Thread by @petersavodnik

There is a blindness on the new right w/r/t Russia, which they insist on viewing sympathetically. That is their starting point, and it's divorced from much, if any, knowledge of history or culture. It leads to the most absurd cul de sac, in which victim becomes villain. /1

https://twitter.com/DrewPavlou/status/1860416404153131189

The most important thing to bear in mind about the Russian state is that it is basically a criminal enterprise. It has been that way since at least Ivan, who ruled Russia in the mid-16th century and, more than anyone else, shaped its political culture more. /2

Of course, there are competing forces and personalities.

But the omnipresence and corruption of the regime is a constant.

The rise of a world-historical Russian literature in the early 19th c. underscores this point: The reformers gave up on politics and turned to art. /3

The Soviet experiment amounted to a tragic attempt to transcend the rot -- to leapfrog over the western powers and create the utopia that seemed perennially out of reach.

But that failed -- because of problems inherent to Marxism, and many that were specific to Russia. /4

The consensus, among those in the America First camp, is that the U.S. cornered Russia into invading Ukraine, that the Kremlin did what it had to do to defend its territorial integrity and preempt a Western onslaught.

This is an FSB talking point. It is a lie. /5

It is a lie of omissions.

To start:

1. The Soviet collapse was organic. (George Kennan wrote an important essay about this nearly a half-century before it happened -- the "X" article.)

2. Millions of eastern Europeans, starting in the 1980s, clamored to join the West. /6

3. The West, led by the U.S., moved slower than eastern Europeans would have liked w/r/t NATO and EU admission, because it didn't want to take on commitments it couldn't manage, and to avoid alienating Moscow.

4. Russia waged two brutal wars against the Chechens. /7

5. The second Chechen war was choreographed by Vladimir Putin with an eye toward consolidating power.

6. The color revolutions in Ukraine, Georgia and Kyrgyzstan were revolts against Russian hegemony. (They, too, were organic, although D.C. provided some limited support.) /8

There are many other points that could be made here. The bottom line is that there has been, for many years, an element on the American right that has a certain fondness for Russia, which it regards as the last redoubt of white, Christian civilization. /9

I first reported on this element in 2008, for
@GQMagazine.

The story was about American men, mostly from red states, looking for love in the former Soviet Union.

They were precursors to MAGA. /10

gq.com/story/russian-…

In 2008, I found these people not entirely unsympathetic. They were mostly ignorant of Russian history. But they weren't blind to Russian authoritarianism. They had not succumbed to the moral relativism that has permeated so much of the American right (and left). /11

Today, many on the MAGA right, like many on the identitarian left, are so tribalized that they cannot see beyond the contours of their own ideological compartments. They are easily manipulated.

This includes many powerful people, including (apparently) @joerogan, alas. /12

I see that I've lost 10 followers. That's fine, although lamentable. Right-wing tribalists are no better than their left-wing counterparts. They have zero interest in a genuine sharing of ideas or points of view. /13

Final thought: One need not believe Ukraine's history or present leadership is unimpeachable. (Hardly.)

It is in our national interest to defend other countries' sovereignty -- and to communicate to Moscow and Beijing that they won't be allowed to undermine the global order./14

Final final thought: In May, I reported for @thefp on American right-wingers who have moved to Russia in search of the new utopia.

They represent, to my mind, the natural bookend to the 2008 piece I reported for GQ.

thefp.com/p/american-men…