the opposite one, that she refuses to trust the American people by telling us important stuff like the state of her health.
"And probably indebtedness.:
This is not Hillary Clinton's problem as she is rolling in huge amounts of dark money now, dark money she is supposedly against.
"All terrible reasons."
Yes all terrible reasons to vote for Hillary Clinton.
And we could have had Bernie Sanders instead.
http://userctl.com/BlueVsRed/061.png
If by praising Putin's leadership over Russia Trump is saying that's the kind of leadership he'd like to impose on we Americans he might be disappointed at how difficult he'll find that to be due to the Constitution's restraints on the assertion of Presidential power.Trump's apparent failure to understand this is reflected in the many occasions when he says " I will..." rather than we.As such even as he idolizes Putin style leaders-and Saddam type-trying to be one over our system of government could make him one of the least effective President's in U.S. history.Trying to be a strongman type President in our country,then, would most likely make him a weak President .Let's wisely use our votes then to keep the delusional fool out of the White House.
73
Hope you're right. However democratic governments have been subverted by demagogues. Think Bismarck Germany. Also, appointing 2 or 3 Supreme Court Justices will help him.
There are many more Americans who appreciate Obama's presidency. His approval ratings are at an all time high. So the comment that criticizes Obama is not as strong as many want to make it out to be. Obama's restraint has mainly kept our soldiers alive. This is a serious world in which we live these days. And it is imperative, it is crucial, that we remain in control of reactionary tendencies! Controlling reactionary tendencies is not a quality of character Donald Trump has. And this is what we have to be very careful about.
2
Three and more criticisms have been made of Trump's now-embarrassing ties with Putin's circle: (1) the numerous articles on Trump as the Manchurian candidate based that include (2) his Azerbaijan casino, a joint-venture with some of the local and Russian oligarchs, and (3) both his top staff's and his own close financial connections with Putin's oligarch circle. Others have noted (from two of his many wives) his preference for the Old Soviet Empire.
Putin and Russia appear to be the puppeteers making Trump to be a mere frightened marionette who has perhaps been instructed not to make his tax returns available to a gullible American public.
Putin and Russia appear to be the puppeteers making Trump to be a mere frightened marionette who has perhaps been instructed not to make his tax returns available to a gullible American public.
2
So what's new here? The United States has, unfortunately, been involved with regime change for the worse, usually because of corporate avarice pulling the strings in Congress and the Oval Office. Just when democracy takes the lead in some far-flung country, special interests here manage to use American might to reverse it thus choosing a despot more willing to bend to Corporate America's will.
In the mid-1950s, the people of Iran voted, through a legitimate democratic process, to elect new leadership. Nationalizing the oil production did not sit well with American oil companies and so American force removed the new president.
The Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), convinced Eisenhower to support the French against the people of French Indo-China eager to dismantel a dictatorship. Ho Chi Minh, an American-educated WW2 hero, begged Eisenhower for help. Ike chose to support the French, the French gave up and handed the fight to U.S. "advisors" which, over time, became Kennedy's problem, then Johnson's, then Nixon's. Ho Chi Minh looked to Mao's China. It was over in 1975. We lost that war and more then 50,000 American lives.
Democratically-elected president of Chile, Salvador Allende: Henry Kissinger advised Nixon to use the CIA to "remove" Allende who planned to nationalize many industries dominated by American corporate interests. A ruthless, murderous dictator took his place.
Moral high-ground here? Hardly. This is the history of supporting "strong men."
In the mid-1950s, the people of Iran voted, through a legitimate democratic process, to elect new leadership. Nationalizing the oil production did not sit well with American oil companies and so American force removed the new president.
The Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), convinced Eisenhower to support the French against the people of French Indo-China eager to dismantel a dictatorship. Ho Chi Minh, an American-educated WW2 hero, begged Eisenhower for help. Ike chose to support the French, the French gave up and handed the fight to U.S. "advisors" which, over time, became Kennedy's problem, then Johnson's, then Nixon's. Ho Chi Minh looked to Mao's China. It was over in 1975. We lost that war and more then 50,000 American lives.
Democratically-elected president of Chile, Salvador Allende: Henry Kissinger advised Nixon to use the CIA to "remove" Allende who planned to nationalize many industries dominated by American corporate interests. A ruthless, murderous dictator took his place.
Moral high-ground here? Hardly. This is the history of supporting "strong men."
1
You have a rather poor grasp of history in regards to both Iran and Vietnam. But your point is well taken.
The neoliberal and neoCon agenda to foster Jeffersonian style freedom and democracy in authoritarian terrains is doomed to failure. If Mrs. Clinton led the neo liberals to foist our version of democracy in Egypt, Algeria, Libya and now Syria she was dead wrong. Not much needs to be said for the neoCon's proven disaster record in Iraq and our consequent trillion $ debt. The world view of ordinary Russians is quite different from our view (Trumpians included!!) on freedoms. I have been to Russia on work in both pre and post Crimea/Ukraine. The middle class Russians that I met daily far removed from the metro centres admired America but did not seem to complain about missing any freedoms. To them Mr.Putin seemed to be an acceptable leader. As a private citizen with no access to our foreign policy elites, my perception is that America and the West have not accorded a respectable place to Russia at the Table. Recall how many decad s it took to grudgingly give Japan a place at the Table. Our foreign policy establishment thinking is too deeply rooted in the Cold War past. Despite attempts to reinvent after the Soviet collapse we continue to have a us vs them type of bipolar thinking in a complex multipolar world polity. The West and Russia have a lot of common enemies in the Middle East. That common ground remains to be exploited. The Iran deal is one good example. Could Syria be the next? Let's leave Putin's Russia to the Russians and focus on " Where/what is Aleppo?(!!!!!!)"
2
What Trump's and Giuliani's admiration Of Putin reveals is the growing attraction to ruthless, authoritarian rulers by the republicans as their demographics without any effort at inclusion of minority groups means that cannot in a fair democratic election. Since they know they can no longer win a fair contest, and that they have to rely on double talk to the masses to trick them into voting against their own economic self interests; and have to rely `investigations' to manipulate government and the law to get rid of their political opponents that they cannot defeat in a democratic elections, the more authoritarian figures like Putin appeal to republicans. If only they could get another president elected, then they could shut down democracy and move us to a ruling oligarchy of the 1%. This is the real reason behind their desperation to get the next several supreme court justices. Get through the courts what they could never get through fair democratic elections.
2
What is most confusing to me is the right's admiration for Putin, as not weak like Obama, in contrast to their frequent claims that Obama has usurped power with his executive orders. In fact there seems to be a strong fear in the 'alt right' that martial law is coming soon, that Obama forced the Attorney General and head of the FBI to not indict Hillary, that as leader of the Democratic party he fixed the nomination of Clinton over Sanders, and will fix the general election as well. If those thing were true, should they not be proud of the "Putin' like qualities of the President?
1
The hard/alt right is enamored with autocracy, because autocracy is all its ideology has to offer. Indeed, it can only achieve power through stifling of dissent, whether by attacking dissidents directly, restricting their right to participate in the franchise, or perpetuating a political climate that marginalizes the rights of some in favor of the rights of others (or all of the above). Of course, anyone who sits in a cube all day can understand this full well, since this is merely another day in corporate America. And that is the ideology that Mr. Trump will bring full bore to the White House should he win: Corporate Autocracy for all.
1
I get the feeling that world politics has taken a dark turn, or a darker turn than usual, with more and more countries being ruled by thugs. There's Russia, of course. Xi Jinping seems to be more of a thug than the usual technocrat China picks for President. Duarte in the Philippines, Netanyahu, Sisi, etc in the Middle East. I don't know how someone like Obama is supposed to deal with these people. Though it's easier to deal with thugs than with failed states, I suppose.
It looks like the big push to expand freedom and democracy at the end of the last century and the early years of this one has fizzled out. Widening prosperity ended up expanding totalitarianism and belligerence, not peace and democracy. One appreciates the shrinking circle of liberal democracies that remain.
It looks like the big push to expand freedom and democracy at the end of the last century and the early years of this one has fizzled out. Widening prosperity ended up expanding totalitarianism and belligerence, not peace and democracy. One appreciates the shrinking circle of liberal democracies that remain.
69
Thanks for the clarifying analysis of Putin's "strong man" mirage. This clarification in fact makes it clear to me why Putin is admired by Trump and why this admiration is condoned by Trump's supporters.
Our country has been for the past two decades been going in certain directions in various aspects. Our politics have polarized and radicalized to the Right, we are increasingly less respectful of facts and truths, we have become a more selfish people, we are getting to be more feudalistic where big money control morre and more of all aspects of our lives, and despite having a black president, we have become more racist. It seems now with Putin worship, we are shown to become more authoritarian. With this latest streak, it shows that we care about winning more than the fair and democratic process in which we compete. Republican controlled states are doing everthing they can to surpress voting. They want to torture people and deny them due process.
The Republican establishment like Paul Ryan should not be shocked by Trump's infatuation of Putin. The political culture they have intentionally cultivated these past two decades lead to this.
Our country has been for the past two decades been going in certain directions in various aspects. Our politics have polarized and radicalized to the Right, we are increasingly less respectful of facts and truths, we have become a more selfish people, we are getting to be more feudalistic where big money control morre and more of all aspects of our lives, and despite having a black president, we have become more racist. It seems now with Putin worship, we are shown to become more authoritarian. With this latest streak, it shows that we care about winning more than the fair and democratic process in which we compete. Republican controlled states are doing everthing they can to surpress voting. They want to torture people and deny them due process.
The Republican establishment like Paul Ryan should not be shocked by Trump's infatuation of Putin. The political culture they have intentionally cultivated these past two decades lead to this.
2
Agreed. Many people like to think that running our government and nation like a business is desirable. They mistakenly conflate Trump with good business and, hence, good government. But Putin runs Russia like a business because it, like China, is in many real respects actually a business. State officials and institutions are driven by personal and institutional profit motives. The only thing Putin fears is domestic upheaval sufficient to overcome the state's repressive authority. Trump and his cronies, elected and not, seek the same outcome but without the fear of domestic upheaval.
2
The crush which Donald Trump has on Vladimir Putin differs from the confusion George W. Bush had about Putin. Where Trump admires what he mistakenly believes is Putin’s strength, Bush was comforted by what, gazing into Putin’s eyes, Bush mistook for goodness.
Trump’s attraction to authoritarians is the root of his becoming smitten with Putin, and that is very, very different from Mitt Romney’s mistake. Romney was correctly criticized for seeing Putin and Russia as an existential threat to America, which it clearly is not – absent a nuclear mistake or the unlikely decision by Russia to sell Nukes to Neighbors.
China, of course, is the much greater threat to us, and Democrats have been constant in that recognition. Democrats in office will negotiate warily with both Russia and China on matters where it serves American interests to do so. There will not, however, be any special affection or trust shown to Putin.
In fairness to Donald Trump, his contempt for the shared decision-making aspect of Democracy is exactly – repeat, exactly – what spurs the attraction to Vladimir Putin felt by a majority of Republican politicians. The Republicans have had that attraction since long before Trump ascended the stage.
Republicans, especially very rich ones, are not good at sharing. It’s just not what they do.
Trump’s attraction to authoritarians is the root of his becoming smitten with Putin, and that is very, very different from Mitt Romney’s mistake. Romney was correctly criticized for seeing Putin and Russia as an existential threat to America, which it clearly is not – absent a nuclear mistake or the unlikely decision by Russia to sell Nukes to Neighbors.
China, of course, is the much greater threat to us, and Democrats have been constant in that recognition. Democrats in office will negotiate warily with both Russia and China on matters where it serves American interests to do so. There will not, however, be any special affection or trust shown to Putin.
In fairness to Donald Trump, his contempt for the shared decision-making aspect of Democracy is exactly – repeat, exactly – what spurs the attraction to Vladimir Putin felt by a majority of Republican politicians. The Republicans have had that attraction since long before Trump ascended the stage.
Republicans, especially very rich ones, are not good at sharing. It’s just not what they do.
3
Mr. Krugman's piece bears closer scrutiny. The Soviet Union ends in 1989. Boris Yeltsin becomes the darling of the West. He ushers in the transition from socialism to capitalism and while new elections and a functional parliament become part of this transition, one would hardly call the new conditions democracy. But then neither would we call Florida in 2000 'democracy.'
But the key is that with the guidance of US economists Yeltsin and his aparatichaks proceed to rape the country. Ever wonder how a soviet style economy where the state owned virtually all major industry and property suddenly produced a cadre of millionaires and billionaires?
Russian industry should have been transformed into worker coops. After all workers, through the state owned the shops they worked for. But the West would have none of that. Pay the workers a pittance for their 'shares' with borrowed money of course and voila! A manager overnight owns all the stock and becomes a billionaire.
Putin is an authoritarian and likely responsible for the death of some of his opponents. But there are authoritarians we like and those we don't. Putin proved to be the later when the head of Gazprom attempted to get Western capital and Putin arrested him and in effect nationalized the oil and gas giant preventing western debt and control. That's the moment he became the authoritarian we loath. Human rights and democracy once again take a backseat to the relentless control of capital. A word to the wise...
But the key is that with the guidance of US economists Yeltsin and his aparatichaks proceed to rape the country. Ever wonder how a soviet style economy where the state owned virtually all major industry and property suddenly produced a cadre of millionaires and billionaires?
Russian industry should have been transformed into worker coops. After all workers, through the state owned the shops they worked for. But the West would have none of that. Pay the workers a pittance for their 'shares' with borrowed money of course and voila! A manager overnight owns all the stock and becomes a billionaire.
Putin is an authoritarian and likely responsible for the death of some of his opponents. But there are authoritarians we like and those we don't. Putin proved to be the later when the head of Gazprom attempted to get Western capital and Putin arrested him and in effect nationalized the oil and gas giant preventing western debt and control. That's the moment he became the authoritarian we loath. Human rights and democracy once again take a backseat to the relentless control of capital. A word to the wise...
2
Putin's military conquests are not "pitiful" in terms of domestic politics. He has succeeded in regaining some of the territory which was lost in the breakup, and which is occupied by ethnic Russians. This has been a big plus with the Russian people and must be a major reason for his domestic popularity. Putin is not out to conquer the world like Hitler, he is playing a standard game of dictators of starting small winnable wars. Actually this is also done by politicians in democratic countries, as we saw in the Bush administration. Although Trump talks isolationism at times, he would also be likely to play the game.
Until this election, I naively believed that the authoritarians were only a minority in our country and that most of us knew and genuinely supported democratic values. The GOP has long been tilted toward an authoritarian style of politics, but my head is spinning how quickly a politically inexperienced, egotistical, manipulative, shallow man like Trump could tip the balance in favor of authoritarianism in the U.S.
So what I am realizing is that authoritarianism versus democracy is less geographic or national than it is psychological and personal. This love-fest between Trump and Putin made it clear. Never would I have believed that an election between the politically experienced Clinton and the inexperienced Machiavellian Trump would be too close to call.
So now I see that every country has it's share of authoritarian citizens, who crave the cult of personality in their leaders, are highly rejecting of alternative views, and favor certain punishment over wishy-washy tolerance and compromise.
An old definition of power provided by sociologist Max Weber: The ability to work one's will despite resistance. And a big difference between authoritarian and democratic regimes is that authoritarian regimes do not tolerate resistance. They not only do not tolerate resistance, they suppress, punish, even kill any resistance.
Are we Americans about to throw everything away that this country was founded on because the citizenry really is more comfortable with authoritarianism?
So what I am realizing is that authoritarianism versus democracy is less geographic or national than it is psychological and personal. This love-fest between Trump and Putin made it clear. Never would I have believed that an election between the politically experienced Clinton and the inexperienced Machiavellian Trump would be too close to call.
So now I see that every country has it's share of authoritarian citizens, who crave the cult of personality in their leaders, are highly rejecting of alternative views, and favor certain punishment over wishy-washy tolerance and compromise.
An old definition of power provided by sociologist Max Weber: The ability to work one's will despite resistance. And a big difference between authoritarian and democratic regimes is that authoritarian regimes do not tolerate resistance. They not only do not tolerate resistance, they suppress, punish, even kill any resistance.
Are we Americans about to throw everything away that this country was founded on because the citizenry really is more comfortable with authoritarianism?
3
Russia and the American right are, I believe, a match made in Heaven. Russian culture seems to favor a certain authoritarian quality; they have never really been able to pull off a real democracy. When they had their chance at revolution and threw off the yoke of the czars, they donned another, and when the USSR fell, they simply couldn't bring themselves to go full democracy, instead ending up with, as Dr. Krugman describes : "...an authoritarian state, with a cult of personality around its strongman, that showers benefits on an immensely wealthy oligarchy while brutally suppressing opposition and criticism."
Our right wing, like all others, is a self-selecting group of people whose political thoughts are conditioned by fear and insecurity, and a longing for order and hierarchy above all else. The frequently messy disorder of democracy is disturbing to them. While the fear of Communism was strong enough to override the love of order, the Russians were The Enemy. Now that the threats to rich guys and their economic systems are gone, it's not surprising that right-wingers would find Russia to be an appealing place. It's equal parts amusing and disturbing, although certainly not illogical, that such a significant subset of our population, including professional politicians theoretically invested in our democracy, would consider a ruthless ex-KGB guy who rules with an iron fist and treats his opponents to polonium cocktails to be an object of affection and admiration.
Our right wing, like all others, is a self-selecting group of people whose political thoughts are conditioned by fear and insecurity, and a longing for order and hierarchy above all else. The frequently messy disorder of democracy is disturbing to them. While the fear of Communism was strong enough to override the love of order, the Russians were The Enemy. Now that the threats to rich guys and their economic systems are gone, it's not surprising that right-wingers would find Russia to be an appealing place. It's equal parts amusing and disturbing, although certainly not illogical, that such a significant subset of our population, including professional politicians theoretically invested in our democracy, would consider a ruthless ex-KGB guy who rules with an iron fist and treats his opponents to polonium cocktails to be an object of affection and admiration.
1
Eighteen years ago, I was involved in a movement to rid our local government of the thugs and liars - I now call this the Experiment. We ran well-vetted, likable, good-quality candidates and addressed issues important to the voters. Our polling often showed the thugs and liars would lose. In every election cycle (3 total), seventy percent of the contested elections were won by the thugs and liars.
The results of the Experiment were very troubling to me. So I spent time gathering additional information to better understand the outcomes. My short list includes:
(1) The thugs and liars somehow provided the government that some voters needed and wanted - this group often included voters most critical of the thugs and liars.
(2) Some voters were wired so that they are not troubled by the thugs and lairs.
(3) Some voters vote tribe (friend, acquaintance, church member, children played on same soccer team ...) even though they were troubled by the actions of the thugs and liars.
(4) Special favors - these voters may want a governmental department or agency to overlook a problem or to be less vigilant.
Now the scary part - the Experiment taught me that a Trump presidency (or its equivalent) is possible because the factors listed above also apply in one form or another to national elections .
The results of the Experiment were very troubling to me. So I spent time gathering additional information to better understand the outcomes. My short list includes:
(1) The thugs and liars somehow provided the government that some voters needed and wanted - this group often included voters most critical of the thugs and liars.
(2) Some voters were wired so that they are not troubled by the thugs and lairs.
(3) Some voters vote tribe (friend, acquaintance, church member, children played on same soccer team ...) even though they were troubled by the actions of the thugs and liars.
(4) Special favors - these voters may want a governmental department or agency to overlook a problem or to be less vigilant.
Now the scary part - the Experiment taught me that a Trump presidency (or its equivalent) is possible because the factors listed above also apply in one form or another to national elections .
3
Prof. Krugman is missing a point here. Dictators don’t stay in power because they do great things for their countries. It is irrelevant how the Russia is objectively faring.
Putin may be objectively weak, but he projects strength. His posturing is enough to earn him the support of the majority of Russians. Even if the economy is doing bad (which can always be blamed on external factors), people will forgive or ignore that for a small dose of national pride. Crimea annexation, served that purpose wonderfully. Putin made Russians feel important again, and that is what counts.
And the more outside (Western) critique comes Putin’s way, the more beloved Russian son he becomes. And that's how Trump sees himself, too.
I just hope we don't fall for the con. It wouldn't be pretty...
Putin may be objectively weak, but he projects strength. His posturing is enough to earn him the support of the majority of Russians. Even if the economy is doing bad (which can always be blamed on external factors), people will forgive or ignore that for a small dose of national pride. Crimea annexation, served that purpose wonderfully. Putin made Russians feel important again, and that is what counts.
And the more outside (Western) critique comes Putin’s way, the more beloved Russian son he becomes. And that's how Trump sees himself, too.
I just hope we don't fall for the con. It wouldn't be pretty...
2
I still find it deeply upsetting that Trump is a Putin admirer. To this reader it shows an appalling lack of knowledge about Putin, Russia, the history of our relationship with Russia, and a fundamental misunderstanding about America. America was not created as an authoritarian country. While we do not have an exemplary record on enforcing civil rights for minorities we do have a bill of rights that we take very seriously. For Trump to admire a man who is willing to jail dissenters, real or imagined, is frightening.
5
Putin did bring order to a chaotic situation in Russia after the breakup, a chaos which was hindering economic growth, oil or no oil. The need to bring order is the primary reason that autocrats attain power, and to do that there usually has to be disorder. At the Republican convention Trump tried to make the case that America is in chaos or in rapid decline to disaster. This has not gone over well - Republicans have been trying to make a similar case since 2009 and it is obvious that it is nonsense. Nevertheless the primaries showed that there is great discontent with the economic course of America as economic inequality has grown under both Republican and Democratic administrations. A more disorderly or dangerous situation in or after the next financial crash could well bring a situation that favors an autocratic regime, especially if it is headed by a more competent figure than Trump. The more economic inequality grows, the more likely this becomes.
3
Putin is an oligarch. He is in the oil and gas business. Thus what is good for his own financial interests is Russian policy. If you can call a gangster and a thug (or a charlatan like Trump) a businessman then businessmen are above the law. There is no blind trust for Putin while he is in office. Trump makes it clear that as president that governing would be secondary to operating his various Trump business to make him much richer.
To silence opposition he wants to change our libel laws. Print or say something Trump does not like and you will be hit with a libel action that will cost you more than a hundred thousand to defend, win or loose. When asked about Putin’s killing of reporters and opponents, Trump’s answer is that Obama killed plenty.
Trump is a thug. He is ignorant of history, economics and civics, and the Constitution. He has contempt for our democracy, the press, women, Jews, people who are not white, immigrants, working people, small business people, and everyone who does not believe that Donald Trump is God’s gift to America. Although the greatest nation is the world Trump says it is run by fools, knaves, cowards and crooks. He alone can make America great again. “Believe me!” Just elect him dictator and all of our problems will quickly disappear. Any doubters should enroll in Trump University and all your questions will be answered if you just check his tax returns, which are none of our business. If Putin does not pay taxes why should Trump?
To silence opposition he wants to change our libel laws. Print or say something Trump does not like and you will be hit with a libel action that will cost you more than a hundred thousand to defend, win or loose. When asked about Putin’s killing of reporters and opponents, Trump’s answer is that Obama killed plenty.
Trump is a thug. He is ignorant of history, economics and civics, and the Constitution. He has contempt for our democracy, the press, women, Jews, people who are not white, immigrants, working people, small business people, and everyone who does not believe that Donald Trump is God’s gift to America. Although the greatest nation is the world Trump says it is run by fools, knaves, cowards and crooks. He alone can make America great again. “Believe me!” Just elect him dictator and all of our problems will quickly disappear. Any doubters should enroll in Trump University and all your questions will be answered if you just check his tax returns, which are none of our business. If Putin does not pay taxes why should Trump?
6
Trump wants to federalize all police forces (and eliminate jurisdictional conflicts) under the Department of Homeland Security, which as a cabinet department is directly answerable to the president. (DHS currently has about 240,000 employees. There are roughly 18,000 police forces in the U.S., comprising 800,000-900,000 full- and part-time sworn officers.) He wants to weaken the standard of probable cause and expand the use of warrantless searches; he wants to weaken the standards for use of deadly force; he wants to eliminate constitutional rights for illegal immigrants; he has banned certain media outlets from campaign events; he wants to change libel laws (which he would have to do at the state level because there are no federal libel laws) to enable him to sue over and therefore silence media reports negative toward him; he would use government agencies (such as the FCC) to punish media critcism. How much (if any) of this he could accomplish is almost beside the point. Trump admires Putin because he exemplifies the style of autocrat Trump has been in the running of his business empire and wishes to be as President.
1
There is an often quoted Italian proverb, "traduttore,traditore" (translator, traitor) that encapsulates the dangers of translation. There is the famous case of the translator for Jimmy Carter during a visit to Poland, in which he used a term indicating sexual desire instead of the needs (desires) of the Polish people.
We may have in Trump's admiration for Putin a similar confusion. Trump likes Putin because the Russian called him brilliant. So, says Trump, if he says nice things about me, I will say nice things about him. The confusion seems to be that the word used by Putin does not indicate mental acuity, brilliance, but a physical characteristic that is close to being "showy", "flamboyant". And Trump is that. Of such confusions love affairs are created.
We may have in Trump's admiration for Putin a similar confusion. Trump likes Putin because the Russian called him brilliant. So, says Trump, if he says nice things about me, I will say nice things about him. The confusion seems to be that the word used by Putin does not indicate mental acuity, brilliance, but a physical characteristic that is close to being "showy", "flamboyant". And Trump is that. Of such confusions love affairs are created.
8
We need a bogyman. A country that demonized and colonized and decimated the indigenous. One that enslaved people for 400 years. One not afraid to use nuclear bombs on civilians. One who can splatter millions of women and children in Vietnam or Iraq with impunity. A country that is so rich, so powerful, that they are above reproach. A country that can carry the bogyman banner most proudly.
1
If you think Germany, Japan, the Viet Cong, et al. were not killing civilians, you are either naive in the extreme or deliberately disingenuous, and a fool either way.
The same is true of the notion that the US invented slavery; or perhaps you think Great Zimbabwe, Macchu Pichu, the Pyramids, the Parthenon, the Colosseum, the Great Wall of China, were all built by union labour with paid holidays, time and a half overtime, and full benefits. Granted, our colour-coded system of slavery had particular horrors. But every culture beyond the hunter-gatherer has at some time practiced slavery in some form; the Third World tribal cultures revered by a particular strain of pseudoliberal had the benefit of being preliterate; the sins of purely oral cultures are written on the wind. Where they did leave records - as with the Aztec and Inca empires, or the Egyptians - they clearly aren't the Peaceable Kingdom.
We used the nuke to end WW II, after both sides bombing each other to shreds - admittedly with boring old conventional bombs - had failed. This is, pretty much unprecedented in history, a country that, having won a war, rebuilt its enemies Germany and Japan, and is now trading with them, as well as with Vietnam.
Your original comment is off topic, though drearily familiar, and i've paid it more respect than it deserves by responding even this briefly. I was once a 'liberal' or 'progressive', but your comment is exactly the kind of thing that drove me frorm the herd.
The same is true of the notion that the US invented slavery; or perhaps you think Great Zimbabwe, Macchu Pichu, the Pyramids, the Parthenon, the Colosseum, the Great Wall of China, were all built by union labour with paid holidays, time and a half overtime, and full benefits. Granted, our colour-coded system of slavery had particular horrors. But every culture beyond the hunter-gatherer has at some time practiced slavery in some form; the Third World tribal cultures revered by a particular strain of pseudoliberal had the benefit of being preliterate; the sins of purely oral cultures are written on the wind. Where they did leave records - as with the Aztec and Inca empires, or the Egyptians - they clearly aren't the Peaceable Kingdom.
We used the nuke to end WW II, after both sides bombing each other to shreds - admittedly with boring old conventional bombs - had failed. This is, pretty much unprecedented in history, a country that, having won a war, rebuilt its enemies Germany and Japan, and is now trading with them, as well as with Vietnam.
Your original comment is off topic, though drearily familiar, and i've paid it more respect than it deserves by responding even this briefly. I was once a 'liberal' or 'progressive', but your comment is exactly the kind of thing that drove me frorm the herd.
Strong may be considered as a club held by each man, but without a strong moral core neither has the ability to lead well.
People will follow either because in Mr Putin's case they will be forced to or in Mr Trump's they are led thinking after they beat the opposition a share of gold awaits at the end of the rainbow.
Each are facets of a stone tied to the end of a heavy club people in both cultures think has value beyond a bludgeon.
But in both instances the citizens are slugged, drained of wealth while they lay prostrate and tossed onto a pile.
While the imagery evokes unpleasantly memorable thoughts the experience all of Europe witnessed through the middle of the last century, it is both allegorically and in some instances literally what is happening.
It is difficult to voice any thought in contrast to our accepted capitalistic paragon especially when the failed state of the former Soviet Union is tossed into the mix, but some more pluralistic monetary model must be adopted if our planet is to survive the endless onslaught of mindless exploitation supported by equally mindless military force.
Those who are already here have to be fed and, regardless the dictates of some religious leaders, urged not to excessively procreate.
The problems of our world are shared unequally and brought about through ignorance, greed, and lack of education. Democracy and civil liberties will work as long as thery are not trampled by the sheer weight of numbers.
We must think and vote.
People will follow either because in Mr Putin's case they will be forced to or in Mr Trump's they are led thinking after they beat the opposition a share of gold awaits at the end of the rainbow.
Each are facets of a stone tied to the end of a heavy club people in both cultures think has value beyond a bludgeon.
But in both instances the citizens are slugged, drained of wealth while they lay prostrate and tossed onto a pile.
While the imagery evokes unpleasantly memorable thoughts the experience all of Europe witnessed through the middle of the last century, it is both allegorically and in some instances literally what is happening.
It is difficult to voice any thought in contrast to our accepted capitalistic paragon especially when the failed state of the former Soviet Union is tossed into the mix, but some more pluralistic monetary model must be adopted if our planet is to survive the endless onslaught of mindless exploitation supported by equally mindless military force.
Those who are already here have to be fed and, regardless the dictates of some religious leaders, urged not to excessively procreate.
The problems of our world are shared unequally and brought about through ignorance, greed, and lack of education. Democracy and civil liberties will work as long as thery are not trampled by the sheer weight of numbers.
We must think and vote.
2
Krugman has joined in the Putin paranoia clique. Putin is like Bugs Bunny to the leaden footed USs Elmer Fudd. So it seems but the US is in a far stronger position in the world than Russia. All this alleged Russian hacking, none of which is proven, mostly served to show how unfair the DNC was to Bernie Sanders. The USs much bigger hacking operation is not mentioned by Krugman. Nothing is mentioned about the hostile coup in Kiev that had bad intent toward Ukrainian Russians. The annexing of Crimea followed the hostile actions of the US supported coup with a referendum that was supported by Russians who are 67% of the people living in Crimea. Khrushchev's mysterious handing over of Crimea in the 50s to the Soviet Republic of Ukraine doesn't give any long or binding tie to Ukraine. Blind determination to get rid of the dictator Assad in Syria has led to a catastrophic civil war. The USs role is unmistakably bad. Putin's efforts to shore up Assad seem to be successful. The US should have stuck with humanitarian aid and an arms embargo. Where the Islamic State is concerned they need to be eradicated. Putin is a dictator and he uses intimidation, even police violence, and xenophobic propaganda. But the USs incessant name calling and unproven accusations of Putin only works to his advantage. Trump has benefited as well from the same misguided strategy. Hillary Clinton unrelenting name calling has taken her focus away from the real issues which she has the advantage.
1
Pres. Obama's characterization of Russia as a "regional power" does not accurately reflect the amount of trouble that Russia can cause.
Putin has supported the far right political parties in the EU with the intention of breaking up the EU. The Syrian refugee crisis is straining the capacity of European countries to handle the influx.
The amount of human misery caused in Syria because Putin supports Assad is unconscionable. Putin's actions in Ukraine have also created misery.
Pres. Obama may consider Russia to be a "regional power" in the same way that he once characterized ISIS to be the "junior varsity." The difference is the problems Putin can create in western and eastern Europe for the U.S. are great and most Americans do not realize that we are in a new Cold War.
Trump would be an unsuitable president because he would be susceptible to Putin's influence.
Putin has supported the far right political parties in the EU with the intention of breaking up the EU. The Syrian refugee crisis is straining the capacity of European countries to handle the influx.
The amount of human misery caused in Syria because Putin supports Assad is unconscionable. Putin's actions in Ukraine have also created misery.
Pres. Obama may consider Russia to be a "regional power" in the same way that he once characterized ISIS to be the "junior varsity." The difference is the problems Putin can create in western and eastern Europe for the U.S. are great and most Americans do not realize that we are in a new Cold War.
Trump would be an unsuitable president because he would be susceptible to Putin's influence.
4
Just one small correction. Russia doesn't just support the Ukrainian rebels. Its upper ranks consists of Russians. Its weapons are supplied by Russia. Russia even has portable crematoriums to dispense with the remains of Russian soldiers killed there, so they can keep up the plausibility of denial (at least domestically) that there is no Russian involvement. It's important because no part of Russian propaganda should be repeated without challenge lest it become accepted.
2
" ... The Russian Federation of 2016 is not the Soviet Union of 1986. True, it covers most of the same territory and is run by some of the same thugs. ..."
While, on the other hand
"The USA of 2016 is the USA of 1986. It covers the same territory and is run by some of the same thugs. "
So that is not the issue.
What seems to be the issue is that Russia has not, as anticipated, kowtowed to the demands of the US and become another extension of US foreign politics.
Russia has its own culture and and a very different understanding of how a country should be run than the US.
Putin is the one politician that embodies these ideas best whether the US like it or not.
So the only reason why Krugman and all those other do not like Putin and try to make a bogeyman of him is that Putin is not willing to succumb to their demands, whether political or economical.
Sorry, but if Mr. Krugman had any idea about Russia, he would be more than happy that the US demands for regime change did never take place as all those other attempts for government change the US has had in the past lead to instability and civil wars.
So between getting what the US wants and a stable Russia is the government of Putin.
Does Mr. Krugan really want to destabilize the entire world by getting his will and getting rid of Putin?
Or is it time for Mr. Krugman and others to finally try and understand that outside their little pond there is an entire universe that does not work the way they believe it should.
While, on the other hand
"The USA of 2016 is the USA of 1986. It covers the same territory and is run by some of the same thugs. "
So that is not the issue.
What seems to be the issue is that Russia has not, as anticipated, kowtowed to the demands of the US and become another extension of US foreign politics.
Russia has its own culture and and a very different understanding of how a country should be run than the US.
Putin is the one politician that embodies these ideas best whether the US like it or not.
So the only reason why Krugman and all those other do not like Putin and try to make a bogeyman of him is that Putin is not willing to succumb to their demands, whether political or economical.
Sorry, but if Mr. Krugman had any idea about Russia, he would be more than happy that the US demands for regime change did never take place as all those other attempts for government change the US has had in the past lead to instability and civil wars.
So between getting what the US wants and a stable Russia is the government of Putin.
Does Mr. Krugan really want to destabilize the entire world by getting his will and getting rid of Putin?
Or is it time for Mr. Krugman and others to finally try and understand that outside their little pond there is an entire universe that does not work the way they believe it should.
1
Correctly stating that Putin is a less than apt model for the US presidency is not at all equivalent to calling for his forced removal.
Putin eventually will die, almost certainly leading to a period of instability in Russia as a society with no practical governrment institutions struggles to find its way.
Of course the US is not perfect. The Russian alternative is so far from perfect it's hard to imagine anyone other than those few who profit from it can find anything good to say about the lot.
Putin eventually will die, almost certainly leading to a period of instability in Russia as a society with no practical governrment institutions struggles to find its way.
Of course the US is not perfect. The Russian alternative is so far from perfect it's hard to imagine anyone other than those few who profit from it can find anything good to say about the lot.
2
Joel,
I take it that you know Russia only from the news?
In real life in Russia, apart from spending months each year in the Middle East I also spend quite some time each year in Russia, Putin is the most liked and respected politician there.
Even in completely free and democratic elections, he and his part would win any time.
Seen from a Russian perspective, only a very strong power can hold the country together and while Russia never had any type democratic history to speak of, Russians are used to a strong hand that runs the country.
On average, they even prefer it to a weak democratic government.
This simply is a matter of local culture which is very different from what the West has.
People don't care about democratic elections as long as they are able to make a living and get the feeling that there are ample job and some social security around.
A full belly gets you further in Russia than a distant promise of democracy.
Even more than that, people know and accept that there is quite some corruption around as this too was a well known issue in the USSR and they know how to handle it.
The West has called for all kinds of regime change for Russia for a long time and they got it once at the end of the USSR.
These calls may have softened their wording but they are still there.
These days it is time to let the USSR get its act together and see what happens when the dust has settled..
It may not be what the West likes but I hope it is what Russian want.
I take it that you know Russia only from the news?
In real life in Russia, apart from spending months each year in the Middle East I also spend quite some time each year in Russia, Putin is the most liked and respected politician there.
Even in completely free and democratic elections, he and his part would win any time.
Seen from a Russian perspective, only a very strong power can hold the country together and while Russia never had any type democratic history to speak of, Russians are used to a strong hand that runs the country.
On average, they even prefer it to a weak democratic government.
This simply is a matter of local culture which is very different from what the West has.
People don't care about democratic elections as long as they are able to make a living and get the feeling that there are ample job and some social security around.
A full belly gets you further in Russia than a distant promise of democracy.
Even more than that, people know and accept that there is quite some corruption around as this too was a well known issue in the USSR and they know how to handle it.
The West has called for all kinds of regime change for Russia for a long time and they got it once at the end of the USSR.
These calls may have softened their wording but they are still there.
These days it is time to let the USSR get its act together and see what happens when the dust has settled..
It may not be what the West likes but I hope it is what Russian want.
Let's face it -Trump isn't praising Putin's lack of democracy, he's praising the fact that he appears to know what he wants, makes decisive decisions and doesn't pay attention to political correctness. Obviously, we don't have a dictatorship, but these qualities, to some extent, are what's missing in our leaders at present or that's what the American voter feels is lacking. Right or wrong, a Teddy Roosevelt- type personality is what many Americans long for in Washington as it appears we feel we are the butt of the world right now with uncontrollable wars, out of control immigration, trade deals giving away jobs and shootings in our cities.
4
Trump is an empty suit, not a "Teddy Roosevelt type." He has stood on the political sidelines for 70 years, criticizing and doing nothing to correct the system. He bribes public officials, misuses employees and small business partners, and complains and complains and complains with no real solutions.
Trump decisive? Hahaha. He has changed his mind or moved to a no-opinion position on everything he has ever stated, as far as policy. Please do no tarnish the name of Teddy Roosevelt by linking him to Donald Trump.
Trump decisive? Hahaha. He has changed his mind or moved to a no-opinion position on everything he has ever stated, as far as policy. Please do no tarnish the name of Teddy Roosevelt by linking him to Donald Trump.
1
Face this: Putin's "decisive decisions", in actual actuality, are anti-democratic and in the case of his dealing with his rivals and his dealings with his friends, would be highly illegal in this country. Go ahead and yearn for Teddy Roosevelt but you won't find him in Vladimir Putin.
1
So, the Trump/Putin bromance , though it may be unrequited, should not surprise us?
It's not like when the awesomely cool guy had a crush on the president of the chemistry club, or the pencil neck with the pocket-protector tried to date the head cheerleader? It's mutual admiration between bullies, where one has the tools to be a real threat to everyone's health and safety, and the bully with the YUGE crush is working on it? Got it.
This election cycle has left us unhinged. I've lost my green check. Am sleeping in the dog-house. Hillary is gonna be fine, by the way.
It's not like when the awesomely cool guy had a crush on the president of the chemistry club, or the pencil neck with the pocket-protector tried to date the head cheerleader? It's mutual admiration between bullies, where one has the tools to be a real threat to everyone's health and safety, and the bully with the YUGE crush is working on it? Got it.
This election cycle has left us unhinged. I've lost my green check. Am sleeping in the dog-house. Hillary is gonna be fine, by the way.
Paul rightly continues to point out the obvious deficiencies in the Republican Party and their atrocious nominee. So bravo.
However, Paul's arguments focus some thoughts on his full throated cheerleading of HRC. First, Russia is indeed a authoritarian petro state with mostly regional scope. Paul glides over an essential point: armed with nuclear weapons. To be more specific, armed with thousands of deliverable, multi-megaton multiwarheaded missiles based on a variety of platforms. When taken with the reasonable assumption that if one or some of these weapons launches, the resulting combined launch is a real existential threat not just to both countries but humanity and the biosphere itself. Systems of dubious fault tolerance control these weapons. HRC has a well documented belief in the use and capabilities of US military power. Lets pray there's no miscalculation with this regional petro state with the power to end humanity.
An addendum to the above is the glossing over of the history of the Ukraine and the Crimean Peninsula - both how Crimea came to be Ukrainian and its importance to Russia as a southern naval base. Then there's western support for the Orange Revolution and the refusal to disavow NATO expansion to Russia's perimeter.
Let's hope that Paul's belief in the neoliberal's version of the end of history doesn't finish what the neocons started.
However, Paul's arguments focus some thoughts on his full throated cheerleading of HRC. First, Russia is indeed a authoritarian petro state with mostly regional scope. Paul glides over an essential point: armed with nuclear weapons. To be more specific, armed with thousands of deliverable, multi-megaton multiwarheaded missiles based on a variety of platforms. When taken with the reasonable assumption that if one or some of these weapons launches, the resulting combined launch is a real existential threat not just to both countries but humanity and the biosphere itself. Systems of dubious fault tolerance control these weapons. HRC has a well documented belief in the use and capabilities of US military power. Lets pray there's no miscalculation with this regional petro state with the power to end humanity.
An addendum to the above is the glossing over of the history of the Ukraine and the Crimean Peninsula - both how Crimea came to be Ukrainian and its importance to Russia as a southern naval base. Then there's western support for the Orange Revolution and the refusal to disavow NATO expansion to Russia's perimeter.
Let's hope that Paul's belief in the neoliberal's version of the end of history doesn't finish what the neocons started.
That about sizes it up. Too bad that it won't be read and understood by every man, woman, and child in the country.
Trump has made it essential that we now produce and air the documentary describing "The Essential Vladmir Putin": How he made his country great again by closing down the shirt industry in favor of the animal skin industry.
Trump has made it essential that we now produce and air the documentary describing "The Essential Vladmir Putin": How he made his country great again by closing down the shirt industry in favor of the animal skin industry.
1
In his forum with Matt Lauer, Trump was completely clear about why he admires Putin. He's a strong leader -- in contrast to Obama, who has "divided" the US. If only Lauer had had the wit to point out that Putin has unified his country largely by (1) threatening, killing, or imprisoning his political opponents; (2) concentrating control of the media and business in the hands of a few of his cronies; and (3) ginning up foreign wars to distract from his manifest failures at home.
13
The claim that Russia covers most of the territory of the former USSR is a bit misleading. Russia covers a lot of the same sparsely inhabited territory, but it has territory with about half as many people as the USSR did. The USSR had a larger population than the US in 1986. Today, Russia has a smaller population than Pakistan.
Russia's not just a regional power. It's not on par with Turkey or Egypt. It's what you might call a great power, something less than a superpower but still a major player in world affairs. Russia's military is about as powerful as France's or the UK's, except with somewhat better force projection. Imagine if France were invading its neighbors and opposing US foreign policy. That would similarly give the US and its allies a big headache.
Regarding admiration for Putin, I think that in the US, how much you praise Russia or its current leader has a lot to do with what you think of the US or its current policies. Americans grow up looking at Russia as a foil to the US, at least politically. A lot of people who are perpetually discontent with US policy see Russia's policies as comparatively better. Sometimes this gets really strange on the left: why do people ostensibly in the anti-war movement have so many nice things about an aggressive power and its clumsy Realpolitik in Syria and Ukraine these days? Republicans admire Putin only because they see themselves in the same boat, as opposing Obama's foreign policy and so admiring Putin as his foil.
Russia's not just a regional power. It's not on par with Turkey or Egypt. It's what you might call a great power, something less than a superpower but still a major player in world affairs. Russia's military is about as powerful as France's or the UK's, except with somewhat better force projection. Imagine if France were invading its neighbors and opposing US foreign policy. That would similarly give the US and its allies a big headache.
Regarding admiration for Putin, I think that in the US, how much you praise Russia or its current leader has a lot to do with what you think of the US or its current policies. Americans grow up looking at Russia as a foil to the US, at least politically. A lot of people who are perpetually discontent with US policy see Russia's policies as comparatively better. Sometimes this gets really strange on the left: why do people ostensibly in the anti-war movement have so many nice things about an aggressive power and its clumsy Realpolitik in Syria and Ukraine these days? Republicans admire Putin only because they see themselves in the same boat, as opposing Obama's foreign policy and so admiring Putin as his foil.
After the revelations about Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort's ties to Russia and to Ukraine's former strongman (quasi-dictator), I have been waiting for your colleagues, Mr. Krugman, to show us in what other ways Trump might be tied to the Russian state, which is known for its ruthless authoritarianism, suppression of dissent, repression against LGBTQ people, violence against religious, ethnic, and racial minorities, etc.
Like many people, I'm still waiting. What are Donald Trump's ties to Putin and the Russian regime? It's clear he admires Putin's ability to control Russia's Parliament and rearrange its laws like a checker game. He probably also loves that Putin can jail (or worse) opponents, enrich allies as he sees fit, spend state money at will on Olympics and send his military into conflicts on a whim, and basically stay in power until he tires of ruling.
But what are his real ties to the Russian strong man he bromances so intensely? To its oligarchs? To its banks? Why won't the Times and other papers demand to see those tax returns? Not just this past year's, but a decades worth? Please get on it, US media! Do you job! All of this is FAR WORSE than a throwaway comment like "basket of deplorables," or a private email server!
Like many people, I'm still waiting. What are Donald Trump's ties to Putin and the Russian regime? It's clear he admires Putin's ability to control Russia's Parliament and rearrange its laws like a checker game. He probably also loves that Putin can jail (or worse) opponents, enrich allies as he sees fit, spend state money at will on Olympics and send his military into conflicts on a whim, and basically stay in power until he tires of ruling.
But what are his real ties to the Russian strong man he bromances so intensely? To its oligarchs? To its banks? Why won't the Times and other papers demand to see those tax returns? Not just this past year's, but a decades worth? Please get on it, US media! Do you job! All of this is FAR WORSE than a throwaway comment like "basket of deplorables," or a private email server!
12
The comments here are interesting. It is hard to see the positive case for Vladmir Putin.
Putin's Russia is moving backward, economically dependent on oil revenues, but failing to compete in a rapidly-modernizing world. Putin himself, a product of Cold War era Soviet espionage tradecraft, styles himself as a strongman dictator, happily embracing modern methods of cyber warfare. He is happy to disrupt the American election, calling our entire democratic system into question. Putin strongly supports the brutal Assad in Syria at the cost of half a million lives, while disrupting European democracies with floods of war refugees. It is just part of the game for him.
Trump openly admires Putin, and Putin, with a wink, says ''nice things'' about Trump. Russian oligarchs, upon whom Putin depends, may have put quite a lot of money into Trump's businesses and at least one bought a mega mansion in Florida from Trump at a substantially inflated price. Trump and Pence call Putin a better leader than the American President twice elected with broad popular majorities.
So what good is to be said about Putin? Why would any American believe he is anything but an adversary? Why would any American admire his leadership and his actions?
Perhaps Trump will explain in more detail in one of the debates.
Putin's Russia is moving backward, economically dependent on oil revenues, but failing to compete in a rapidly-modernizing world. Putin himself, a product of Cold War era Soviet espionage tradecraft, styles himself as a strongman dictator, happily embracing modern methods of cyber warfare. He is happy to disrupt the American election, calling our entire democratic system into question. Putin strongly supports the brutal Assad in Syria at the cost of half a million lives, while disrupting European democracies with floods of war refugees. It is just part of the game for him.
Trump openly admires Putin, and Putin, with a wink, says ''nice things'' about Trump. Russian oligarchs, upon whom Putin depends, may have put quite a lot of money into Trump's businesses and at least one bought a mega mansion in Florida from Trump at a substantially inflated price. Trump and Pence call Putin a better leader than the American President twice elected with broad popular majorities.
So what good is to be said about Putin? Why would any American believe he is anything but an adversary? Why would any American admire his leadership and his actions?
Perhaps Trump will explain in more detail in one of the debates.
5
Wouldn't it have been great if Matt Lauer had asked Trump a follow up question or two exploring why Trump thinks Putin is a strong leader? Give him a chance to explain what he thinks makes a strong leader and how the Russian leader has shown strong leadership.
The answers could range from the bobble head stupidity of "He's popular" and "He thinks I'm brilliant" to something intelligent (albeit scary). Whether it is a Regional or Geopolitical Power, Russia remains important to the US. Voters need to know where this admiration is coming from.
The press is simply not doing its job when they let Trump get away with bobble head answers.
As for the Republican Right, their bobble head answer for admiring Putin is that he does things that embarrass the US which, in turn, embarrasses Obama. That's patriotism, I guess. And the radical Left admires his love of privacy, demonstrated by giving refuge to Snowden. (Don't look at their hacking.)
The answers could range from the bobble head stupidity of "He's popular" and "He thinks I'm brilliant" to something intelligent (albeit scary). Whether it is a Regional or Geopolitical Power, Russia remains important to the US. Voters need to know where this admiration is coming from.
The press is simply not doing its job when they let Trump get away with bobble head answers.
As for the Republican Right, their bobble head answer for admiring Putin is that he does things that embarrass the US which, in turn, embarrasses Obama. That's patriotism, I guess. And the radical Left admires his love of privacy, demonstrated by giving refuge to Snowden. (Don't look at their hacking.)
20
Barack Obama is fueled with Marxism/socialism. Unfortunately he is reckless and not respected by many Americans as well as world leaders but that is his legacy.
Right-wing infatuation with authoritarianism in general and Putin in particular has little to do with the realities of U.S-Russia relations or any specific geopolitical issue. Rather, it is a longing for an imaginary archetype, a Hollywood cowboy who projects an image of heroism and strength, whose principles are easily grasped, and whose worldview is distilled into simple black and white propositions. These people look at staged photographs of Putin wrestling bears or riding bareback and sigh with envy. They are ashamed of Obama's intellectual approach to problem-solving, or his willingness to acknowledge that domestic and global economic and political issues are complex, paradoxical, and ever-shifting. It makes sense to them that Putin asserts power through violence and coercion because in their minds violence is the most decisive form of asserting control. How many times have they rationalized Putin's thuggishnes as a sign that he "cares" about his people? Skepticism about concentrating power in the hands of one individual is woven into the very fabric of our nation's DNA. The Founding Fathers devised our Constitutional freedoms and checks and balances to prevent the rise of an American Putin. Calling out Trump's adulation of a dictator isn't reviving the Cold War--it is asserting a greater faith in our own system--a system that is fully incompatible with everything Trump represents.
207
As the saying goes,
when you're right, you're right.
Mr Krugman is right on both counts; eg, Mr Putin and Mr Trump & his deplorables.
when you're right, you're right.
Mr Krugman is right on both counts; eg, Mr Putin and Mr Trump & his deplorables.
9
This is not funny anymore but downright scary. All of us NYT commenters are going to Trump's gulags if he gets elected. I'm already packing my toothbrush and bar of soap.
9
Kim Jung-on, North Korea's Supreme Leader, has 100% approval - makes Putin's 82% approval seem like minor league. By Trump logic, Kim Jung-on is a great leader - such strength, nothing like our weak leader (can we even call him leader?) Obama.
Under the true horror of Trump winning in November, no doubt that Trump will issue executive orders requiring us to call him Supreme Leader (the only one who can save America) to applaud in unison whenever he enters a room/stage, a ban on media criticism (death penalty for criticism) with all news supplied by Trump News - and, oh yes, a ban on sarcasm by anyone other than Trump - we must all smile and laugh when not secretly crying inside. Let's get that approval rating for Supreme Leader Trump to 100%
Under the true horror of Trump winning in November, no doubt that Trump will issue executive orders requiring us to call him Supreme Leader (the only one who can save America) to applaud in unison whenever he enters a room/stage, a ban on media criticism (death penalty for criticism) with all news supplied by Trump News - and, oh yes, a ban on sarcasm by anyone other than Trump - we must all smile and laugh when not secretly crying inside. Let's get that approval rating for Supreme Leader Trump to 100%
7
Saddam Hussein always won elections by massive margins. The list can go on and on...
Lets recall a little history here about the collapse of the Soviet Union and the takeover of State Enterprises by thuggish Russian capitalst oligarchs. Mikhaiil Gorbachev proposed giving the Soviet people a stake and some democratic control over State run enterprises. But then Gorbachev was toppled by the Yeltsin coup which was eagerly backed by Western capitalists ready to pounce on the large resources of the Soviet Union and convert them into capitalist fiefdoms. The State run enterprises, instead of being distributed to the people were taken over by their Communist Party bosses for their own huge profits and Wall Street was eager to make deals with these new Russian Capitalists for their own profits. Meanwhile the Russian people suffered through years of hardship which resulted in a drastic cut to lifespans and the decline of public institutions. But the Russian mafia prospered , bought US athletic teams and were showered with the same Corporate welfare as American capitalists with US taxpayers money for new totally unneeded sports stadiums and arenas. Suddenly now we are supposed to be concerned about this? Gorbachev had the right idea in the first place.
We need enterprises owned and operated by the people and their own workers not more Corporate oligarchy and welfare...
The Green Bay Packers are the right model not the billionaires private sports teams, beaches, islands and yachts...
We need enterprises owned and operated by the people and their own workers not more Corporate oligarchy and welfare...
The Green Bay Packers are the right model not the billionaires private sports teams, beaches, islands and yachts...
12
Donald Trump's Make Russia Great Again campaign is off and running...
4
The thing that Putin did for Russia was give them a renewed sense of national confidence. It's hard to overstate how demoralized Russians were by the end of Yeltsin's regime. They had been transformed from one of the two most powerful nations on earth into a third world basket case of a country with an obviously alcoholic leader. The social/civic breakdown was painfully severe. I spent a summer in a Russian city in the mid 90's. When I arrived and visited the main market square, full of quasi legal kiosks and vendors selling the necessities, I saw a dead dog laying next to a busy sidewalk corner. Over the next few months I watched that dog carcass bloat and decompose as people stepped over and around it. That dog was emblematic of the complete breakdown of governance that happened in the transition from communism to "liberal capitalism" under Yeltsin. Putin may have been helped by a fortuitous rise in oil prices, and he is certainly an undemocratic thug, but he cleaned up the dead dogs. He gave the Russians a sense that their country mattered again, that they weren't destined to be dominated by the IMF and other proxies of its former enemies. This is why Putin has such high approval ratings. It's also why Trump and others on the right admire him. He seems to fit their own self-conception of a "strong man" who, through force of will, brings order and stability to a rudderless nation. They see 2016 America as somehow similar to 90's Russia.
4
Krugman, do you have one shred of proof that Americans on the right admire "strongmen that showers benefits on an immensely wealthy oligarchy while brutally suppressing opposition and criticism?" If so, please share it.
This is yet another of your ludicrous straw man caricatures, thrown out as red meat for your fellow leftists, because it is what you and they want to believe about anyone who disagrees with you.
This is yet another of your ludicrous straw man caricatures, thrown out as red meat for your fellow leftists, because it is what you and they want to believe about anyone who disagrees with you.
Just imagine if Hillary's campaign manager was found to have taken 12 million in bribes from the Ukrainian kleptocracy. We would hear of nothing else for years, possibly decades, but somehow it is just one of the many egregious shades of Trump that gets a pass.
29
So according to you Mr. PUtin is bad because he has not led the Russian economy into recovery. Exactly how do you feel the American economy is doing? You think that a return of the jobs lost in 2008 is enough to call this a a recovery? You must have a pension from good old Yale. Because everyone else in this country is hurting too. Exactly why do you think Trump is dong well in this election. I suggest you get out you Ivory Tower and see how the 'despicables' are living in the USA. Printing money by the Fed to pump up the DJIA isn't an economic recovery. And putting 9 million people on Medicaid is not a healthcare solution. Wake up Mr. Krugman. Everything you said about Putin applies to Obama.
1
I'm all for world peace and interrelationships to assure peace, but feel that there must still be a degree of nationalism and patriotism to assure our prosperity and survival. We must compete with Russia to continue progress, not acquiesce to it's influence and power. I am extremely uncomfortable knowing our future President could be so easily swayed by an admiration of Putin while claiming to want to "Make America Great Again". They just don't compute in my mind.
2
Trump is merely saying that Putin is throughly entrenched in power and that we should think of geopolitical interests instead of trying to overthrow him as was Hillary's policy with Michael McFaul as ambassador following no other goal.
Putin with his terrorists in Chechenia has common interests with us in the Mideast. Trump is saying cooperate with him--as Obama finally seems to be doing.
Read about Libya today to see the democracy Hillary and Samantha Powers brought when they overthrew a distastefu, but stabilizing dictator. A genuine militia thug just seized two ports from "our" forces. So we are supposed to go back to the bad, old days under Hillary who gave us the refugees who are turning Europe in a fascist direction.
Bah, humbug.
Putin with his terrorists in Chechenia has common interests with us in the Mideast. Trump is saying cooperate with him--as Obama finally seems to be doing.
Read about Libya today to see the democracy Hillary and Samantha Powers brought when they overthrew a distastefu, but stabilizing dictator. A genuine militia thug just seized two ports from "our" forces. So we are supposed to go back to the bad, old days under Hillary who gave us the refugees who are turning Europe in a fascist direction.
Bah, humbug.
Thanks for re-phrasing Donald's words in praise of Putin. Can you give us the corrected version of "Russia isn't going into the Ukraine when I'm president.... oh, they're already there... I knew that."?
Donald didn't want citizens in Libya killed by their own government any more than Hillary did. He sat down with his other BFF Matt Lauer and told him how he'd join the coalition and bring it on. For a moment, he actually sounded sane.
Donald didn't want citizens in Libya killed by their own government any more than Hillary did. He sat down with his other BFF Matt Lauer and told him how he'd join the coalition and bring it on. For a moment, he actually sounded sane.
I really would have expected more from Krugman on Crimea. He completely ignores the actual reason Russia annexed the peninsula, namely the massive naval base that is home to the Black Sea Fleet, one of Russia's few naval bases that is not at risk of freezing over in the Winter. Indeed, this need has driven a lot of Rusdian and Soviet foreign policy for the past 200 years. To ignore it exposes Krugman for the partisan hack he has devolved into.
You can't just generalize what you learn in AP Euro to current global affairs. Russia would have had control over that military base whether or not Crimea was in the hands of an EU state. Guantanamo Bay doesn't give the US a reason to annex Cuba, even though there's a regime there openly hostile to the US. (The US has attempted regime change in the past in Cuba, but not to protect our naval base, which is protected by having a more powerful army than Cuba.)
7
Does this mean we can annex Bahrain, home of our Fifth Fleet?
2
By now, the US has a base in Cuba to spite the Cuban government. Its Air Force and Navy bases in Puerto Rico closed long ago. The Army's Fort Buchanan remains open.
The United States is a corrupt Oligarchy that maintains outwardly Democratic forms that are just an empty show. What more proof do you need than our current campaign for the Presidency?
Both Trump and Clinton are avaricious, dishonest, thoroughly corrupt servants of the Super Rich, Mrs. Clinton is just more polished in her presentations.
Our "War(s) on Terror", which both candidates indorse, is really a series of wars to control middle eastern oil which is controlled by and profits the Super Rich. Our military actions against Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya have killed, maimed, displaced and impoverished a hundred times more innocent people than any of the Terrorists we claim to be fighting.
Isn't it just as crazy to believe Trumps ravings as Clinton promises to clean up our financial institutions and Tax the Super Rich?
I'm voting Green, we will not win this times but after four years of Trump or Clinton people may wake up and save or Democracy.
Both Trump and Clinton are avaricious, dishonest, thoroughly corrupt servants of the Super Rich, Mrs. Clinton is just more polished in her presentations.
Our "War(s) on Terror", which both candidates indorse, is really a series of wars to control middle eastern oil which is controlled by and profits the Super Rich. Our military actions against Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya have killed, maimed, displaced and impoverished a hundred times more innocent people than any of the Terrorists we claim to be fighting.
Isn't it just as crazy to believe Trumps ravings as Clinton promises to clean up our financial institutions and Tax the Super Rich?
I'm voting Green, we will not win this times but after four years of Trump or Clinton people may wake up and save or Democracy.
This all sounds like a pre-scripted theme conjured up by a political campaign.
I don't doubt the validity. But the timing sure seems forced. This was all apparent 6 months ago.
It makes me wonder what Krugman would be writing about if we had different nominees. Maybe he would be writing about our economy.
I don't doubt the validity. But the timing sure seems forced. This was all apparent 6 months ago.
It makes me wonder what Krugman would be writing about if we had different nominees. Maybe he would be writing about our economy.
1
Vladimir Putin dreams of being relevant in the world. Putin wants to openly meddle and interfere in American politics and elections by espionage, mass media propaganda, domestic Slavic ethnic Russian lobby organizations and dual American Russian citizenship participation. Russian President Vladimir Putin wants to be just like Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
5
Drumpf has the same GOP'er problem with democracy and the Constitution as Dubya, when he lamented in the 2000 campaign:
" If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator. "
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0012/18/nd.01.html
An opinion shared by many at the top of the capitalist pyramid, with U.S. oligarchs having moaned to the press how much easier it is for them to deal with dictators and strong men, than it is to deal with democracies.
A theme runs through these sentiments.
" If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator. "
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0012/18/nd.01.html
An opinion shared by many at the top of the capitalist pyramid, with U.S. oligarchs having moaned to the press how much easier it is for them to deal with dictators and strong men, than it is to deal with democracies.
A theme runs through these sentiments.
34
There has always been this authoritarian tendency amongst Republicans. The admiration for Putin is much the same as the praise they used to lavish on Pinochet or the Greek colonels. Anyone who keeps the hated liberals in their place is by definition admirable. If a few people fall out of helicopters that's just collateral damage. Witness the widespread admiration for the CIA torture program or the huge appetite for TV fantasies where right thinking Americans torture and kill "Them." It's a ridiculously simplistic and one dimensional view of the world that has been given an additional push by the hatred of Obama the black, muslim Kenyan. Clinton is fundamentally right. Half of Trump's supporters are pretty deplorable.
54
The Deplorables like Putin because he is the kinda guy who would march into another country and just take their stuff. Rudy Giuliani expressed tremendous admiration for this strategy on TV the other day. I'm sure they think this is patriotic.....
42
How is surprising that a kleptocrat wannabe admires a successful kleptocrat? Birds of a feather and other proverbs to the same effect.
27
Trump has succeeded with the "basket of deplorables" because they are beyond frustration, their anger overpowers common sense, and this pot has been boiling for at least three decades. It is about JOBS. Say it again, JOBS. Tens of thousands of them, skilled and unskilled have been shopped overseas to workers who (still) earn less then $10 a day. As long as we allow unrestrained political graft from corporations, corrupt politicians will do nothing to stop an endless cycle of declining real wages, young people poorer than their parents, no American Dream for them. These people are truly desperate for support and Trump the trickster has managed to sell his snake oil to them, and they will believe anything he says including adoration of Putin.
Unless we hear more, much more, from the Clinton team about how she plans to support especially small manufacturing businesses employing Americans and using American materials, Trump may win.
Unless we hear more, much more, from the Clinton team about how she plans to support especially small manufacturing businesses employing Americans and using American materials, Trump may win.
18
This is a good comment but let's be fair, Americans have a seemingly endless appetite for cheap sweatshop made goods. Many Americans have willingly participated in building this corporate led culture, either with their wallets or with their votes.
1
Your average American doesn't know much about Putin besides what they see in the news clips of him meeting with Obama. The narrative for Obama's presidency is that he doesn't have a good relationship with Putin (understandably so) and Putin will never stand down to Obama.
That's all it takes to win over the hearts of Republicans these days.
That's all it takes to win over the hearts of Republicans these days.
12
Our American Constitution has proven strong enough to keep our democracy functioning as various past "strong" American leaders have challenged its authority. Perhaps that has always been the greatest challenge to the American democracy, from inward thugs rather than outside dictators.
Truth is, if Putin were running for American President, the Constitution would be in great peril. It is up to both the Republican and the Democratic Parties to make sure his tool, Trump, isn't elected. Time will tell in this crisis, and answer the question "can the American People wake up to the danger of reality tv coming to the White House?"
Hugh Massengill, Eugene
Truth is, if Putin were running for American President, the Constitution would be in great peril. It is up to both the Republican and the Democratic Parties to make sure his tool, Trump, isn't elected. Time will tell in this crisis, and answer the question "can the American People wake up to the danger of reality tv coming to the White House?"
Hugh Massengill, Eugene
20
Trump admires strongmen thugs like Putin (don't forget he also praises Saddam Hussein and Kim Jong Un). Now Putin, who for his own purposes of intervening in our election, complimented Trump (mocked Trump's narcissism if truth be told). That sealed the deal--Trump craves attention. A powerful thug complimenting him was better than another bankruptcy where he walks away with everyone's money.
But the icing on the cake is the homegrown, flag waving Americans who admire him. That's the Republican Party. The patriotic all-American Republican Party that has worked so hard to make our government fail, especially government led by President Obama, make our country fail, so that they can claim we need a Republican to save us. And insteps Trump who claims he alone can make government work, make America great again...a la Putin? Yes. A la Putin.
Trump will build a wall. Trump will round up, deport 11 million undocumented immigrants. Trump will bring back jobs. Trump will make the world's most expensive military bigger, more expensive while he cuts taxes (90 percent of the cuts to the wealthy). Trump alone can do it.
He has told America--only he can do it. He doesn't need Congress (maybe he will suspend it). Maybe he'll use a few Putin ideas to make Congress do his bidding. Increase his popularity from a basket of the deplorable to 82 percent of the population. All things are possible for the man widely admired because he admires and wishes to emulate powerful thugs. Oh America!
But the icing on the cake is the homegrown, flag waving Americans who admire him. That's the Republican Party. The patriotic all-American Republican Party that has worked so hard to make our government fail, especially government led by President Obama, make our country fail, so that they can claim we need a Republican to save us. And insteps Trump who claims he alone can make government work, make America great again...a la Putin? Yes. A la Putin.
Trump will build a wall. Trump will round up, deport 11 million undocumented immigrants. Trump will bring back jobs. Trump will make the world's most expensive military bigger, more expensive while he cuts taxes (90 percent of the cuts to the wealthy). Trump alone can do it.
He has told America--only he can do it. He doesn't need Congress (maybe he will suspend it). Maybe he'll use a few Putin ideas to make Congress do his bidding. Increase his popularity from a basket of the deplorable to 82 percent of the population. All things are possible for the man widely admired because he admires and wishes to emulate powerful thugs. Oh America!
31
"Imprisoned or dead": That seems to be Trump's plan for Hilary as his only realistic path in his run for the White House.
9
One of the odd things about many right-wing people that I know is that they are cynical and suspicious while at the same time they are gullible and easily led astray. I think that this is because in many cases they don't understand how economics, government, politics, etc. works so they attribute outcomes to dishonesty or corruption when it is not. But the right is eager to support Trump despite the fact that he has betrayed practically everyone he has done business with down through the years. A day or two ago it was reported that people are leaving his campaign organization because they haven't been paid their salaries.
Trump loves to use debt in his business but bankers and business people who know anything know that he loves to stiff creditors and everyone with whom he deals. That is one reason he has turned to the Russians.
It would be interesting to know how much Donald has borrowed from the Russians or if he has large business dealings with the Russian oligarchs.
Trump loves to use debt in his business but bankers and business people who know anything know that he loves to stiff creditors and everyone with whom he deals. That is one reason he has turned to the Russians.
It would be interesting to know how much Donald has borrowed from the Russians or if he has large business dealings with the Russian oligarchs.
28
"it’s just an authoritarian state, with a cult of personality around its strongman, that showers benefits on an immensely wealthy oligarchy while brutally suppressing opposition and criticism."
You left out "with international expansionist ambitions."
Funny (as in curious, not humorous), this doesn't sound very different than the neocons who came into office with George W Bush--Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfawitz, Scooter Libby, and Condaleeza Rice. In fact, they introduced the Patriot Act, the MCA, sought to "free" the giant corporations and tried to put even Social Security into oligarchs' hands on Wall Street.
True, they weren't as blatant about it as Putin, but then again, we've had the same Republic since 1787, and they've only had theirs since 1989, and behind that a thousand years of dictatorships.
But that's what the oligarchs ALWAYS want. The older, agrarian version of it was called feudalism, a caste-oriented society where a few got to live in unimaginable and unquestionable luxury, and the rest lived at subsistence at the whim and mercy of the wealthiest. We see, in Donald Trump's flagrant disregard of laws, particularly tax, bankruptcy, labor, political donations and non-profit laws a belief that they simply don't apply to rich guys like him. Libel laws don't apply to him, but they do to the ordinary Joe, as he sues anyone at the drop of a hat.
Is it any wonder he admires a guy who's at the very top of the pyramid, totally able to do what he likes?
You left out "with international expansionist ambitions."
Funny (as in curious, not humorous), this doesn't sound very different than the neocons who came into office with George W Bush--Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfawitz, Scooter Libby, and Condaleeza Rice. In fact, they introduced the Patriot Act, the MCA, sought to "free" the giant corporations and tried to put even Social Security into oligarchs' hands on Wall Street.
True, they weren't as blatant about it as Putin, but then again, we've had the same Republic since 1787, and they've only had theirs since 1989, and behind that a thousand years of dictatorships.
But that's what the oligarchs ALWAYS want. The older, agrarian version of it was called feudalism, a caste-oriented society where a few got to live in unimaginable and unquestionable luxury, and the rest lived at subsistence at the whim and mercy of the wealthiest. We see, in Donald Trump's flagrant disregard of laws, particularly tax, bankruptcy, labor, political donations and non-profit laws a belief that they simply don't apply to rich guys like him. Libel laws don't apply to him, but they do to the ordinary Joe, as he sues anyone at the drop of a hat.
Is it any wonder he admires a guy who's at the very top of the pyramid, totally able to do what he likes?
19
@ Montreal Moe and jbtodsttoe:
See
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-economic-plan_us_57c9dc...?
"At a private meeting of conservatives in Cleveland this summer, Donald Trump’s senior economic adviser, Stephen Moore, said the candidate planned to pay for his costly proposals by eliminating the departments of Commerce, Energy and Education; lifting all restrictions on mining, drilling and fracking; ending Temporary Assistance for Needy Families programs, and offering rust-belt factory workers new jobs on oil rigs and steel mills."
...
"At the Council for National Policy meeting, Moore reiterated that Trump will lift any and all restrictions on fossil fuel production. The millions of jobs this will create, he said, can be filled by the same disaffected blue collar workers who form the base of Trump’s electoral support."
The article questions how this will be possible, given the low energy prices caused by the current glut of oil, which has already made some production uneconomic.
Whether or not Trump and Moore explicitly see Putin's Russia as an economic inspiration, one has to wonder whether unsupportable petrostate economics and petrostate authoritarianism inevitably go together.
See
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-economic-plan_us_57c9dc...?
"At a private meeting of conservatives in Cleveland this summer, Donald Trump’s senior economic adviser, Stephen Moore, said the candidate planned to pay for his costly proposals by eliminating the departments of Commerce, Energy and Education; lifting all restrictions on mining, drilling and fracking; ending Temporary Assistance for Needy Families programs, and offering rust-belt factory workers new jobs on oil rigs and steel mills."
...
"At the Council for National Policy meeting, Moore reiterated that Trump will lift any and all restrictions on fossil fuel production. The millions of jobs this will create, he said, can be filled by the same disaffected blue collar workers who form the base of Trump’s electoral support."
The article questions how this will be possible, given the low energy prices caused by the current glut of oil, which has already made some production uneconomic.
Whether or not Trump and Moore explicitly see Putin's Russia as an economic inspiration, one has to wonder whether unsupportable petrostate economics and petrostate authoritarianism inevitably go together.
18
""At the Council for National Policy meeting, Moore reiterated that Trump will lift any and all restrictions on fossil fuel production. The millions of jobs this will create, he said, can be filled by the same disaffected blue collar workers who form the base of Trump’s electoral support."
The article questions how this will be possible, given the low energy prices caused by the current glut of oil, which has already made some production uneconomic."
There is a worldwide glut of steel too.
The article questions how this will be possible, given the low energy prices caused by the current glut of oil, which has already made some production uneconomic."
There is a worldwide glut of steel too.
I agree wholeheartedly with your conclusions and the title is funny and clever, but your characterization of Russia's rise under Putin is simplistic at best. It is particularly bad that you are quoting Obama (and McCain "a gas station with an army") given how American dismissals of Russia play into Putin's hands. If by "regional power" you mean they have influence throughout Eurasia, then you are closer to accuracy. They are not a superpower, but casual dismissals of Russia are akin to the American abroad arrogance that leaves us unprepared when the world does not respond when we snap our fingers or conform to our expectations.
3
Paul, please don't underestimate Russia's sphere of political and military influence. They are still a global power, and very much a threat to the security of the free world. This is especially true in the mid-East, where they supply Iran and Assad in Syria and other nefarious actors there. This all makes American presence in the region very difficult and perilous. Trump's overtures to Putin go directly against American interests. Of course, Trump views this as just one more way to rattle the media cage and get more attention. He has no understanding of the geopolitical consequences of his pronouncements. He is a babe in the woods with this, and doesn't realize that the Russian bear is just waiting to make a meal of him.
20
It seems Putin is like that imaginary figure Americans are using to externalize their anger with their own failure to address their own problems of their own making.
7
How would Trump deal with a reluctant congress/Supreme Court?
Autocrats/sociopaths can't stand opposition. Would Trump engage in character assassination, threats, blackmail to get his way. Would he even obey a law he disagrees with?
If the answer is yes, then the nation cannot afford 4 years of lawless chaos based on a president's real or imagined slights.
Autocrats/sociopaths can't stand opposition. Would Trump engage in character assassination, threats, blackmail to get his way. Would he even obey a law he disagrees with?
If the answer is yes, then the nation cannot afford 4 years of lawless chaos based on a president's real or imagined slights.
241
We cannot afford T rump even if he were a lefty of the highest order.
He is ignorant. And he likes it that way.
He is ignorant. And he likes it that way.
I think it likely that he would take his golf balls and go home. And then where would we be? Stuck with Pence, whose ideology is frightening. And I'll bet, given his record as governor, he'd know how to implement it.
So, vote HRC, everyone, please!
So, vote HRC, everyone, please!
http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2016/apr/25/bob-goodlatte/...
Our current POTUS said 22 times he could not change immigration law. Then he went ahead and did it.
Our current POTUS said 22 times he could not change immigration law. Then he went ahead and did it.
The need and power to crush your enemies--or just dissenters--is not leadership, but megalomania.
Mr Trump shows no hallmarks of leadership, yet 40% of the country is ready to cast their lot with his under the guise of his being a better leader (or just "looking presidential," according to him).
It took eight years of a remarkable president to clean up after the mess made by the second Mr Bush. Who will step up to that same challenge if Mr Trump is elected? And will we even have that option?
Mr Trump shows no hallmarks of leadership, yet 40% of the country is ready to cast their lot with his under the guise of his being a better leader (or just "looking presidential," according to him).
It took eight years of a remarkable president to clean up after the mess made by the second Mr Bush. Who will step up to that same challenge if Mr Trump is elected? And will we even have that option?
21
If that is true, why do so many people in Germany admire Putin?
1
I personally appreciate the efforts the Times has made to portray Trump and his idiocy in its true light and the Lord knows I wish Trump's supporters would listen. The praise being heaped upon Putin is offensive and insulting but as Trump told us, “One friendly word of praise deserves a positive return."
This whole pre-election charade cannot end soon enough for me.
This whole pre-election charade cannot end soon enough for me.
13
I find it hysterical that @PaulKrugman calls out Putin/Russia as having contempt for "civil liberties". Have you looked at Obama and the United States lately? Pot, meet kettle.
3
That analogy is more like pot meet giraffe....
16
Yes, there's a problem here. No, the scale is COMPLETELY different between here and Russia.
1
Good column, PK. As usual!
In this season of many things, politics and football, for example, I've come to the conclusion that commentators and analysts in the football field know their business far better than those in the political field--with one or two shining examples, Krugman being one. PK, however, certifiably knows more about economics and its ramifications than most Americans. The politicos? By dint of white teeth, bright smiles, and the heart of the Tin Man, they acquire the label of pundit, and grind every issue down to its most childish and most sellable components. Don't join the NFL, Paul. We need you here.
In this season of many things, politics and football, for example, I've come to the conclusion that commentators and analysts in the football field know their business far better than those in the political field--with one or two shining examples, Krugman being one. PK, however, certifiably knows more about economics and its ramifications than most Americans. The politicos? By dint of white teeth, bright smiles, and the heart of the Tin Man, they acquire the label of pundit, and grind every issue down to its most childish and most sellable components. Don't join the NFL, Paul. We need you here.
3
"Beyond that, however, admiring Mr. Putin means admiring someone who has contempt for democracy and civil liberties. Or more accurately, it means admiring someone precisely because of that contempt."
Democracy can be messy. Mr Putin, Erodgan, and other despots eliminate that mess in favor of control along with massive corruption. Turkish friends tell me that Turkish citizens want "stability" and will except the abuses that this desire requires in their end of the world. In the US, the GOP is striving to emulate this 'control' ideology by corrupting democracy, e.g. voter suppression tactics as we see in the extreme in North Carolina and other GOP controlled states.
Trump plays to this human affliction (fear and the appearance of uncertainty) and may just succeed, with the help of much of the media. Look at headlines each day, obvious criticisms and concern about Clinton's health, etc and with big blasts of Trump in all of his cartoonish glory.
Protecting our democracy means recognizing demagogues for what they are, empty vassals of hate, no more. Hillary is our only hope today.
Democracy can be messy. Mr Putin, Erodgan, and other despots eliminate that mess in favor of control along with massive corruption. Turkish friends tell me that Turkish citizens want "stability" and will except the abuses that this desire requires in their end of the world. In the US, the GOP is striving to emulate this 'control' ideology by corrupting democracy, e.g. voter suppression tactics as we see in the extreme in North Carolina and other GOP controlled states.
Trump plays to this human affliction (fear and the appearance of uncertainty) and may just succeed, with the help of much of the media. Look at headlines each day, obvious criticisms and concern about Clinton's health, etc and with big blasts of Trump in all of his cartoonish glory.
Protecting our democracy means recognizing demagogues for what they are, empty vassals of hate, no more. Hillary is our only hope today.
9
I must question Putins popularity. While initially, it was spring time in Russia, since the fall in oil prices, like Texas, it has been anything but. So with the economy in shambles, freedoms all but gone, his popularity is based on what? Attacking Ukraine?
So I have to ask, if you are in a country that suppresses freedom of speach, and a pollster calls and asked you about Putin would you give an honest answer? Would you believe unequivocally that your answer was anonymous? Just asking, cause 85% approval seems incredibly high. Has any President ever hot that? I don't think so. And of course Russians are not allowed to hear oppositional press.
So it goes!
So I have to ask, if you are in a country that suppresses freedom of speach, and a pollster calls and asked you about Putin would you give an honest answer? Would you believe unequivocally that your answer was anonymous? Just asking, cause 85% approval seems incredibly high. Has any President ever hot that? I don't think so. And of course Russians are not allowed to hear oppositional press.
So it goes!
7
Kim Jong-il always gets 99% approval rating.
Republicans love tough talk. George W. Bush with his Yosemite Sam personality and his "Bring it on" speeches showed real leadership until, of course, the enemies brought it on. Republicans love leaders who do something, anything, no matter how misguided it might be. They have no use for leaders such as Obama who will thoughtfully analyze a situation before taking action or who may decide no action is the best action. Putin takes action and the GOP just loves it.
387
"They have no use for leaders such as Obama who will thoughtfully analyze a situation before taking action or who may decide no action is the best action."
This country can not afford eight more years of inaction.
If President Obama had taken SOME actions domestically the US electorate would have been in a better place and we would be looking at a landslide victory for the Democrats.
If President Obama had take SOME actions against Debbie Wasserman Schultz instead of tacitly approving them then we would not have the rigged process ensuring that the second most hated person in the US was the Democratic Presidential nominee.
Instead Hillary Clinton will probably lose the election to "The Donald" because of President Obama's INACTION.
Thanks Obama!
This country can not afford eight more years of inaction.
If President Obama had taken SOME actions domestically the US electorate would have been in a better place and we would be looking at a landslide victory for the Democrats.
If President Obama had take SOME actions against Debbie Wasserman Schultz instead of tacitly approving them then we would not have the rigged process ensuring that the second most hated person in the US was the Democratic Presidential nominee.
Instead Hillary Clinton will probably lose the election to "The Donald" because of President Obama's INACTION.
Thanks Obama!
Words I have taken from the Old and the New testaments:
This you know, my beloved brethren But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger;
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
He who is slow to anger has great understanding, But he who is quick-tempered exalts folly.
A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.
Cease from anger and forsake wrath; Do not fret; it leads only to evildoing.
Do not be eager in your heart to be angry, For anger resides in the bosom of fools.
Do not associate with a man given to anger; Or go with a hot-tempered man, Or you will learn his ways And find a snare for yourself
This you know, my beloved brethren But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; for the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God.
A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
Cease from anger and forsake wrath; Do not fret; it leads only to evildoing.
The one who says he is in the Light and yet hates his brother is in the darkness until now.
Do not be eager in your heart to be angry, For anger resides in the bosom of fools.
This you know, my beloved brethren But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger;
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
He who is slow to anger has great understanding, But he who is quick-tempered exalts folly.
A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.
Cease from anger and forsake wrath; Do not fret; it leads only to evildoing.
Do not be eager in your heart to be angry, For anger resides in the bosom of fools.
Do not associate with a man given to anger; Or go with a hot-tempered man, Or you will learn his ways And find a snare for yourself
This you know, my beloved brethren But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; for the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God.
A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
Cease from anger and forsake wrath; Do not fret; it leads only to evildoing.
The one who says he is in the Light and yet hates his brother is in the darkness until now.
Do not be eager in your heart to be angry, For anger resides in the bosom of fools.
8
"Trump"s effusive praise" for Putin doesn't exist.
Why is a Trump quotation conspicuously absent from the strongly partisan attack article?
Trumps has said that Obama is a weak leader which many Americans,if not mot, agree with.
Why is a Trump quotation conspicuously absent from the strongly partisan attack article?
Trumps has said that Obama is a weak leader which many Americans,if not mot, agree with.
4
He could be Putin and Duterte rolled into one, and the "many if not most" in that basket would pledge never to follow him anywhere.
Who loves Putin? Check Germany in the 1930s.
8
"Who loves Putin? Check Germany in the 1930s."
And the answer to "Who loves Trump?" is much the same.
And the answer to "Who loves Trump?" is much the same.
1
82% approval rating, that's what Trump admires. But polls and approval ratings are meaningless without freedom of the press and expression. The very strength Trump admires in is reality the strangulation of the freedom of expression and hence the root of democracy. Trump lacks the sophistication to understand that. Perhaps Trump is effected by "popularity by association". If 82% the people love Putin, and Putin thinks I am brilliant, (approves of me) then I must be loved by 82% of Russians. Therefore I will be able to make a deal with Russia.
Worst, trumps tacit approval of Putin's methods should worry every American. We naturally seek to emulate those we admire.
The funny thing is this is a one way love affair. Putin will use and humiliate Trump like a cheap date. Putin must be laughing hysterically every time Trump brings up his admiration of Putin.
All this is just one more reason why Trump must never be elected POTUS.
Worst, trumps tacit approval of Putin's methods should worry every American. We naturally seek to emulate those we admire.
The funny thing is this is a one way love affair. Putin will use and humiliate Trump like a cheap date. Putin must be laughing hysterically every time Trump brings up his admiration of Putin.
All this is just one more reason why Trump must never be elected POTUS.
277
Which do you prefer?
1) Vladimir Putin
2) Polonium-210
Check one.
1) Vladimir Putin
2) Polonium-210
Check one.
1
Spot on about Trump's being seduced by a chimerical "popularity by association," and also about the truth that "this is a one way love affair." But the problem is not that "Trump lacks the sophistication to understand" that Putin's approval rating depends upon an unfree, state-controlled press. It's that Trump lacks the conscience to care.
Have written a similar comment before, and will now repeat.
Putin's eyes scare me. He has the gaze of a substantial, patient, well-fed, flexible serpent. And Donald Trump is the plump little golden Tweetie (tweeting) bird.
Why is it that Republicans (GW Bush, Donald Trump) are mesmerized by Putin?
Really do think it's a guy thing.
Putin's eyes scare me. He has the gaze of a substantial, patient, well-fed, flexible serpent. And Donald Trump is the plump little golden Tweetie (tweeting) bird.
Why is it that Republicans (GW Bush, Donald Trump) are mesmerized by Putin?
Really do think it's a guy thing.
9
"But Russia wasn’t going to realize its technology potential under a regime where business success depends mainly on political connections."
In our post-Citizens United country, how long before "business success depends mainly on political connections?" Clearly Big Oil's political connections are paying big dividends: one entire party is denying climate change and encouraging more drilling, more fracking, and more pipelines despite scientific evidence that doing so is altering our long-term survival.
In our post-Citizens United country, how long before "business success depends mainly on political connections?" Clearly Big Oil's political connections are paying big dividends: one entire party is denying climate change and encouraging more drilling, more fracking, and more pipelines despite scientific evidence that doing so is altering our long-term survival.
9
As Trump would say: Sad that Professor Paul just doesn't understand why Putin is the model of the modern major president. Putin has made Russia Great Again. Just like it was under the previous czars. With the difference, as Paul admits, that intolerance of (and the occasional pogrom against) Jews has been resolved by exporting to Israel most of them who didn't become oligarchs or computer hackers (time for a shout out to Snowden). But there's one big difference. In fact, it's HUGE. Putin engages in manly sports like wrestling tigers bare-chested while would-be Czar Trump hits little golf balls around and has yet to show us what's under his tailored suits. Time for some full disclosure, Donald.
133
The full disclosure offered by the 5 sculptures of Trump in his Emporer's regalia a few weeks back was more than enough -- any exposing the real thing brings to mind Justice Stewart Potter's definition of obscenity -- "I Know it when I see it".
I'm sure full disclosure of the source of his immense wealth -- if it really is immense -- will most likely expose the obscenity of his money grubbing ways at the expense of those he suckered.
I'm sure full disclosure of the source of his immense wealth -- if it really is immense -- will most likely expose the obscenity of his money grubbing ways at the expense of those he suckered.
"and has yet to show us what's under his tailored suits."
True, but I think we know what's under the suits: a tubby old man wearing a custom-made corset.
True, but I think we know what's under the suits: a tubby old man wearing a custom-made corset.
1
This may be too explicit for some but it's clear what's under "his" tailored suits. An enormous, disgusting jelly roll that drapes over his underpants, as statues recently unveiled in five cities revealed. Or perhaps he wears a corset.
1
The inspiration for Secretary Clinton's campaign can best be summed up by "Stronger Together."
The motivation for the Trump campaign can best be summed up by "Despot Money."
Paul Manafort represented Putin-surrogate Viktor Yanukovych of the Ukraine.
Trump looked for Paul Manafort as he was schooled in putting and keeping strong man despots in power who stole from their countries: Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines and Mobuto Sese Seko of the Congo were clients.
These strong man despots, like Putin, have stolen money from their countrymen in the tens of billions.
To steal requires unquestioned autocratic rule. Trump considers Putin a stronger leader than President Obama because their is no criticism of Putin (as journalists, political opponents and other critics tend to die trying.)
When Paul Manafort's ties to Russia became too hot after the Russians hacked the DNC to help Comrade Trump, Paul just slunk away.
The question of who changed the GOP platform with respect to Russia's aggression in the Ukraine went with him.
The new low rung available to Trump is Brietbart news.
They fit right in Putin's Russia and Trump's America.
It is funny to hear Trump say that the Clinton's should shut down a charity that saves and elevates the lives of tens of millions of people around the world for appearances sake, when he won't shut down his for-profit businesses that enrich himself and his family.
Funny but not surprising.
The motivation for the Trump campaign can best be summed up by "Despot Money."
Paul Manafort represented Putin-surrogate Viktor Yanukovych of the Ukraine.
Trump looked for Paul Manafort as he was schooled in putting and keeping strong man despots in power who stole from their countries: Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines and Mobuto Sese Seko of the Congo were clients.
These strong man despots, like Putin, have stolen money from their countrymen in the tens of billions.
To steal requires unquestioned autocratic rule. Trump considers Putin a stronger leader than President Obama because their is no criticism of Putin (as journalists, political opponents and other critics tend to die trying.)
When Paul Manafort's ties to Russia became too hot after the Russians hacked the DNC to help Comrade Trump, Paul just slunk away.
The question of who changed the GOP platform with respect to Russia's aggression in the Ukraine went with him.
The new low rung available to Trump is Brietbart news.
They fit right in Putin's Russia and Trump's America.
It is funny to hear Trump say that the Clinton's should shut down a charity that saves and elevates the lives of tens of millions of people around the world for appearances sake, when he won't shut down his for-profit businesses that enrich himself and his family.
Funny but not surprising.
456
So...do we "think" that Trump really wants to be a Trillionaire by using Other People's Money continually; and next is the taxpaper's money? That's what I think. Then he declares bankruptcy, or I mean to say he leaves after he defaults on our Country's loans and bingo, there goes the US and there he goes to the golden tower. Scary thought.
1
Yes Paul, that immensely wealthy, oligarchy that are enabled and funded by the plutocrats and 1%.
Good thing you aren’t shilling for that candidate isn’t it Paul.
We wouldn't want someone whose is secretive and refuses to release info requested by voters would we.
Someone that admires military might and flexes that muscle whenever the chance comes along.
Agreed Paul. Anyone that admires contempt for civil liberties and democracy shouldn't be put into office. Funny that you mentioned the DNC hack in this screed. By the by Paul, you have proof of who perpetrated the hack? Or are you just red-baiting like the rest?
How does that meme go about pointing fingers, three point back...?!
Good thing you aren’t shilling for that candidate isn’t it Paul.
We wouldn't want someone whose is secretive and refuses to release info requested by voters would we.
Someone that admires military might and flexes that muscle whenever the chance comes along.
Agreed Paul. Anyone that admires contempt for civil liberties and democracy shouldn't be put into office. Funny that you mentioned the DNC hack in this screed. By the by Paul, you have proof of who perpetrated the hack? Or are you just red-baiting like the rest?
How does that meme go about pointing fingers, three point back...?!
3
Dr. Krugman is relying on US intelligence sources for his conclusion that the DNC hack was perpetrated by the Russians. Multiple news outlets, including the Times, have quoted sources in the investigation as indicating that evidence points to Russia as the source of the hack.
10
Thank God Romney didn't win; he would have imagined a Cold War/ Star Wars all over again, a complete waste of perception, money, and time.
4
I hope this doesn't come down to one of those retorts that if Trump is elected (Reason help us) we don't hear "Well as least you can't say you weren't warned". His admiration of Putin is one of those warning. Ignore it at our peril.
13
Any thoughts on Obama's visit to Cuba? Remember when he praised and legitimized the murderous Castro brothers and their tyrannical regime? Just saying....
Nope... don't remember that. Perhaps you should pay attention to what happens in actual reality.
13
Communists live in their own "reality." You probably think Obama is the greatest president in history, that Obama is working well, and that Hillary is the epitome of health and integrity. Communists never let "facts get in the way of their dystopian agenda.
And that's what's great about the internet: You can just say anything.
1
It is perhaps one of the most bizarre aspects of this campaign to witness the Republican nominee lavish such gushing public praise on the brutal and cunning Mr. Putin. This appears to have all started when Putin called Mr. Trump brilliant. The phrase blow in his ear and he will follow you anywhere seems appropriate here. But then Evangelical leaders rallying behind the egotistical and wealth loving Trump seems just as mind boggling. Romney, the long forgotten man, identified Russia as our number one enemy not to long ago. But we are in a completely different universe today; where everything defies logic.
10
Someone needs to investigate the connections between Trump and Russian hacking, not to mention the basic financial connections between Trump and Russian oligarchs. It all smells fishy, yet it seems the TV media will not attack Trump on his corruption.
9
You first. I'm allergic to Polonium 210.
Dr. Krugman, once a man of exact numbers, now makes sweeping unsupported statements. "Donald Trump's effusive praise of Vladimir Putin--which actually reflects a fairly common sentiment of the right..." How common? Where is the data on that? So, there is none of the old "Reagan-bring-down-that-wall" in the right?
Is it possible that Hillary Clinton's attention to billionaire donors, which is suggested by the fact that she does more fundraisers with the rich than press conferences, is a way of "showering benefits on the immensely wealthy oligarchy"? Mr. Clinton's pension for flying on billionaire's planes who have private islands sounds more Putin than Scottish golf courses.
Mr. Krugman needs to be benched.
Is it possible that Hillary Clinton's attention to billionaire donors, which is suggested by the fact that she does more fundraisers with the rich than press conferences, is a way of "showering benefits on the immensely wealthy oligarchy"? Mr. Clinton's pension for flying on billionaire's planes who have private islands sounds more Putin than Scottish golf courses.
Mr. Krugman needs to be benched.
1
at first i was annoyed ("thugs") but then PK found his footing (somewhat, of course, b/c that one word, "oil," wouldn't have meant so much if China & India hadn't needed so much electrical power to create cheap stuff for the USA to buy/sell, develop a middle class of consumers for US goods & US debt instruments, etc., etc.)
a) How can Russia manufacture anything when "privitization" really means, "lLet's all get paid, kick 8% up & stash our winnings elsewhere?"
b) There's no question Russian dough helped fund various Trump business ventures - Query: why hasn't this point been raised sooner?
c) Q. How can the GOP presidential nominee publically admire a former communist KGB Agent as being a better leader than a currently sitting US President and not be excommunicated immediately? A. When he's running against HRC.
a) How can Russia manufacture anything when "privitization" really means, "lLet's all get paid, kick 8% up & stash our winnings elsewhere?"
b) There's no question Russian dough helped fund various Trump business ventures - Query: why hasn't this point been raised sooner?
c) Q. How can the GOP presidential nominee publically admire a former communist KGB Agent as being a better leader than a currently sitting US President and not be excommunicated immediately? A. When he's running against HRC.
9
Ok, it hasn't been Capitalism vs. Communism for awhile.
But it remains Democracy vs. Despotism. Human Rights vs. Repression. Terror vs. Tolerance. Privilege vs. Powerless. Wall Street vs. Main Street. Rich vs. Robbed. Free vs. Fear. Public Responsibility vs. Public Relations. Now vs. Later. Me vs. We. Us vs. Them. Great vs. Hate. Deal vs. Steal. Realism vs. Extremism. Trump vs. Truth.
This election isn't about a job or what it should be. There already is a clear job description, a long history of previous job-holders, rules, expectations, staff, logistical support, and a long list of problems that need urgent attention. Job also comes with a really big plane and generous housing and entertainment benefits.
What the election is about is whether the applicants for the position understand the scope of work, rules, responsibilities, qualifications, relevant experience, demonstrated facility with complex problems, capacity to work productively with others, usually in a contentious and hostile environment. Even temperament, long hours, and strong, sustained focus are desirable.
References are helpful. Endorsements useful. Name-dropping tyrants isn't.
And may lead to disqualification.
But it remains Democracy vs. Despotism. Human Rights vs. Repression. Terror vs. Tolerance. Privilege vs. Powerless. Wall Street vs. Main Street. Rich vs. Robbed. Free vs. Fear. Public Responsibility vs. Public Relations. Now vs. Later. Me vs. We. Us vs. Them. Great vs. Hate. Deal vs. Steal. Realism vs. Extremism. Trump vs. Truth.
This election isn't about a job or what it should be. There already is a clear job description, a long history of previous job-holders, rules, expectations, staff, logistical support, and a long list of problems that need urgent attention. Job also comes with a really big plane and generous housing and entertainment benefits.
What the election is about is whether the applicants for the position understand the scope of work, rules, responsibilities, qualifications, relevant experience, demonstrated facility with complex problems, capacity to work productively with others, usually in a contentious and hostile environment. Even temperament, long hours, and strong, sustained focus are desirable.
References are helpful. Endorsements useful. Name-dropping tyrants isn't.
And may lead to disqualification.
16
Unfortunately it seems more like a Middle School popularity contest at this point.
Professor Krugman continues to debase his credibility by wholeheartedly joining the Russia-bashing claque clamoring for a new Cold War. Tell me, whose purposes does it serve to demonize Russia (often with blatantly false disinformation, as in the meme that Putin "invaded" Ukraine) and revive the kind of hysteria and belligerence that brought the world to the brink of nuclear holocaust untold times during the Soviet era? Used to be that Paul Krugman was above such idiocy. Apparently, his desire to serve Hillary Clinton has removed such scruples.
2
Clamor for a new Cold War would surely include claims of threat posed by Putin, but Krugman makes none. He does the opposite, saying praise for Putin is unwarranted.
Do you dispute Putin is a despot, has quashed free speech, jailed and poisoned rivals? Did Russia not annex Crimea by force and, if so, how is it wrong to call that an invasion?
It is Putin who wants to revive a Cold War, to improve his legitimacy and stature. That is why he supports Assad, and why the Syrian civil war drags on without end. Criticizing him is easy; what's hard is finding something good to say.
Do you dispute Putin is a despot, has quashed free speech, jailed and poisoned rivals? Did Russia not annex Crimea by force and, if so, how is it wrong to call that an invasion?
It is Putin who wants to revive a Cold War, to improve his legitimacy and stature. That is why he supports Assad, and why the Syrian civil war drags on without end. Criticizing him is easy; what's hard is finding something good to say.
The world's most accomplished strongmen - Stalin, Hitler, Mao Zedong, Mussolini, Pol Pot, the North Korean Kims, Saddam Hussein - all had a psychopathic lust for power who crushed political dissent and eliminated their enemies through the cult of personality.
Free speech is always the first and favorite victim of tyrants to be buried, replaced with a climate of fear of freedom of expression and covered up by state-produced propaganda and misinformation.
That is today's Kremlin-mafia-run state head by the Russian Godfather Vladimir Putin, who seems roughly inspired by the murderous Joseph Stalin and his Great Purge tactics to Make Russia Great Again.
Russia ranks 180 out of 199 countries for press freedom, behind Iraq, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
At least 34 journalists have been murdered in Russia since Putin assumed office in 2000.
Over the same time period, three were killed in the USA.
The vast majority of Russian cases remain unsolved.
No one has proven Putin to have ordered assassinations of dissidents, but experts say the political climate in Russia is responsible for the high journalist murder rate.
Russia has the kind of right-wing authoritarian political climate where people are inspired Trumpian quotes like "nothing you can do, folks....although the Second Amendment people — maybe there is, I don’t know.”
"Compassion and tolerance are not a sign of weakness, but a sign of strength." – Dalai Lama
Putin and Trump are Weakmen, not Strongmen.
Free speech is always the first and favorite victim of tyrants to be buried, replaced with a climate of fear of freedom of expression and covered up by state-produced propaganda and misinformation.
That is today's Kremlin-mafia-run state head by the Russian Godfather Vladimir Putin, who seems roughly inspired by the murderous Joseph Stalin and his Great Purge tactics to Make Russia Great Again.
Russia ranks 180 out of 199 countries for press freedom, behind Iraq, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
At least 34 journalists have been murdered in Russia since Putin assumed office in 2000.
Over the same time period, three were killed in the USA.
The vast majority of Russian cases remain unsolved.
No one has proven Putin to have ordered assassinations of dissidents, but experts say the political climate in Russia is responsible for the high journalist murder rate.
Russia has the kind of right-wing authoritarian political climate where people are inspired Trumpian quotes like "nothing you can do, folks....although the Second Amendment people — maybe there is, I don’t know.”
"Compassion and tolerance are not a sign of weakness, but a sign of strength." – Dalai Lama
Putin and Trump are Weakmen, not Strongmen.
710
Men?
1
One thing you neglected to point out: All the brutal dictators you list at the top were Leftist/Socialist/Collectivist. Just like the author.
2
One thing you neglected to point out, KarlosTJ: All the brutal dictators I listed were unapologetic sociopaths with little regard for their fellow human beings who never ever had second thoughts about their superiority over other human beings.
Unbridled narcissism is the important hallmark of authoritarian monsters.
Trump is no murderer per se, but his fomenting of 2nd Amendment Derangement Syndrome at his 'Nuremberg rallies' and his systematic belittling of 'others' - combined with his narcissistic love of self and authoritarianism - give him clear potential to drive America off a tyrannical cliff.
Unbridled narcissism is the important hallmark of authoritarian monsters.
Trump is no murderer per se, but his fomenting of 2nd Amendment Derangement Syndrome at his 'Nuremberg rallies' and his systematic belittling of 'others' - combined with his narcissistic love of self and authoritarianism - give him clear potential to drive America off a tyrannical cliff.
3
Paul, I agree with your motivation to underscore just how dangerous a Trump victory would be which serves to promote Hillary as the logical choice. N-Chomsky is spot on in his analysis of our foreign policy since WWII. I do not admire Putin & am amazed you can point a disapproving finger at Putin without the other pointer involuntarily directed back at the U.S.
Our gov’t is an oligarchy with corrupt politicians bought off with money by corp’s & the wealthy. The Supreme Court is dominated by right-wing ideologues that have endorsed political corruption.
Bush-Cheney & Obama have moved us in the direction of a police state by ignoring the constitution in both its war powers & NSA domestic spying- endangers democracy & civil liberties.
The sr exec’s responsible for the world-wide 2008 economic meltdown were protected from indictments & then awarded themselves the biggest bonus pools in history in 2009 despite massive bailouts by the taxpayers.
Why did Obama pardon key players of the Bush-Cheney regime for torturing people? One can hardly praise U.S. soft policy since it relies heavily on military aggression over diplomacy. Obama has prosecuted more leakers intimidate reporters under the espionage act of 1913 than all previous presidents combined. Without the patriotic actions of Snowden we would still be in the dark on massive domestic surveillance. Corp’s are just as secretive in revealing their purchase of politicians as Trump hiding alleged campaign support by Putin.
Our gov’t is an oligarchy with corrupt politicians bought off with money by corp’s & the wealthy. The Supreme Court is dominated by right-wing ideologues that have endorsed political corruption.
Bush-Cheney & Obama have moved us in the direction of a police state by ignoring the constitution in both its war powers & NSA domestic spying- endangers democracy & civil liberties.
The sr exec’s responsible for the world-wide 2008 economic meltdown were protected from indictments & then awarded themselves the biggest bonus pools in history in 2009 despite massive bailouts by the taxpayers.
Why did Obama pardon key players of the Bush-Cheney regime for torturing people? One can hardly praise U.S. soft policy since it relies heavily on military aggression over diplomacy. Obama has prosecuted more leakers intimidate reporters under the espionage act of 1913 than all previous presidents combined. Without the patriotic actions of Snowden we would still be in the dark on massive domestic surveillance. Corp’s are just as secretive in revealing their purchase of politicians as Trump hiding alleged campaign support by Putin.
14
People from Bloomfield can disagree, at least, in part. Putin is responsible for the death of scores of journalists and dissidents for simply being in opposition to his rule. Nothing comparable can be said of any American president. Also, Putin’s aggressions toward neighboring states cannot be justified by American policies. They should be judged on their own merits separate from whatever flaws exist in American policy or elsewhere. President Obama did not exonerate anyone for acts of torture. He failed to seek their prosecution because it would have been terribly divisive at a time when there is already too much polarization. Snowdon also indiscriminately released information with complete indifference to the consequences of his act. This is starkly different from what Daniel Ellsberg did with the Pentagon Papers where he understood all the contents and his act was directed toward a specific aim. He also stayed in the US to be held accountable for the legal ramifications of his action. That there was major surveillance going on is dubious. Intelligence sought only information on people who potentially represented a threat and most data is completely dismissed as irrelevant. Throughout Europe there is surveillance going on and for good reason. We see the consequences of not doing so in numerous instances. It would be a better world if there were not plots going on that endangers civilian populations. Unfortunately that is not the reality we live in.
1
If Donald Trump were a “right-winger”, establishment Republicans would be supporting him instead of running from him; and, actually, he wouldn’t be the Republican nominee.
Republican regulars shun him because he clearly has a foot in each ideological camp: his favor of retaining Social Security and Medicare in their current forms is a major turn-off. If that’s ALL he represented, then Republicans would reject him, for ideology and because his manner would be fatally off-putting.
He’s the Republican nominee because an immense number of people reject establishment politics of ANY kind, as they’ve failed at improving the lots of millions of Americans. Mrs. Clinton barely talks of the economy so’s you’d notice, and is the very image of elite establishmentarianism, while Trump is the anti-establishment, promising to make a start at securing an American 21st Century of broadly-shared prosperity. It’s a powerful argument to millions of dispirited Americans.
Many yearn for a leader with a vision who sees a way forward to objectives and doesn’t forever and bootlessly triangulate, then make the wrong historical decisions relative to perceived interests. Clearly, that’s NOT Barack Obama OR Hillary Clinton, but Donald Trump and, for better or worse, Vladimir Putin. Many Americans don’t admire Putin because he’s a stone killer who heads a corrupt state, but because he’s someone who clearly knows how to get things done. It’s actually a dreadful popular indictment of Barack Obama.
Republican regulars shun him because he clearly has a foot in each ideological camp: his favor of retaining Social Security and Medicare in their current forms is a major turn-off. If that’s ALL he represented, then Republicans would reject him, for ideology and because his manner would be fatally off-putting.
He’s the Republican nominee because an immense number of people reject establishment politics of ANY kind, as they’ve failed at improving the lots of millions of Americans. Mrs. Clinton barely talks of the economy so’s you’d notice, and is the very image of elite establishmentarianism, while Trump is the anti-establishment, promising to make a start at securing an American 21st Century of broadly-shared prosperity. It’s a powerful argument to millions of dispirited Americans.
Many yearn for a leader with a vision who sees a way forward to objectives and doesn’t forever and bootlessly triangulate, then make the wrong historical decisions relative to perceived interests. Clearly, that’s NOT Barack Obama OR Hillary Clinton, but Donald Trump and, for better or worse, Vladimir Putin. Many Americans don’t admire Putin because he’s a stone killer who heads a corrupt state, but because he’s someone who clearly knows how to get things done. It’s actually a dreadful popular indictment of Barack Obama.
7
"his favor of retaining Social Security and Medicare in their current forms is a major turn-off."
Yet they still support him; I wonder why? Because they know Trump is lying about preserving these programs. Richard is only trying to make Trump palatable by suggesting otherwise.
Yet they still support him; I wonder why? Because they know Trump is lying about preserving these programs. Richard is only trying to make Trump palatable by suggesting otherwise.
9
By "get things done" do you mean get his enemies imprisoned or killed?' What, otherwise has he got done that has helped anyone other than himself and his friends? In that respect Stalin was much more of a leader than Putin.
4
Clinton speaks on the economy routinely and specifically. Here is a transcript of one example of many.
http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-full-transcript-economic-speech-...
The number of Trump supporters is not immense. It may be barely enough to elect him. Even in this unfortunate outcome, only a fraction of those will vote for economic reasons; many others for misogyny or racist or because they like a bully. Of the fraction voting for Trump, surely the largest number, will be voting against their economic self interest.
http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-full-transcript-economic-speech-...
The number of Trump supporters is not immense. It may be barely enough to elect him. Even in this unfortunate outcome, only a fraction of those will vote for economic reasons; many others for misogyny or racist or because they like a bully. Of the fraction voting for Trump, surely the largest number, will be voting against their economic self interest.
9
So many elements of today's politics are represented by people who are liars with sloppy ideas that depend on fuzzy emotions and traditional angst with violent subtexts and women in their place, who willing to accept strays of the right color and wrap the lot in patriotism, the beauty of Paul's spare, honest, point-by-point critique almost arouses suspicion: we have been conditioned to wait on the scream, to stiffen against insulting assaults, to gird our lions against the brute force of ignorance and its negative, self-serving, ugly and divisive bombast.
In 2009, Russia, Europe's main supplier, cut gas supplies in the middle of winter by 60 percent, completely shutting off ^ countries. That is the Putin Trump admires—the one who cripples his neighbors and crushes his domestic opponents, but Trump would put legal cages around groups he does not like, ans openly calls for actions that contradict the constitution.
Unlike Putin, Trump's maze and miasma justifies its violence by race, ethnicity, religion—all denied—all applauded. Under Trump, women and their families are economic orphans. His attacks on think tanks (ideas), money (power/control), and minions (voters/lawmakers) is producing diminishing returns. One country has already fired a brilliant, economic leader for his support of Trump. Trump gloated (“the people that arranged the trip in Mexico have been forced out of government. That’s how well we did."). His logic and actions are deplorable!
In 2009, Russia, Europe's main supplier, cut gas supplies in the middle of winter by 60 percent, completely shutting off ^ countries. That is the Putin Trump admires—the one who cripples his neighbors and crushes his domestic opponents, but Trump would put legal cages around groups he does not like, ans openly calls for actions that contradict the constitution.
Unlike Putin, Trump's maze and miasma justifies its violence by race, ethnicity, religion—all denied—all applauded. Under Trump, women and their families are economic orphans. His attacks on think tanks (ideas), money (power/control), and minions (voters/lawmakers) is producing diminishing returns. One country has already fired a brilliant, economic leader for his support of Trump. Trump gloated (“the people that arranged the trip in Mexico have been forced out of government. That’s how well we did."). His logic and actions are deplorable!
48
How many innocents has Putin/Russia killed with ILLEGAL drone strikes? Just curious. Cutting off the gas seems kinda mild in comparison. But, oh yeah, Obama can do no wrong - forgot that for a moment...
1
RJ, thanks for reading and your reply. Putin prefers assassinations of domestic enemies, having been suspected of ordering the deaths of at least 10 prominent opponents, including a deputy prime minister. So far, the US has not been linked to the killing of its own officials and only Americans engaged in direct warfare have been killed. Putin's choices include invasion and occupation, expressed preferences of Trump. Note Georgia and the Ukraine.
Two points on drones: exactly what makes drone attacks illegal? They are lawfully ordered by the Commander-in-Chief under his duty and authority to protect US interests. They minimize carnage and physical destruction and armed conflict. They comply with international consensus on self-defense and do not deliver any prohibited payloads. They do less damage than agent orange, which killed, in the long term, American troops who were exposed to its effects.
Finally, drones save American lives, domestically and in the uniformed service. Are they “illegal” because they do not put American lives at risk? War may be unethical, immoral, illegal, and craven. War may corrupt, overreach and kill needlessly. War may devastate. But within war, the use of drones is legal, reduces loss of life, saves the environment, limits collateral damage (although not without fail!), and adroitly targets enemies. What exactly is your beef?
The innocent elderly freezing to death is horrific. In your case Obama can do no right.
Two points on drones: exactly what makes drone attacks illegal? They are lawfully ordered by the Commander-in-Chief under his duty and authority to protect US interests. They minimize carnage and physical destruction and armed conflict. They comply with international consensus on self-defense and do not deliver any prohibited payloads. They do less damage than agent orange, which killed, in the long term, American troops who were exposed to its effects.
Finally, drones save American lives, domestically and in the uniformed service. Are they “illegal” because they do not put American lives at risk? War may be unethical, immoral, illegal, and craven. War may corrupt, overreach and kill needlessly. War may devastate. But within war, the use of drones is legal, reduces loss of life, saves the environment, limits collateral damage (although not without fail!), and adroitly targets enemies. What exactly is your beef?
The innocent elderly freezing to death is horrific. In your case Obama can do no right.
2
Brennan stated, "as a matter of domestic law, the Constitution empowers the President to protect the nation from any imminent threat of attack.
"As a matter of international law, the United States is in an armed conflict with al-Qa'ida, the Taliban, and associated forces, in response to the 9/11 attacks, and we may also use force consistent with our inherent right of national self-defense. There is nothing in international law that bans the use of remotely piloted aircraft for this purpose or that prohibits us from using lethal force against our enemies outside of an active battlefield, at least when the country involved consents or is unable or unwilling to take action against the threat."[78]
"As a matter of international law, the United States is in an armed conflict with al-Qa'ida, the Taliban, and associated forces, in response to the 9/11 attacks, and we may also use force consistent with our inherent right of national self-defense. There is nothing in international law that bans the use of remotely piloted aircraft for this purpose or that prohibits us from using lethal force against our enemies outside of an active battlefield, at least when the country involved consents or is unable or unwilling to take action against the threat."[78]
1
Call it what it is. Anyone who evinces praise and fealty of any sort to the likes of Putin is a traitor to American ideals. Pure and simple.
I'll use a low-brow analogy to express what Trump is to me. Trump is to Putin what Benito Mussolini was to Hitler. A sycophantic toady with delusions of grandeur. He does not support American ideals, so most certain should not occupy the Power Oval. If American's do not see this clearly then they get what they deserve, just as the Italian people did during a certain era.
I'll use a low-brow analogy to express what Trump is to me. Trump is to Putin what Benito Mussolini was to Hitler. A sycophantic toady with delusions of grandeur. He does not support American ideals, so most certain should not occupy the Power Oval. If American's do not see this clearly then they get what they deserve, just as the Italian people did during a certain era.
62
Russia ended the communist regime only to fall into the disorganization and chaos of oligarchy and strongman led government - which is the prevailing global model of government. From Afghani warlords, to banana republics, to Saudi kings, a small number of people profit from the plunder of the region, and hold on to the proceeds through force or authoritarian power.
I have to think that the the bromance for Trump is based on the idea that he wouldn't mind having a strong leader protect his own right to plunder. The world tried Trumps idea, a few decades ago. The leader was Mussolini.
I have to think that the the bromance for Trump is based on the idea that he wouldn't mind having a strong leader protect his own right to plunder. The world tried Trumps idea, a few decades ago. The leader was Mussolini.
38
Donald Trump once in power would do nothing but further enrich himself and other billionaires connected to him. The idea that people, millions of them, believe his claims that he'd work for them instead is a depressing indictment against even a basic level of intelligence and critical thinking among nearly half of our country.
An article yesterday in this newspaper included interviews with voters in Appalachia who said basically yes he's a loudmouth and sort of insane, but things are so bad, it's time to try anything, as long as it's different and promises change.
This is basically what students signing up for Trump "University" said. Hey my life is so terrible what have I got to lose by paying tons of money to this guy who promises to change it all?
The answer should be obvious: everything. That's what you have to lose. The fact that this isn't patently obvious is a sad, and terrifying, statement about the gullibility of the American electorate.
Trump probably won't win this election, but prospects for our future, from what I've seen in this election, are less than positive.
An article yesterday in this newspaper included interviews with voters in Appalachia who said basically yes he's a loudmouth and sort of insane, but things are so bad, it's time to try anything, as long as it's different and promises change.
This is basically what students signing up for Trump "University" said. Hey my life is so terrible what have I got to lose by paying tons of money to this guy who promises to change it all?
The answer should be obvious: everything. That's what you have to lose. The fact that this isn't patently obvious is a sad, and terrifying, statement about the gullibility of the American electorate.
Trump probably won't win this election, but prospects for our future, from what I've seen in this election, are less than positive.
74
Dr Krugman raises a very important question: How much does Donald Trump depend on Russian money to sustain his business and his campaign?
135
We'll know when he releases his tax returns.
The donald is not interested enough to find out any thing about Russia or its economy or its dictator. He admires those who first express admiration for the donald. He loves himself and loves those who seem to like him, e.g.,"the poorly educated." I'm sure he doesn't think about the racists' support, to he bigots' support or any other groups' support because he doesn't think. It takes some level of critical thinking to sort out the complexities of the mob that is clapping for him, and punching for him. The Press has allowed themselves to be corralled in a pen soothes aren't mixing in with the mob. If they write about the donald it will be above the fold and at the head of the electronic newscasts so all is good there. The Press has provided the donald with all the support he needs for people to know his bumper-sticker policy analysis, and the mob not being strong on their literary skills that's good enough for them.
So Putin is smart enough to praise the donald and the donald likes what he hears. All's right with the world, eh.
So Putin is smart enough to praise the donald and the donald likes what he hears. All's right with the world, eh.
26
Putin is an authoritarian, so is Trump. Why the mystery about mutual admiration?
39
Oh! And don't forget Trump is our last best chance
before non white demographics forever denature our heretofore marvelous society.
before non white demographics forever denature our heretofore marvelous society.
19
The word "authoritarian" only appears once in the third paragraph, and the reference is Russia, not today's so-called Republican Party. However "authoritarian" is the key to understanding Trump and his staunchest and most aggressive supporters. There are lots of books about it, but I think it mostly comes back to simplicity. "Follow the leader" is really easy and mindless, and if you get a turn to be the leader, then you can expect to be followed, which feels especially nice, too. Authoritarianism is much easier and simpler than thinking.
Unfortunately democratic and republican forms of government are fundamentally based on the idea of thinking. Arbitrary but absolute authority is how monarchy works, and the Founders were quite clearly against it. Near as I can tell, the only advocates of authoritarianism are the people who hope to become the authoritarian leaders. The followers just follow.
Just another part of the basket of deplorables. Maybe not half of Trump's supporters, but there aren't many such to be found on the Democratic side. Authoritarians require organization, and the Democratic Party has never got there, as Will Rogers noted.
Unfortunately democratic and republican forms of government are fundamentally based on the idea of thinking. Arbitrary but absolute authority is how monarchy works, and the Founders were quite clearly against it. Near as I can tell, the only advocates of authoritarianism are the people who hope to become the authoritarian leaders. The followers just follow.
Just another part of the basket of deplorables. Maybe not half of Trump's supporters, but there aren't many such to be found on the Democratic side. Authoritarians require organization, and the Democratic Party has never got there, as Will Rogers noted.
10
Well, surprisingly, the electoral college - undemocratic by definition - will save our democracy in the time of Trump... pretty please... save us from ourselves.
13
The Electoral College is undemocratic in the sense that a republic is not strictly speaking democratic. Too bad we as a nation have lost the understanding of that subtle distinction. Back at the founding, "democracy" was a notion that scared the Founders, they equated it with the simplicity of mob rule, almost. The idea that everyone should have a voice in running things (and that it should be run in ways that involved direct expression of those voices as affecting the use of power) was not at all what they wanted. They viewed that as unstable and malleable in the hands of powerful personalities.
5
Our Constitution defines a Republic, not a Democracy...more reading less commenting.
fwa
fwa
3
"Our Constitution defines a Republic, not a Democracy...more reading less commenting."
Actually a republic is a form of democracy. Time to hit the books!
Actually a republic is a form of democracy. Time to hit the books!
Putin's economic record is mixed.
- By quickly lowering the exchange rate he managed the fall of the oil prices very well - much better than other oil producing countries. The logical consequence was that the standard of living fell.
- Diversification of the economy indeed remains a weak point, although there are some strong points like the grain production.
- For a long time Putin focused on containing the oligarchs. However, keeping them out of politics was in itself a major accomplishment. Only recently do we see serious attention to corruption and as a consequence all signs are now that corruption is falling in Russia.
- By quickly lowering the exchange rate he managed the fall of the oil prices very well - much better than other oil producing countries. The logical consequence was that the standard of living fell.
- Diversification of the economy indeed remains a weak point, although there are some strong points like the grain production.
- For a long time Putin focused on containing the oligarchs. However, keeping them out of politics was in itself a major accomplishment. Only recently do we see serious attention to corruption and as a consequence all signs are now that corruption is falling in Russia.
1
Professor Krugman....perhaps you should take these views up with
Charlie Rose.....on Prime Time....because....there is a global audience which
is not reading this today....and there needs to be a clean sweep of what
is going on in this election: because the 'Trashy Tabloid' news cycle is
clouding our air waves.....and this kind of information is not reaching the
general electorate.
The Truth would indeed Enlighten ....Us ...don't you think Professor.
Lux et Veritas...perhaps....Go on Charlie Rose...he would welcome you..again.
Charlie Rose.....on Prime Time....because....there is a global audience which
is not reading this today....and there needs to be a clean sweep of what
is going on in this election: because the 'Trashy Tabloid' news cycle is
clouding our air waves.....and this kind of information is not reaching the
general electorate.
The Truth would indeed Enlighten ....Us ...don't you think Professor.
Lux et Veritas...perhaps....Go on Charlie Rose...he would welcome you..again.
9
Trumps man Manafort received how much from Putins peaps? --12M USD I believe and forgot to register as a foreign agent
Putins plan to weaken Europe and the west proceed apace.
A million refugees expedited to Europe from the ME.
Election hacks to favor Trump over on this side of the pond.
Please fourth estate , do your job. Connect the dots.
Find the evidence of Trumps financial ties to Putin et al.
Oh , I forgot. Always trust the Russians.
Putins plan to weaken Europe and the west proceed apace.
A million refugees expedited to Europe from the ME.
Election hacks to favor Trump over on this side of the pond.
Please fourth estate , do your job. Connect the dots.
Find the evidence of Trumps financial ties to Putin et al.
Oh , I forgot. Always trust the Russians.
7
Perhaps those who admire Putin would want a constitutional amendment that prohibits local candidates to run for state and local offices unless they are vetted and approved by the white house. In essence this is how Putin consolidated his power. Do his American supporters believe in such a power grab. Probably.
12
American supporters no.
Confederate supporters yes
Confederate supporters yes
4
For once professor Krugman is careless with reality. It’s understandable since the basis for Vladimir Putin’s popularity, which is his role in ending the worst social catastrophe in the world after WWII, is completely wiped out of western history writing.
A few American economists (and one notorious Swede) succeeded in totally smashing the Russian economy after the capitalist “revolution” in 1990. For their convenience they had an alcoholic in the Kremlin countersigning their decisions.
Half of the Russian industrial capacity was razed to the ground practically overnight, the valuable parts were stolen by a bunch of unscrupulous apparatchiks (and some of it brought to the west), the social safety net was obliterated, salaries for public employees disappeared for long periods, starvation and malnutrition spread among the poor.
In the very beginning of the 1990s some ten million people, mostly men in working ages, died as a direct consequence of the capitalist “reforms”. Life expectancy declined by seven years in that short period. This unspeakable tragedy should elicit some compassion with the Russians, but we have chosen to suppress it completely.
Vladimir Putin may certainly have all kinds of despicable traits (just as much as he lacks a number of those most dear to western MSM propaganda) and he surely were lucky with the oil price, but his role in putting Russia on its feet and deal with the cataclysm the Russian people had to endure during the 1990s can’t be disputed.
A few American economists (and one notorious Swede) succeeded in totally smashing the Russian economy after the capitalist “revolution” in 1990. For their convenience they had an alcoholic in the Kremlin countersigning their decisions.
Half of the Russian industrial capacity was razed to the ground practically overnight, the valuable parts were stolen by a bunch of unscrupulous apparatchiks (and some of it brought to the west), the social safety net was obliterated, salaries for public employees disappeared for long periods, starvation and malnutrition spread among the poor.
In the very beginning of the 1990s some ten million people, mostly men in working ages, died as a direct consequence of the capitalist “reforms”. Life expectancy declined by seven years in that short period. This unspeakable tragedy should elicit some compassion with the Russians, but we have chosen to suppress it completely.
Vladimir Putin may certainly have all kinds of despicable traits (just as much as he lacks a number of those most dear to western MSM propaganda) and he surely were lucky with the oil price, but his role in putting Russia on its feet and deal with the cataclysm the Russian people had to endure during the 1990s can’t be disputed.
5
What has been revealed about Trump’s previous campaign manager Manafort is his close links to the Russian elite through his work with Viktor Yanukovych, ousted Ukrainian leader who fled to Russia. It's just too coincidental that Trump is spouting anti NATO rhetoric which is music to Putin's ears, while DNC emails exposed through Russian hackers are released just as the Dem convention was starting to deliberately stoke the fires of internal Dem squabbles. And it gets downright sinister when Manafort's name appears in clandestine documents uncovered in Ukrainian corruption investigations linking him to big underhanded payoff schemes. Clinton's emails issues pale in comparison to stuff like this. It really seems disproportionate that the State Department's email systems had to undergo an FBI administrative investigation (prompted by a GOP request that appears to have been a deliberate effort to perpetuate a minor email issue emerging from the Benghazi investigation) while clearly there is a far more pressing priority for the FBI to investigate a man like Manafort. The implications are considerable of which relatively speaking blatant tax evasion may be only a minor part. Treason is not outside the realm of possibility conceivably involving Trump himself.
27
The FBI is already been taken over by Trump insiders.
1
documentation, please?
1
"People are saying Trumps 'empire' is propped up by Russian and Chinese money."
13
Uh, which "people"? I mean beyond the lurid veiled accusation by the author?
1
So now the leaders of the Soviet Union were thugs too? Is "thug" code for "foreign political leader the NYT doesn't like"? Are the Saudi royal family thugs? The Bahraini royal family? The Phillipine president? The leadership of the Communist Party of China? Raul & Fidel Castro? Victor Maduro?
I keep seeing the word "thug" applied to Putin so it must be in some talking points that go out to pundits like Krugman. But I don't know how we the pundit-worshipping public are supposed to react. World War 3?
I keep seeing the word "thug" applied to Putin so it must be in some talking points that go out to pundits like Krugman. But I don't know how we the pundit-worshipping public are supposed to react. World War 3?
4
@ late from Moscow
I disagree with your comment but agree that the term thug is improperly used much too often.
I disagree with your comment but agree that the term thug is improperly used much too often.
A little sensitive, Late2DaGame? - the reference was specifically to Putin (not to "leaders of .."). It refers to his strong arm tactics against people who criticize him and countries he wants to invade. And, yes, there is evidence to thuggish behavior. That's so even if can apply, with some variations, to some of the other leaders you mention. That would not excuse Putin. The argument of "others do it too" is childish.
3
Lenin, Stalin, and Beria were thugs. Brezhnev, maybe, but hard to tell with those eyebrows. The guy running the Philippines seems like a thug in training. Maduro and the Castros are becoming has-been thugs. Here in the US we don't worship pundits, but we don't imprison them or kill them with polonium or poison darts from fake umbrellas, or have them assassinated either, at least not yet.
1
The term 'strong' has more than one connotation. Trump uses the word to refer to the ability of an individual to bend other people to his will, using force if necessary. By this definition, Putin qualifies as a strong leader within the borders of Russia. Praising this conception of leadership, however, requires that you ignore the needs and the integrity of everyone except the 'leader.'
A different meaning of 'strong' refers to the capacity to persuade other people voluntarily to follow your recommendations. This approach requires the leader to listen to the ideas of others and to respect their autonomy. The leader may mobilize support for a plan of action, but the plan itself will reflect the input of many people.
Any successful politician in a democracy will incorporate some elements of both models of leadership, but the second one more closely reflects the style demanded by people in a free society. For this reason alone, Donald Trump flunks the test of leadership for this country.
A different meaning of 'strong' refers to the capacity to persuade other people voluntarily to follow your recommendations. This approach requires the leader to listen to the ideas of others and to respect their autonomy. The leader may mobilize support for a plan of action, but the plan itself will reflect the input of many people.
Any successful politician in a democracy will incorporate some elements of both models of leadership, but the second one more closely reflects the style demanded by people in a free society. For this reason alone, Donald Trump flunks the test of leadership for this country.
263
No, you are not being unfair.
And the one who probably makes Putin laugh is Trump.
And the one who probably makes Putin laugh is Trump.
11
It's entirely appropriate to criticize Trump for expressing admiration for Putin, or for that matter Clinton for calling Mubarak a "family friend". But that's not what Democrat neo - John Birchers are doing. They are demanding the political police investigate their political opponents. They claim not bad political judgment - of which Trump has spades - but insinuate treason. Krugman knows this I'm sure, he can read. So once again he's just being dishonest.
What? Are you living in a bunker? Trump could make public his tax returns, oh no its the political police.
fwa
fwa
5
Tax returns are for the little people.
It is a shame that this brilliant critique of both Putin and Trump will be read only by the singers in Krugman's choir.
Somehow, the power of deductive reasoning and factual analysis of all kinds have become irrelevant in the choosing of our next president- Trump has exposed their limitations in engaging and influencing perhaps a majority of the voters of our great nation.
America has long had an anti-intellectual bent in its politics, where speaking with the vocabulary (and nuance) of a college graduate had been taboo since Kennedy, until Obama came along. Trump must be the Obama backlash.
Vote Trump- make America ignorant again.
Somehow, the power of deductive reasoning and factual analysis of all kinds have become irrelevant in the choosing of our next president- Trump has exposed their limitations in engaging and influencing perhaps a majority of the voters of our great nation.
America has long had an anti-intellectual bent in its politics, where speaking with the vocabulary (and nuance) of a college graduate had been taboo since Kennedy, until Obama came along. Trump must be the Obama backlash.
Vote Trump- make America ignorant again.
38
Ignorance and the pride the ignorant have in that ignorance is the right's biggest problem.
I have never seen a group of more ignorant people than those I see on the clueless right.
I mean George W. AWOL was considered smart in texass but come on, that's texas.
Here in the United States we require more from a President than a born to privlege sissy like AWOL Bush or draft dodger Trump.
I have never seen a group of more ignorant people than those I see on the clueless right.
I mean George W. AWOL was considered smart in texass but come on, that's texas.
Here in the United States we require more from a President than a born to privlege sissy like AWOL Bush or draft dodger Trump.
6
Trump has repeated talked about how he, as a private citizen, has used money to bribe politicians to kiss his backside. Is there any reason to doubt that as a politician he would take bribes, especially from Putin who could offer him the 10s of billions of dollars he wishes he had?
10
Yep, clearly the old authoritarian streak in American politics, never that far from the surface, is rearing its poisonous head again in the semi-mass appeal of Trump, and the Trump-Putin bromance.
Dr. K. brings up another very important point, about the oligarchs' failure to diversify the Russian economy. It's even worse than PK describes; the Russian oil giants are doubling down, spending zillions finding new fields and adding far more to reserves than any other group of companies ... new reserves that can never be burned if humanity is to have even a snowball's chance of avoiding major climate disruption and human misery on a scale never seen or experienced before. Russia is highly likely to devolve into a failed state over the next decade or so.
Dr. K. brings up another very important point, about the oligarchs' failure to diversify the Russian economy. It's even worse than PK describes; the Russian oil giants are doubling down, spending zillions finding new fields and adding far more to reserves than any other group of companies ... new reserves that can never be burned if humanity is to have even a snowball's chance of avoiding major climate disruption and human misery on a scale never seen or experienced before. Russia is highly likely to devolve into a failed state over the next decade or so.
9
Putin is a tough, experienced world leader. The U.S./Russia relations in
Syria need clarification. It is a murky political cesspool. Trump's comments
about Putin are nothing more than shrill rants. Going forward, Professor
Krugman could provide some insights in to the political world
of Saudi Arabia.
Syria need clarification. It is a murky political cesspool. Trump's comments
about Putin are nothing more than shrill rants. Going forward, Professor
Krugman could provide some insights in to the political world
of Saudi Arabia.
1
Denigrating Russia to the status of a “regional power” is as pompously ignorant as one can get while analyzing global geopolitics. Russia is the only power which posses a credible “second-strike capability” against the U.S.
That strategic jargon convey an estimation that a “nuclear exchange” -- even under the worst conditions for Russia – will result in such horrific damage for the U.S. (Ironically, a consequential part of Russia’s massive-retaliation force is directed at “red” states like Oklahoma and Wyoming, and most probably Kansas won’t be there anymore also) that’s it’s inconceivable (exactly what the word means) to treat America’s nuclear arsenal as a source of power over Russia. That’s the geopolitical-strategic-historic immanent meaning of a “global power” -- and Russia is the only country to posses it vis. a.vis the indispensable nation.
Mr. Krugman may also want to look again at the crisis in Syria; the role Putin played in achieving the Iran nuclear deal; the “Silk Road” growing cooperation with China; the quality of Russian missiles; and the fact that Russia (even with all the “brain-drain”) is likely still be the number one in Mathematics, before he endeavors to get Putin feel like his and his “mother-land” honor has been defiled.
That strategic jargon convey an estimation that a “nuclear exchange” -- even under the worst conditions for Russia – will result in such horrific damage for the U.S. (Ironically, a consequential part of Russia’s massive-retaliation force is directed at “red” states like Oklahoma and Wyoming, and most probably Kansas won’t be there anymore also) that’s it’s inconceivable (exactly what the word means) to treat America’s nuclear arsenal as a source of power over Russia. That’s the geopolitical-strategic-historic immanent meaning of a “global power” -- and Russia is the only country to posses it vis. a.vis the indispensable nation.
Mr. Krugman may also want to look again at the crisis in Syria; the role Putin played in achieving the Iran nuclear deal; the “Silk Road” growing cooperation with China; the quality of Russian missiles; and the fact that Russia (even with all the “brain-drain”) is likely still be the number one in Mathematics, before he endeavors to get Putin feel like his and his “mother-land” honor has been defiled.
5
Why aren't the Democrats hammering Trump and the Republicans on holding up Putin as an example to be admired? Putin has his opponents jailed and killed. Putin doesn't seem to have a problem with journalists and lawyers exposing high level corruption being murdered. Putin silences all opposition in the press. Putin invades and steals territory from his neighbors. Putin threatens first strike nuclear weapons in Europe. Putin bombs hospitals and civilians in Syria. As Gary Kasparov said, Putin is a strong leader like arsenic is a strong drink. Someone running for a major office cannot possibly hope to get elected holding a murderer like this up as an example and saying he's better than Obama.
Unfortunately, the Democrats are pathetic with their attacks. The only one who seems to be able to land a solid punch against Trump is Elizabeth Warren. They have to hit back hard and often on this shockingly ridiculous "Putin is a stronger leader than Obama" statement.
And the media needs to headline every one of Trumps constant stream of lies and ridiculous assertions. Come on!!! Trump lies 10x more than Hillary but she's constantly being attacked as untrustworthy while the media doesn't find a headline in a giant lie like,"I was always against the Iraq war." The media just seems dumbfounded by the volume of lies and absurd and idiotic statements made by this guy WHO COULD END UP BEING PRESIDENT WITH HIS FINGER ON THE BUTTON!!!
Unfortunately, the Democrats are pathetic with their attacks. The only one who seems to be able to land a solid punch against Trump is Elizabeth Warren. They have to hit back hard and often on this shockingly ridiculous "Putin is a stronger leader than Obama" statement.
And the media needs to headline every one of Trumps constant stream of lies and ridiculous assertions. Come on!!! Trump lies 10x more than Hillary but she's constantly being attacked as untrustworthy while the media doesn't find a headline in a giant lie like,"I was always against the Iraq war." The media just seems dumbfounded by the volume of lies and absurd and idiotic statements made by this guy WHO COULD END UP BEING PRESIDENT WITH HIS FINGER ON THE BUTTON!!!
14
Hammering every nonsensical notion that Trump spews is like playing Whack-a-Mole.
Futile and time consuming, and prevents the election being decided on the basis of issues and policies for the future of the US.
That is the Republican strategy. But I agree, Trump should be hammered on this one.
Futile and time consuming, and prevents the election being decided on the basis of issues and policies for the future of the US.
That is the Republican strategy. But I agree, Trump should be hammered on this one.
1
Mr.Krugman,whether you like it or not, it is undeniable that Putin has been one of the most influential leader of the 21st century, just like Angela Merkel.
Putin, like most world leaders within the neoliberal paradigm, is no angel, nor is he the devil, he certainly is not the all powerful cartoon villain of the compliant Western media either.
For example, the US neocon establishment was aiming at war with Iran. Russia was instrumental in Obama’s Iranian agreement. If this prevents a US-lead war, stopping tens of thousands of deaths, then from an American anti-war perspective, Putin was a stand up guy.
The idea that the US is a virtuous actor on the world stage ended some time ago and that's what makes this “red-baiting” so obnoxious.
At least since WWII US human rights abuses dwarf anything attributable to any other country, including Russia. Regime changes, death squads, torture schools, unprovoked wars, destabilizations, sponsoring ultra-right wing or jihadi proxy armies, cluster bombs, depleted uranium, agent orange, assassinations, drone wars etc.
Even domestically the US is far from perfect: the highest incarceration rate in the world by far. Its use of solitary confinement,a form of torture, is widespread. The death penalty is considered barbaric in much of the world. Political dissidents/whistleblowers are jailed: Barrett Brown, Chelsea Manning, John Kiriakou ..., surveillance-state etc.
You don't have to be a Putin-fan to know this “red-baiting” is pure hypocrisy.
Putin, like most world leaders within the neoliberal paradigm, is no angel, nor is he the devil, he certainly is not the all powerful cartoon villain of the compliant Western media either.
For example, the US neocon establishment was aiming at war with Iran. Russia was instrumental in Obama’s Iranian agreement. If this prevents a US-lead war, stopping tens of thousands of deaths, then from an American anti-war perspective, Putin was a stand up guy.
The idea that the US is a virtuous actor on the world stage ended some time ago and that's what makes this “red-baiting” so obnoxious.
At least since WWII US human rights abuses dwarf anything attributable to any other country, including Russia. Regime changes, death squads, torture schools, unprovoked wars, destabilizations, sponsoring ultra-right wing or jihadi proxy armies, cluster bombs, depleted uranium, agent orange, assassinations, drone wars etc.
Even domestically the US is far from perfect: the highest incarceration rate in the world by far. Its use of solitary confinement,a form of torture, is widespread. The death penalty is considered barbaric in much of the world. Political dissidents/whistleblowers are jailed: Barrett Brown, Chelsea Manning, John Kiriakou ..., surveillance-state etc.
You don't have to be a Putin-fan to know this “red-baiting” is pure hypocrisy.
162
if you define "influential" as possessing the ability to blow up the European Experiment, I agree with your assessment vis-a-vis Frau Merkel.
Putin has jailed hundreds and been a "strong leader" since 2000 during which time 34 journalists were killed. We should reflect on Trump's criticism of Obama. If Obama were Putin, Trump would likely be hanging from his thumbs or dead. If Obama were Putin, he would have engineered a Constitutional Amendment enabling him to be President for life. If Obama were Putin the conservatives might all be in prison. If Obama were Putin, the Philippines would be annexed....
Putin is a dangerous thug and cannot be trusted or extolled by any president who is an American. Trump is not a real American. Trump is a racist, xenophobe, misogynist, bigot....not suitable for any office as the oath of office makes that impossible: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." because Trump, by his own words, does not believe in the Constitution.
Putin is a dangerous thug and cannot be trusted or extolled by any president who is an American. Trump is not a real American. Trump is a racist, xenophobe, misogynist, bigot....not suitable for any office as the oath of office makes that impossible: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." because Trump, by his own words, does not believe in the Constitution.
6
Excuse me, Putin has his opponents in Russia jailed and murdered. Putin intentionally bombs civilians and hospitals in Syria. He has shut down all opposition media in Russia. He suggests Stalin, probably the biggest mass murderer in history, is a hero for the Russians. He has threatened to use first strike, tactical nuclear weapons in Europe.
So far the American President has not had his opponents murdered & jailed.
The United States has done many horrible things, from killing the Indians and taking their land to leaving unexploded bombs in Laos.
However, sitting where I am in the Czech Republic, it's clear that without the United States the Iron Curtain would still be in place. If you wanted to visit Austria you either be shot or have to leave hostages to get government permission. There were hundreds of thousands of Warsaw Pact soldiers here; there are virtually no American soldiers as the Czechs and others enjoy the US security protection and the Pax Americana which Trump is ready to throw out the window. Until Putin started making attacks, threats and actively seeking to disrupt NATO and the EU, this part of the world had 25 years of peace, prosperity and freedom.
Without the United States, both as a flawed but still inspiring example and a guarantor of security, everyone on this side of the possibly returning Iron Curtain will get to live under the murderous kleptocracy which is Putin's example for Trump to hold up to Americans.
So far the American President has not had his opponents murdered & jailed.
The United States has done many horrible things, from killing the Indians and taking their land to leaving unexploded bombs in Laos.
However, sitting where I am in the Czech Republic, it's clear that without the United States the Iron Curtain would still be in place. If you wanted to visit Austria you either be shot or have to leave hostages to get government permission. There were hundreds of thousands of Warsaw Pact soldiers here; there are virtually no American soldiers as the Czechs and others enjoy the US security protection and the Pax Americana which Trump is ready to throw out the window. Until Putin started making attacks, threats and actively seeking to disrupt NATO and the EU, this part of the world had 25 years of peace, prosperity and freedom.
Without the United States, both as a flawed but still inspiring example and a guarantor of security, everyone on this side of the possibly returning Iron Curtain will get to live under the murderous kleptocracy which is Putin's example for Trump to hold up to Americans.
6
Putin has his share of apologists and admirers on the left as well. As a liberal, I have always found it disturbing that a certain segment of American liberals will find a few nice things to say about anybody willing to spit in the eye of their own country. Their respect for democracy, civil liberties, LGBT rights, and autonomy of countries which are not militarily poweful, all go out the window for someone like Putin. They often have justified, righteous criticism of their own country, but then turn that criticism into apologism for someone like Putin.
Just another way the people on opposing far fringes of politics become strange bedfellows.
Just another way the people on opposing far fringes of politics become strange bedfellows.
103
As a Liberal Democrat I find CityBumpkin's comment fairly accurate and while I don't like it I find I have to be truthful about a segment of American liberals. To put it into the most recent vernacular, they are the deplorables on the left who betray the principles for which Liberal Democrats exist, the well-being of Americans mainly whose income is in the middle of the wealth quotient all the way down to those in the poor realm. Liberal Democrats support egalitarian government, where all people have equal social rights, equal right to opportunities to achieve personal aspirations, equal justice for individuals as well as the entire society. The comment takes a lucid observation and we should be thankful for the reminder! Here is my thanks! I won't forget it!
2
"Putin has his share of apologists and admirers on the left as well. As a liberal, I have always found it disturbing that a certain segment of American liberals will find a few nice things to say about anybody willing to spit in the eye of their own country. Their respect for democracy, civil liberties, LGBT rights, and autonomy of countries which are not militarily poweful, all go out the window for someone like Putin."
If Vladimir Putin has apologists on the left as well, you should have no trouble naming one or two. I strongly suspect you will have trouble though.
And you will not find a single prominent progressive political figure who will express anything but disgust for Putin and his oligarchy. And certainly nobody with the relative importance of Trump or Giuliani.
Should President Obama and his successor continue to keep diplomatic lines open with Russia, and cooperate where possible on vital issues like terrorism? Absolutely. We have always done this with our adversaries, even singularly odious ones. But it is not necessary to admire Putin or his regime to accomplish this.
If Vladimir Putin has apologists on the left as well, you should have no trouble naming one or two. I strongly suspect you will have trouble though.
And you will not find a single prominent progressive political figure who will express anything but disgust for Putin and his oligarchy. And certainly nobody with the relative importance of Trump or Giuliani.
Should President Obama and his successor continue to keep diplomatic lines open with Russia, and cooperate where possible on vital issues like terrorism? Absolutely. We have always done this with our adversaries, even singularly odious ones. But it is not necessary to admire Putin or his regime to accomplish this.
3
Please share who these admirers on the left are. I certainly can't come up with a single mainstream member of the "left" who admires Putin off the top of my head, and I follow these things pretty closely.
3
What's most worrisome about Trump's admiration of Putin is that most of us try to emulate those we admire rather than loathe.
Having a President Trump who sees Putin as a leadership role model, particularly in light of Trump's demonstrated disdain of free press, traditional principles of military behavior, and pluralism, among our other core values, is terrifying.
Having a President Trump who sees Putin as a leadership role model, particularly in light of Trump's demonstrated disdain of free press, traditional principles of military behavior, and pluralism, among our other core values, is terrifying.
10
What Dr. K describes as the Russian economic system, is the basic modle of Fascism. Oligarchs run the country, the government tells them how to do it. Just ĺike Germany comtrolled Krupp, Messerschmit, and other industries.
Trump admires this model, it is open to corruption as we have seen from history, and we have ample evidence that Trump has profitted from corruption.
Just notice he will be going on trial for a RICO charge, and fraud.
Trump admires this model, it is open to corruption as we have seen from history, and we have ample evidence that Trump has profitted from corruption.
Just notice he will be going on trial for a RICO charge, and fraud.
116
Once elected, Trump will be Fuehrer for life. What RICO trial? Trump - using his appointed flunkies to run Justice, FBI, military, and rest of gov't - will reign supreme. Goodbye US Constitution. Assasinnation & imprisonment of all Trump foes will be part of it. Suppression of courts will be part of it. (Trump's 'army of deplorables' - and most Repubican Party members -will love it).
13
The disintegration of the former Soviet Union in the late 1980s seemed to me at the time as one of the most significant events in modern history, but then I naively expected that Russia and other member of the former bloc would really have free elections, and I never imagined a former KGB hood becoming a de facto dictator.
Trump's backing of Putin should hardly surprise anyone these days. America's party of the oligarchy has been pushing especially hard to cripple democracy in the US, by limiting voting rights of ordinary citizens, granting virtually unchecked power to corporations, incarcerating citizens at a rate similar or higher than some of the most corrupt totalitarian states in the world, and all but decimating unions and the right to collective bargaining.
America's oligarchs and their political cronies must be high fiving each other behind closed doors, and why wouldn't they? Trump backs Putin because he and the GOP's designs on America are very similar to Putin's plans for Russia, and let's face it, they are both already well on the way to achieving their goals.
Trump's backing of Putin should hardly surprise anyone these days. America's party of the oligarchy has been pushing especially hard to cripple democracy in the US, by limiting voting rights of ordinary citizens, granting virtually unchecked power to corporations, incarcerating citizens at a rate similar or higher than some of the most corrupt totalitarian states in the world, and all but decimating unions and the right to collective bargaining.
America's oligarchs and their political cronies must be high fiving each other behind closed doors, and why wouldn't they? Trump backs Putin because he and the GOP's designs on America are very similar to Putin's plans for Russia, and let's face it, they are both already well on the way to achieving their goals.
145
Putin reminds me of Mussolini. His invasion of Crimea, Mussolini's Albania, Syria, Mussolini's Ethiopia.
While he was still just a pretender, Hilter admired Mussolini from afar.
That makes Trump Hitler in this analogy, and unfortunately, the United States as Germany. Are you getting uncomfortable yet?
The seeds of authoritarian politics is the concentration of wealth which stalls growth for everyone everywhere, and has people looking to identity politics of nationalism and racism.
All of this could be reversed with a proper keynesian demand side economic stimulus in the U.S. and Europe. But the wealth concentrators have their hands on the throttle and they aren't about to open up economics for growth.
Obama's failure to go for a truly aggressive stimulus in early 2009 now looks a lot like Chamberlain's mistake at Munich.
The road to ruin was paved by Bush II and Reagan and the destruction of the demand side of our economy. What Will Durant said about the destruction of great civilizations and empires? Something about collapsing from within. And almost always you can find wealth concentration in there somewhere.
While he was still just a pretender, Hilter admired Mussolini from afar.
That makes Trump Hitler in this analogy, and unfortunately, the United States as Germany. Are you getting uncomfortable yet?
The seeds of authoritarian politics is the concentration of wealth which stalls growth for everyone everywhere, and has people looking to identity politics of nationalism and racism.
All of this could be reversed with a proper keynesian demand side economic stimulus in the U.S. and Europe. But the wealth concentrators have their hands on the throttle and they aren't about to open up economics for growth.
Obama's failure to go for a truly aggressive stimulus in early 2009 now looks a lot like Chamberlain's mistake at Munich.
The road to ruin was paved by Bush II and Reagan and the destruction of the demand side of our economy. What Will Durant said about the destruction of great civilizations and empires? Something about collapsing from within. And almost always you can find wealth concentration in there somewhere.
204
Thank you, Tim.
We're going to spend the weekend in Canada at a B&B. I was just now gazing out the window, thinking about how I would answer the inevitable questions. A speech very closely resembling your post went through my mind. Then I turned my head back to the screen and there it was--
I may add a sentence about the minimally-regulated, low-tax 19th century economy with its history of "panics" culminating in the mother of all panics, the stock market crash of 1929.
History does show that these "business-friendly" policies always lead to repeated bouts of boom and bust. A desperate populace is then easy prey for authoritarian figures who promise to solve all their problems.
We're going to spend the weekend in Canada at a B&B. I was just now gazing out the window, thinking about how I would answer the inevitable questions. A speech very closely resembling your post went through my mind. Then I turned my head back to the screen and there it was--
I may add a sentence about the minimally-regulated, low-tax 19th century economy with its history of "panics" culminating in the mother of all panics, the stock market crash of 1929.
History does show that these "business-friendly" policies always lead to repeated bouts of boom and bust. A desperate populace is then easy prey for authoritarian figures who promise to solve all their problems.
2
Tim Kane: welcome back!
Thank you, Tim Kane, for having the courage to say this. Too much of contemporary politics has begun to sound unfortunate echoes of the past.
1
"Beyond that, however, admiring Mr. Putin means admiring someone who has contempt for democracy and civil liberties. Or more accurately, it means admiring someone precisely because of that contempt."
Does anyone else see the parallel with the other Repubican heroes, the Kochs, Sheldon Adelson and such? It's the same song, second verse. Once again, Trump has just taken the veneer off some our most unpleasant phenomena.
Does anyone else see the parallel with the other Repubican heroes, the Kochs, Sheldon Adelson and such? It's the same song, second verse. Once again, Trump has just taken the veneer off some our most unpleasant phenomena.
89
Everything voiced by Trump and the acclaim given to Trump are in the context of a dictatorship.
The instant, unilateral solutions Trump proposes never refer to constitutional deliberation.
The enraged sentiment of accord expressed by his followers is not a yearning for legislation.
The Constitution is only invoked as a talisman for unreflective action.
Of course Putin and Kim Jong Un are invoked as models.
The Donald J. Trump campaign is to elect a dictator.
The instant, unilateral solutions Trump proposes never refer to constitutional deliberation.
The enraged sentiment of accord expressed by his followers is not a yearning for legislation.
The Constitution is only invoked as a talisman for unreflective action.
Of course Putin and Kim Jong Un are invoked as models.
The Donald J. Trump campaign is to elect a dictator.
45
Love of Putin springs from hatred of Obama, simply. And the constant diminution of our president has weakened America.
The GOP would rather weaken the country than grant Obama any status at all.
The RIght hate America because they hate the majority of Americans. This is an insurrection.
The GOP would rather weaken the country than grant Obama any status at all.
The RIght hate America because they hate the majority of Americans. This is an insurrection.
587
As often stated, the GOP is the most treasonous group in America. (and America doesn't care.)
13
None dare call it treason.
2
According to Yale history professor Timothy Snyder, Putin has been financially supporting right wing fringe movements in Europe. His purpose is to weaken Europe, which is Russia's rival. Supporting Trump would be another step in the attempt to weaken the West.
Snyder's books Bloodlands and Black Earth give excellent background, and about a dozen of his talks to university and political science organizations are on YouTube.
To see what we should do watch Comedy Party Platform on YouTube (2 min 9 sec). Also on YouTube, aoeGenesis7 comments on some American failings too. Thanks. [email protected]
Snyder's books Bloodlands and Black Earth give excellent background, and about a dozen of his talks to university and political science organizations are on YouTube.
To see what we should do watch Comedy Party Platform on YouTube (2 min 9 sec). Also on YouTube, aoeGenesis7 comments on some American failings too. Thanks. [email protected]
18
So, some years ago, Newt Gingrich said Obama is un-American because he had an "Kenyan anti colonial behavior". And Republicans applauded him for this. The same Obama who took out Osama bin Laden who gave the Soviets hell in Afghanistan. The same Obama who used up his political capital so that 30 million Americans could finally get access to healthcare. The same Obama who put the term "respect" next to America on the global stage. The same Obama who has nixed Iran's nuclear program.
And then you have Trump admiring Putin and getting applause from the same Republicans.
So, honestly speaking, if it were Obama and Putin on the ballot, is Trump saying that he would cast his vote for Putin?
And then you have Trump admiring Putin and getting applause from the same Republicans.
So, honestly speaking, if it were Obama and Putin on the ballot, is Trump saying that he would cast his vote for Putin?
319
No, Trump would write-in his own name, but the only difference between the Donald and Putin is that Putin has real chops at being a thuggish dictator - he's not an actor.
6
Paul, Paul, slow down!
"This growth can, however, be explained with just one word: oil."
Please!
No, no, no, two words, "...oil AND gas..."
Think back to the time when the Putin "régime" shut off gas pipelines passing through Ukraine, in the middle of extremely cold winters (you could look it up), astonishing a West occupied with its delusions of new world order, by renewing with "starvation" (popular now in Syria)---or economic warfare as it was once called.
No more imperial strategy than starving a neighbour to obtain tribute. Goes WAY back.
Eventually, parts of the North Caucasus WILLbreak out of the Russian Federation, no matter what. They MAY resprt to spurious "relgious" reasons (fashion and trends, you know).
That of course is the main concern of the Vlad P. himself. The fear of the Caucasus region (an amazing ethnic checkerboard which IS NOT Russian) breaking its slow way out of the Russian Federation is why he harrasses Ukraine in the West, and the Turkish languages-speaking peoples, strung out all accross South-Central Asia from Asia Minor ("Turkey") and Kazakhstan to the Uighur peoples in Xinjiang.
He will have failed. The peoples are different. Opposed monotheisms will not stand, in the end. He chooses to ignore History. But he is painting himself into a dirty corner, with very slow-drying paint.
The region can never turn out as "the man" wishes, no matter how "tough" he looks and acts.
He is a fool. May take a while, but kiss him goody-bye.
"This growth can, however, be explained with just one word: oil."
Please!
No, no, no, two words, "...oil AND gas..."
Think back to the time when the Putin "régime" shut off gas pipelines passing through Ukraine, in the middle of extremely cold winters (you could look it up), astonishing a West occupied with its delusions of new world order, by renewing with "starvation" (popular now in Syria)---or economic warfare as it was once called.
No more imperial strategy than starving a neighbour to obtain tribute. Goes WAY back.
Eventually, parts of the North Caucasus WILLbreak out of the Russian Federation, no matter what. They MAY resprt to spurious "relgious" reasons (fashion and trends, you know).
That of course is the main concern of the Vlad P. himself. The fear of the Caucasus region (an amazing ethnic checkerboard which IS NOT Russian) breaking its slow way out of the Russian Federation is why he harrasses Ukraine in the West, and the Turkish languages-speaking peoples, strung out all accross South-Central Asia from Asia Minor ("Turkey") and Kazakhstan to the Uighur peoples in Xinjiang.
He will have failed. The peoples are different. Opposed monotheisms will not stand, in the end. He chooses to ignore History. But he is painting himself into a dirty corner, with very slow-drying paint.
The region can never turn out as "the man" wishes, no matter how "tough" he looks and acts.
He is a fool. May take a while, but kiss him goody-bye.
23
"...resprt..." = "resort".
Well, I meant, "...good-bye", but as far as it goes, I rather DO like, "...goody-bye..." Why not?
But not even the little Putin can stem the tide of history The truth will out (a phrase either Shakespeare or Chaucer or somebody plagiarised off me).
Well, I meant, "...good-bye", but as far as it goes, I rather DO like, "...goody-bye..." Why not?
But not even the little Putin can stem the tide of history The truth will out (a phrase either Shakespeare or Chaucer or somebody plagiarised off me).
2
I hope you are right!
1
Psycho Don does his best JulieAnnie:
I'm Just Wild about Vlady
Vlady's Wild about me
His heavenly compliments
Like kisses
Fill me with ecstasy.
I'm Just Wild about Vlady
Vlady's Wild about me
His heavenly compliments
Like kisses
Fill me with ecstasy.
5
How crucial has Russian money been in sustaining Mr. Trump’s ramshackle business empire? There are hints that it may have been very important indeed, but given Mr. Trump’s secretiveness and his refusal to release his taxes, nobody really knows.
Given the lack of interest by the Times' own reporters, it's not a surprise nobody really knows. But they are concerned about what might perhaps happen if Chelsea Clinton remains connected with the Clinton Foundation if her mother is elected President. And about any potential influence foreign governments may have through that foundation, despite the $12 million Trump's former lieutenant received for unknown activities from pro-Russia operatives in Ukraine.
You'd think that they'd follow the money, the real money, not the speculative money. Unless the speculative money relates to Donald Trump's widely varied claims about his income and his taxes. Then the Times reporters aren't so interested in speculative money.
You'd also think that, given Trump's admiration for Putin, and Putin's extermination of political enemies, and Trump's "joke" about "second amendment types" taking care of Clinton, there'd be a really intense focus on this "joke". Especially because some people really don't know how to take a joke.
But feel free to opine and wonder, Times editorialists: your reporters aren't going to give you much information to think upon.
Given the lack of interest by the Times' own reporters, it's not a surprise nobody really knows. But they are concerned about what might perhaps happen if Chelsea Clinton remains connected with the Clinton Foundation if her mother is elected President. And about any potential influence foreign governments may have through that foundation, despite the $12 million Trump's former lieutenant received for unknown activities from pro-Russia operatives in Ukraine.
You'd think that they'd follow the money, the real money, not the speculative money. Unless the speculative money relates to Donald Trump's widely varied claims about his income and his taxes. Then the Times reporters aren't so interested in speculative money.
You'd also think that, given Trump's admiration for Putin, and Putin's extermination of political enemies, and Trump's "joke" about "second amendment types" taking care of Clinton, there'd be a really intense focus on this "joke". Especially because some people really don't know how to take a joke.
But feel free to opine and wonder, Times editorialists: your reporters aren't going to give you much information to think upon.
277
'You'd think' I couldn't agree more. Tougher journalism please!
7
Ummmm.... The New York Times just recently published an excellent expose of Mr.Trump's debt. And after its journalists poured through millions of documents, it revealed that the debt was close to twice what Mr. Trump has claimed, 650 million, and that a large chunk was owned by the Bank of China. Good, original, sturdy journalism.
12
Now if only we could get our hands on Trump's tax returns. Of course it is none of our business, since we are only little people, but I suspect Mr. Trump pays no tax at all. He may even qualify for Earned Income Tax Credit.
2
The notion that Russia is a regional power overlooks the crucial fact that Putin aspires to restore the international status of the Soviet Union at it height. He is dabbling in the Middle East, trying to cozy up to China and is a beacon of hope to the likes of Khamenei, Kim and various Islamic radical groups who see his progress as a sign that the U.S. is in rapid decline as an international power. Obama's indecision and ineptness in international affairs greatly amplifies the effect of Putin's behavior both regionally and world-wide. But of course, Krugman and the Times would never admit this.
1
A Republican calling Obama's foreign policy inept. Most readers of the NYT are more than 16 years old, you know.
They call that projection. Your boy was the most inept president in history. Are you trying to restore his reputation by electing someone even worse?
Of course you are.
They call that projection. Your boy was the most inept president in history. Are you trying to restore his reputation by electing someone even worse?
Of course you are.
27
@NRoad
What you are saying about Putin and his efforts to "make Russia great again" is true as far as it goes – the question is what the US can/should do about it. Do you have something to suggest or you'd rather just put down Obama, The Times, Krugman and liberals in general? Or, are you holding your breath until Trump can fix things in his inimitably decisive way?
What you are saying about Putin and his efforts to "make Russia great again" is true as far as it goes – the question is what the US can/should do about it. Do you have something to suggest or you'd rather just put down Obama, The Times, Krugman and liberals in general? Or, are you holding your breath until Trump can fix things in his inimitably decisive way?
7
It is to laugh. Trump embraces Putin...sounds nuts. Obama and Clinton embrace the Saudis...thats ok Jack. I'm sorry but whether the dictator wears a suit or a robe it doesn't make a difference. Our leaders are making embracing dictators business as usual. As a result, arguing that Trump is an outlier is evidence not of your insightful analysis but rather your biased reporting
I wish we would stop supporting dictators no matter what their rational is for their absolutist regimes!
I wish we would stop supporting dictators no matter what their rational is for their absolutist regimes!
9
@Justice Holmes
Saudi Arabia and Russia are essentially the same thing? Is Saudi Arabia now claiming a superpower status? Challenging the US? "We should not be supporting dictators" is a sentiment I can agree with – who wouldn't? But then there is a big and complicated world out there and simplistic approaches to foreign policy don't cut it.
Saudi Arabia and Russia are essentially the same thing? Is Saudi Arabia now claiming a superpower status? Challenging the US? "We should not be supporting dictators" is a sentiment I can agree with – who wouldn't? But then there is a big and complicated world out there and simplistic approaches to foreign policy don't cut it.
24
Lots of us would love to stop supporting dictators but its all about the oil, no matter how much we Drill, Baby, Drill. Too much money is donated to the Republicans by oil companies that have financial interests in Saudi Arabia.
I voted for President Obama twice and give him very high marks for his stewardship over the last seven and a half years. But I completely agree with Donald Trump's remarks that Vladimir Putin is a "stronger" leader than President Obama in that he exercises more control over Russia than Obama does over the U.S.
Of course he does. He's a dictator. The same would be true of Stalin or Hitler or Mao. They're all "stronger" leaders than Mr. Obama. That's why dictators are sometimes called "strong men." They controlled every facet of life in their countries.
In fact, these dictators -- and lots more -- were "stronger" leaders than any American President, be it Obama, FDR, Reagan or Lincoln. Because all our presidents are constantly reined in by a powerful system of checks and balances which compels them to share power with the legislature, the courts and the governments of the individual states.
Mr. Trump is right about who is stronger, but his quarrel is not with President Obama. It is with the Constitution.
Of course he does. He's a dictator. The same would be true of Stalin or Hitler or Mao. They're all "stronger" leaders than Mr. Obama. That's why dictators are sometimes called "strong men." They controlled every facet of life in their countries.
In fact, these dictators -- and lots more -- were "stronger" leaders than any American President, be it Obama, FDR, Reagan or Lincoln. Because all our presidents are constantly reined in by a powerful system of checks and balances which compels them to share power with the legislature, the courts and the governments of the individual states.
Mr. Trump is right about who is stronger, but his quarrel is not with President Obama. It is with the Constitution.
2081
Dictators and tyrants are not leaders any more than prison guards are not leaders, they are enforcers, and their power depends on those who would exercise the same power if they could take charge.
5
This is very much on the right track. I would only add that the so called "strength" that they admire is actually the weakness of bellicose bullies. They have a two dimensional cartoon version of "strength" that they trot out for every election. Cartoon character superheroes rather than intellectual acumen and analysis.
5
I think you are off the mark in your definition of leadership strength. In fact Putin is weak in the sense that he can only hold on to power by imprisoning or murdering his opponents. Likewise Trump is weak because his business "success" is based on lying, cheating, and outright fraud. Likewise the Republican party is weak because they must resort to voter suppression and gerrymandering to hold on to power.
10
Would mentioning Syria at all in your piece be far too inconvenient for your case? Russia may not be our #1 geopolitical rival, but it is equally wrong to dismiss Russia as a regional player incapable of preventing America from advancing its global interests or influencing domestic public opinion in the US. Rivals do not have to approach economic or military parity with the US to make things very costly or arduous for us, and labeling Russia as an ordinary corrupt petrostate does not enable us to prevent it from egregiously breaking international norms. Since Crimea was, as you put it, "not much of a conquest", and a "liability" for Russia, why then, have our efforts to influence that development been largely fruitless? Remember that even at the height of American power, we could not achieve many of our objectives in Korea or Vietnam. From a moral standpoint, the invasion of Ukraine and support for Assad's regime are deplorable. From a realist's perspective, 2016 Russia and Putin are doing a well enough job of navigating themselves in the resurgence of geopolitics, and need not be the USSR for it to be a formidable foe.
8
Syria is a tale for another editorial piece.
I wish Donald would just call his old pal Vladimir and settle this whole Syria thing right here and now. Just like he recently made Mexico pay for the wall.
62
In the world of the deplorables, one can be just as high-minded as Hillary supporters since Trump never defines his supposed values. The Orange-Hued one spouts his love of "democracy" much like a Putinsky in Russia, who would include as an exemplar the roughneck who rose in society by killing off his rivals. Who one is has become, in Trumpspeak, the meaningless drivel that comes out of his/her mouth. Valuable people are measured by how much of it comes out of their mouths.
5
Putin represents everything the House "Freedom Caucasus" dreams for anyone who opposes their agenda. Their ideological paymasters wants all lefty liberals (and their ideas) consigned to the memory hole.
There are no serfs on the baronial estates (yet), but predatory finance laws and punitive court fees for the school to prison pipeline is creating them.
We already brought back debtors prison.
There are no serfs on the baronial estates (yet), but predatory finance laws and punitive court fees for the school to prison pipeline is creating them.
We already brought back debtors prison.
559
If Trump wins liberal ideas will be "consigned to the memory hole", but after they have completely destroyed the country for all but the 1%, the Republican Party will be destroyed, the latter the only silver lining in that very dark cloud of our future.
1
Putin's attractiveness from the reactionary right is based, in large part, as a reaction to Obama. Obama: no drama, no swagger, no macho war rhetoric, no "bad guys versus good guys," many Americans don't want an Obama presidency.. they want strong, want decisive, want heated rhetoric, and want a president who is entertaining, and so we have Trump, an exact opposite, a caricature, a macho man who swats at HRC's experience, and denigrates Obama's restraint, and so Putin is such a model for the reactionary right --- a truly sad state of affairs.
1369
A Viet Nam draft dodging puke like Trump is macho?
Only in his Walter Mitty imagination.
Only in his Walter Mitty imagination.
153
He knows how to play one on tv.
41
What is crazy about this is that if Obama uses executive orders to enact needed change he is called a dictator by the right, and if his attempts to enact change cannot be enforced except by a vote of Congress, he can't accomplish much of anything and is called a weak leader by Trump. Obama can't win no matter what he does. At the same time, a Congress who won't vote whether or not to authorize force against ISIS is the weakest leadership of all.
1107
But of course Trump knows nothing of this, and recently didn't even know that Russia had invaded Ukraine two years ago in taking Crimea. All he knows is Putin's power and the 82% poll support, which he also knows and has thought nothing more about. And because he is a narcissist, what he sees in Putin is a projection of himself—he would like to be that powerful and that popular. So if Putin calls him a name that can mean "brilliant" or "flashy", he chooses "brilliant" and thinks Putin also admires him as much as Donald admires himself. Sad, yes, but extremely dangerous.
100
Whenever putin does something that makes some sort of sense, some of my friends wish that our president could be like him. My reminders that he poisons people or has them assassinated or imprisoned seem not to influence many. One thing that needs discussing is whether he provides edward snowden with anything more than a refuge. Is that refuge temporary? Conditional?
19
Mr Krugman describes Putin well as well as the Trump's attitude toward the dictator. However, he avoids an eerie issue - just how many citizens are ready to abandon their freedom to an autocrat in the hope he'll make them feel safe. It's relatively easy to describe what Trump's fawning admiration of Putin says about himself. It's harder to know what voters' support for Trump says about America. We'll learn a lot the first Tuesday of November.
48
Popular vote
Nate Silver calls
Hillary Clinton
46.7%
Donald Trump
43.1%
Gary Johnson
8.9%
Yikes! If the Fascists and the Ignoramuses join forces, we are doomed.
Nate Silver calls
Hillary Clinton
46.7%
Donald Trump
43.1%
Gary Johnson
8.9%
Yikes! If the Fascists and the Ignoramuses join forces, we are doomed.
3
Russia and Putin are exactly what you say they are. But for the USA as it is now stationed politically and economically isn't Russia exactly the kind of large developing economy that the USA needs to feed the kind of economic growth that the USA desperately needs? If we forget about the murders and imprisonments, if we forget about the kleptocracy and the oversized power of Russia's job creators and its right wing plutocrats isn't Russia the exact economy and political structure that America needs to maintain and grow its economy and bring back to life the 20th century economy Americans need and are promised?
4
We're all in the 21st century here, where state-sponsored murder and denial of human rights, along with the other hallmarks of virulent power abuse you blithely suggest we "forget about," are moral and political impediments to "feeding" off a country's economy. But let's try this little experiment of see-no-evil for a second. One still can't overlook the fact that what we are supposed to consider as a "large, developing economy" is, as Mr. Krugman points out, neither. I can't think of anyone is this century, the past century, or any other century who would have, has or might now suggest the current Russia as a model for anything one needs or should be promised. Oh wait--I'm forgetting Donald Trump. He has a lot to say about what Americans need, alot of promises for them, all of which would send them right back into the 20th century--round about 1929, say.
10
jb,
I lived on Chicago's South Side what is happening to America's underclass as what happen to Brazil's underclass not too many years ago the culling of young males. Here in Canada we are just beginning to try and stop a five hundred year genocide.
The contempt we show by our need to instill our cultural and social values on societies that have leaders that are just as smart and just as competent as our own is a crime against humanity.
I know many of the parole officers, teachers, bureaucrats we send to people not like ourselves. It is murder and it is political.
I am sorry if satire and irony are dead in 21st century America but I am more afraid of McConnell and Ryan than I am of the current incarnation of the KGB.I am more afraid of Trump than I am of Putin.
I am not suggesting that you or anyone else emulate Russia but I am suggesting that it seems to me that the values of the Russian Plutocracy are not in any way different from the GOP and a large segment of the Democratic party. Remember the lifeboats on the Titanic and good luck to those in steerage.
I lived on Chicago's South Side what is happening to America's underclass as what happen to Brazil's underclass not too many years ago the culling of young males. Here in Canada we are just beginning to try and stop a five hundred year genocide.
The contempt we show by our need to instill our cultural and social values on societies that have leaders that are just as smart and just as competent as our own is a crime against humanity.
I know many of the parole officers, teachers, bureaucrats we send to people not like ourselves. It is murder and it is political.
I am sorry if satire and irony are dead in 21st century America but I am more afraid of McConnell and Ryan than I am of the current incarnation of the KGB.I am more afraid of Trump than I am of Putin.
I am not suggesting that you or anyone else emulate Russia but I am suggesting that it seems to me that the values of the Russian Plutocracy are not in any way different from the GOP and a large segment of the Democratic party. Remember the lifeboats on the Titanic and good luck to those in steerage.
4
Thugs of a feather stick together.
65
Mr. Krugman, you say “..... a few people on the left are anti-anti-Putinists, denouncing criticism of Mr. Trump’s Putin-love as “red-baiting.”
Er, what does that mean? Please rewrite simpler.
I guess an anti- anti Putinist means a pro Putinist. Otherwise they’d also be anti- Putin. So these anti-antis then criticize the critics of Trump’s Putin-love as red baiting? Which really means criticism of the reds meaning communists? Huh?
So are you criticizing the Left, or the critics of Trump, or the red-baiters, or the reds? Are these all the possibilities?
So confusing. How does that relate to your main point—whatever it is? Thanks.
Cute title, thugs and kisses, and cute reference to bromance. You are so with-it, PK.
Er, what does that mean? Please rewrite simpler.
I guess an anti- anti Putinist means a pro Putinist. Otherwise they’d also be anti- Putin. So these anti-antis then criticize the critics of Trump’s Putin-love as red baiting? Which really means criticism of the reds meaning communists? Huh?
So are you criticizing the Left, or the critics of Trump, or the red-baiters, or the reds? Are these all the possibilities?
So confusing. How does that relate to your main point—whatever it is? Thanks.
Cute title, thugs and kisses, and cute reference to bromance. You are so with-it, PK.
2
Krugman's writing is not so hard to parse as you make out. In summary, some people on the left view criticism of Trump's adulation of Putin as hearkening back to the days when any praise of Russia resulted in the knee-jerk response of "Commie Lover." They see critics of Trump as falling into this history of "red-baiting," that is, the tainting of anyone who criticizes the US or praises its foes with the "stain" of Communism. Krugman points out the anachronistic aspect of such defenders of Trump by stating, in clear and simple terms, that Putin is not a Communist or a leader of a rival super power; he is simply a petty authoritarian whose only success has been in suppressing dissent and the free exchange of ideas.
If I can understand and summarize Krugman, it is strange that you find it impossible, unless you are the one trying to be cure rather than enter honestly into the arena of intellectual exchange.
If I can understand and summarize Krugman, it is strange that you find it impossible, unless you are the one trying to be cure rather than enter honestly into the arena of intellectual exchange.
18
Beyond Donald Trump's refusal to show what he earns, what he's worth and what he owes (and to whom), one has to conclude that his infatuation with Comrade Vladimir Putin is based on his financial obligations. He could allay this cynic's fears by releasing his taxes. Donald?
Trump has praised the 21st century autocrats of Russia, North Korea and Iraq. What he's telling those who will see beyond his wild rhetoric is that, yes, he admires the dictators of these regimes because, to his distorted way of thinking, they (brutally) accomplish "great" things.
In Republican la-la land, the right have tossed its party's philosophical dread of strongman rule overboard. It wasn't so long ago when Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan and Bush I built their foreign policies on the handy pile of "what to do with Red Russia?" That the vast country was broken up after the Wall came down in Berlin hasn't lessened the bite in its teeth. Bush II was oddly enough seduced by Putin; he stared into his blue eyes and "saw his soul," or some such nonsense. One can imagine Barack Obama running in 2008 (or 2012) with similar naïve praise for Putin and being elected. Do you think?
Far more worrisome is Trump's trashing of the American president which has been greeted by silence on the right. Where's the patriotism that, for generations, the GOP has called its own? Well, the GOP trashed President Obama long ago so that Trump campaigns on the same basic theme is no surprise.
After all, it's country first. Right?
Trump has praised the 21st century autocrats of Russia, North Korea and Iraq. What he's telling those who will see beyond his wild rhetoric is that, yes, he admires the dictators of these regimes because, to his distorted way of thinking, they (brutally) accomplish "great" things.
In Republican la-la land, the right have tossed its party's philosophical dread of strongman rule overboard. It wasn't so long ago when Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan and Bush I built their foreign policies on the handy pile of "what to do with Red Russia?" That the vast country was broken up after the Wall came down in Berlin hasn't lessened the bite in its teeth. Bush II was oddly enough seduced by Putin; he stared into his blue eyes and "saw his soul," or some such nonsense. One can imagine Barack Obama running in 2008 (or 2012) with similar naïve praise for Putin and being elected. Do you think?
Far more worrisome is Trump's trashing of the American president which has been greeted by silence on the right. Where's the patriotism that, for generations, the GOP has called its own? Well, the GOP trashed President Obama long ago so that Trump campaigns on the same basic theme is no surprise.
After all, it's country first. Right?
360
For Trump and the Republicans, it's race first.
5
Soxarered, you have done it again! Bringing back W's looking into Putin's soul and finding it good told us about him (along with "The French have no word dor entrepreneur) just as we learn who Trump is by his complete lack of intellectual acuity - admittedly a non-value in much of America.
The "soul" of the KGB, another language than English? (You can argue about W's Spanish, but in Texas it's hardly a "foreign" language.) Plus there's always the percentage of congresspersons with passports to explain the choices of the electorate.
The "soul" of the KGB, another language than English? (You can argue about W's Spanish, but in Texas it's hardly a "foreign" language.) Plus there's always the percentage of congresspersons with passports to explain the choices of the electorate.
2
The authoritarian conservative base has produced Trump, who just took advantage of it and pushed it few notches up.
The conservative authoritarianism is the response to democratic process that produced New Deal, Civil Act and Obama presidency. It is the last refuge of poor and middle class white segment of the society. It grew over time and is now culminating with a direct call for a strong leader who would override democratic process. The last straw was the Obama's presidency, and the complete shut down of economic recovery by GOP Congress, so to a large extent it has been engineered by conservative propaganda. This last 7 years have been used to intentionally exacerbate weaknesses of democratic process, impotence of federal government and build the nationalistic and authoritarian narrative for a conservative leader to win election. It seem to have worked.
That's where we are now.
The conservative authoritarianism is the response to democratic process that produced New Deal, Civil Act and Obama presidency. It is the last refuge of poor and middle class white segment of the society. It grew over time and is now culminating with a direct call for a strong leader who would override democratic process. The last straw was the Obama's presidency, and the complete shut down of economic recovery by GOP Congress, so to a large extent it has been engineered by conservative propaganda. This last 7 years have been used to intentionally exacerbate weaknesses of democratic process, impotence of federal government and build the nationalistic and authoritarian narrative for a conservative leader to win election. It seem to have worked.
That's where we are now.
2
You are scaring me. I have read Trump supporters are more authoritarian oriented than Clinton supporters. What do you get when you have a passionate base who seek authoritarian rule and are fueled by a racist, sexist ideology? I really hope I don't have to find out.
52
Saudi Arabia?
10
Justice Holmes - My impression is that the people of the Saudi base deplore the authoritarian rule but tolerate it because of the handouts. Conversely, many of their (often Western-educated) elites question the rigid Islamic code but continue to promote it because, along with the handouts, it mollifies the base. But if this understanding is wrong I am eager to be set straight.
1
Coal rollers?
2
One doesn't have to be an admirer of Putin to deplore the anti-Russian hysteria emanating from the Democrats. Oceania is at war with Eurasia; Oceania will always be at war with Eurasia. All because Obama has a hissy fit when Russia gave sanctuary to Snowden...
10
Really, "abo"? - you think it's about Snowden, and not about the expansionists actions by Russia or the elimination of opposition, critics, and democratic principles? come on.. You're diverting a serious discussion to your 'pet project' perhaps?
32
To say nothing about the annexation of Crimea
all hissy about the Little Green Men invading Ukraine
Then there's the assassination of Russian journalists;
oh yeah.....
The military operations on behalf of Assad.....
....yeah, Snowden is REAL BIG in this equation!!!
all hissy about the Little Green Men invading Ukraine
Then there's the assassination of Russian journalists;
oh yeah.....
The military operations on behalf of Assad.....
....yeah, Snowden is REAL BIG in this equation!!!
36
No. We'd be at least as concerned if Trump idolized Xi Jinping or Erdogan, or had some strange love for Saudi Arabia's ruling caste, or Pakistan's ever-shifting authoritarian/military/corrupt governing figures.
It's about the authoritarianism, the corruption and the assassinations, not the nation.
Especially since Trump seems to have virtually no knowledge about US law aside from bankruptcy statutes, and definitely doesn't care that he knows so little.
Bear in mind that in a Trump presidency with a love affair with Russia, Europe will just be collateral damage.
It's about the authoritarianism, the corruption and the assassinations, not the nation.
Especially since Trump seems to have virtually no knowledge about US law aside from bankruptcy statutes, and definitely doesn't care that he knows so little.
Bear in mind that in a Trump presidency with a love affair with Russia, Europe will just be collateral damage.
58
W looked into Pooty Poot's eyes
And loved what he saw, no surprise,
Donald and Russian banks
Have their own hanky panos,
The kind that honest men despise.
He'd love to import that technique
To flaunt his power o'er the weak,
To connive and cheat
Is the Donald's meat
To bully and mock all the meek.
And loved what he saw, no surprise,
Donald and Russian banks
Have their own hanky panos,
The kind that honest men despise.
He'd love to import that technique
To flaunt his power o'er the weak,
To connive and cheat
Is the Donald's meat
To bully and mock all the meek.
241
That elusive hanky panks !
12