What's up with Russian apologists?

[OneGrassRoot]

I'm a little hesitant to ask this question publicly but don't know anywhere else to do so.

I'm specifically wondering what's up with the pro-RT, Russiagate is a nothing burger people on the left. Is it as simple as having been a Jill Stein supporter that makes them double down? Do you know many Bernie people who are doing so?

I know in the early 2000s many of us kind of liked watching RT and similar programming to get a bigger picture of what was being said around the world but came to realize and accept the insidious influence of Putin. (I really like Thom Hartmann and know his show is licensed to RT but is entirely owned by Hartmann's company, which has contractual editorial control over the program, FYI).

But there's a pro-Assange, Putin-isn't-that-bad-and-isn't-meddling contingent on the left that I can't quite wrap my brain around.

Is it hatred of Hillary, since the Putin stuff involves being against her?

[Statistical]

1. They are useful idiots. That being said given their actions I question

how many green party members are actually "on the left". A lot of them seem like self entitled douchebags who want to see the world burn.

[OneGrassRoot]

5. I've noticed nihilism definitely is a strong quality...

interestingly enough in many "environmentalists."

Though I suppose that makes sense; they're misanthropes who feel the Earth can only survive if humans are gone.

Which may be true...sadly.

[BannonsLiver]

2. They're dead inside.

Also hatred for HRC.

[OneGrassRoot]

7. It's sad that I LOL'd...

at "they're dead inside."

But I did.

[GeorgeGist]

3. I'm not seeing it on DU ...

can you point me to an example?

[OneGrassRoot]

6. Oh, not here...

elsewhere.

[Drunken Irishman]

11. Those DUers have long been purged from the site.

They gravitated to that other site. I can't recall its name. People mock it here. Jack Rabbit or whatever.

[revmclaren]

19. I call the site Just Putin's Radicals.

They are frantically pushing the 'Putin is our friend' meme and 'there really wasn't any Russian interference in 2016', and 'both tRump and Biden are the same so I'll never vote for Biden'...yada yada yada...

Same st, different election.



And after Biden wins, they will purge their posts again and try to fade away into the woodwork like last time.

But of course...screenshots and archive.org are forever.

[OneGrassRoot]

24. Wow, okay. Good to know. Thanks! n/t

[Thomas Hurt]

4. Russia went from godless communism to...

an autocracy managed by organized crime and oligarchs, and of course the restoration of the Orthodox church.

That is almost heaven for the right wing in this country.

[OneGrassRoot]

8. Most of the people I see doing this...

are atheist or agnostic. Religion isn't a factor.

But I suppose the horseshoe effect could be in play otherwise, as we definitely see the left-wing and right-wing overlapping about some things.

[Drunken Irishman]

9. These people have supported Russia and Putin since the Obama days.

If you were around then, you'd remember a lot of DUers who defended Putin and attacked Obama over Syria and other issues. Putin was always portraying as the good guy, who got boosted by allowing asylum to Snowden.

That view carried over into the 2016 election as those same folks convinced themselves that Putin was not the bad guy and that Russia did not influence our election.

I think a lot of it ties back to the old leftist love affair with the Soviet Union. Clearly Putin has a similar love affair. They seem to believe anyone who questions his actions of wanting to restart the cold war.

This is where I'll give Bernie credit. Unlike maybe even a lot of his supporters on the left, he does not seem disillusioned by Russia and their actions. It's a shame guys like Glenn Greenwald and Oliver Stone are basically Putin Propagandists.

[OneGrassRoot]

14. Ah, the Snowden connection...

I was definitely around but don't recall those discussions.

That makes sense - about the leftist contingent who bristles at any criticism as being reminiscent of the Cold War. (Though they're oddly silent about Putin's atrocities, domestic and foreign.)

Hell yes about Greenwald and Stone.

smh

[DonaldsRump]

10. On the left Democrats? I think there are very few of those supporting Putin/Russian government

Alleged leftist "independents" are a whole other kettle of fish.

I do not know of a single genuine Democrat who is pro-Putin, pro-Russian government, or pro-meddling.

I agree with you about Russia Today: when RT first came on the air, I thought it was a breath of fresh air. Remember those days when we used to talk about the post-Cold War "peace dividend"? And remember when President Clinton and Boris Yeltsin were genuine friends? I remember in the 2004 Presidential debates when W referred to the Russian midget dictator-for-life as "Vlad", as if they were best buds. Wow, did things change.

I think RT followed that same trajectory: it might have started out as an open-minded and comprehensive news source, but it quickly morphed into Putin propagandist.

[OneGrassRoot]

15. No, not Democrats...

If they considered themselves Democrats at some point, they haven't since 2016. That's for sure.

I'd describe them as the leftist libertarians.

[DonaldsRump]

18. "Libertarians": That's a code word to me!

I've always viewed "libertarians" as either Republicans who are to ashamed to admit or nihilists, who'd like to burn things down.

I did see Drunken Irishman's post, and he clearly has a lot more insight than me, particularly on the historical membership of DU and how it's changed over the years.

In the mid-1990s and continuing for about a decade afterwards, there was a genuine belief that the US and Russia were good friends. And I think it was definitely true with Clinton/Yeltsin because of their warm personal relationship and the hopes that the two countries would become allies.

Picking Putin as the replacement for Yeltsin was the worst mistake possible for Russia and the world. There is no doubt, of course, that he interfered with the US and almost assuredly the Brexit vote. He is the one person in the world who stood to benefit from a weakened US and a weakened EU. It all coincided with the rise of authoritarianism. Without strong leadership from the US, authoritarianism/fascism took off. While I love Angela Merkel, who is the leader of the free world, I don't think Germany alone could shape global forces in a way that the US, particularly under a D presidency, did.

And that authoritarianism that Putin helped propel deeply damaged the complex fabric of international relations. Had their been better international relations around the globe, for example, I think Covid-19 would have had a much better chance of being controlled. So that's what I blame Putin for: Trump and destroying international relations for his own infinite greed.

I wonder how long Putin's going to last when Joe and Kamala take over. Starting a plan to get rid of this awful, evil, and dangerous person is one sure way to start the world healing again.

[H2O Man]

12. Recommended.

Last edited Mon Sep 28, 2020, 09:44 PM - Edit history (1)

Good question. I'm not sure there will be good answers from pro-Putin advocates.

We see the pro-Russia influence in DC, being promoted by "The Fellowship" (aka "the Family&quot . That included the unholy Russian investments in the NRA for the 2016 elections. And, of course, it resulted in Trump's curious "I am the choosen one" press statement. I had done some investigating of that myself, and considered writing something for this forum on it. One thing that I can say without any risk of error is that most of these folks are white nationalists, and they view Russia as a more "pure" state than most modern European countries. More, they understand that climate change and the violence that will soon be more closely associated with it wilkl result in significant migration from those lands near the equator. Putin does not like Muslims, and Trump does not like Mexican and Central American peoples. I think that is essential to understanding why the republicans -- as closely associated as a party with the Fellowship as is VP Pence -- refused to consider impeaching & convicting Trump.

I could go on, but you get the picture.

[OneGrassRoot]

16. Thank you...

I hope you write something about this. I certainly see the "leftist" contingent of white nationalists, though the people I have in mind don't appear (key word) to be white supremacists. They're still vocally pro-BLM (and haven't gone down the QAnon rabbit hole). Nihilism is a common trait though, to varying degrees.

They DEFINITELY loathe the DNC.

Their pro-Assange, pro-Putin stuff has really confounded me.

[H2O Man]

21. Yes, exactly!

You've nailed it! THAT is the real concern ..... it's not the white supremacists alone who are falling into this mental tar pit. In fact, far too many -- and not limited to the left -- are subscribing to this poison. That unfortunately includes a number of elected Democrats who break bread with the Fellowship, too, who are unaware of the series of paths this country is being herded down.

I had a strange experience with a group that self-identifies as the radical left this weekend. Several of them fit the description of pro-Russia, which is sadly hilarious, because if they behaved in Moscow as they did on Saturday, they would be in the ER, in jail, or in a cemetery. Minds that have very little to compare, have very little they can understand. And when gathered in a group, they were not much different in behavior than the white supremacists they crossed the street to insult, holler at, and push.

Again, your question is essential. Yet too many people want to hear the real answers.

[uponit7771]

37. " are white nationalists, and they view Russia as a more "pure" state " and Putin pushes this notion

... often too.

[H2O Man]

42. Right.

[jayfish]

13. Sounds Like Your talking About Krystal Ball.

She's, literally, the worst.

[OneGrassRoot]

17. Lawd, haven't thought of her in ages...

but she does fit the description.

[revmclaren]

20. She's one of their saints

over at Just Putin's Radicals.

[JonLP24]

35. I think the show Rising is a gateway drug for the "populist" right

Saagar is a poor man's Tucker Carlson and they don't have many substantive disagreements. I remember when they were bashing the NBA Saagar said "they won't support a wealth tax". He was wrong on that point.

Andre Iguodala on AOC's and Warren's wealth tax proposals: 'I'm all for it'

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.yahoo.com/amphtml/lifestyle/andre-iguodala-responds-to-bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-and-ao-cs-tax-proposals-if-you-have-to-take-a-chunk-of-my-wealth-im-all-for-it-143609915.html

Anyways, I wondered what racism which the players were addressing what it had to do with the wealth tax.

[The Magistrate]

22. This Covers It Pretty Well, Sir

Orwell's 'Notes On Nationalism':

https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/notes-on-nationalism/

But for an intellectual, transference has an important function which I have already mentioned.... It makes it possible for him to be much more nationalistic – more vulgar, more silly, more malignant, more dishonest – than he could ever be on behalf of his native country, or any unit of which he had real knowledge. When one sees the slavish or boastful rubbish that is written about Stalin, the Red army, etc. by fairly intelligent and sensitive people, one realizes that this is only possible because some kind of dislocation has taken place. In societies such as ours, it is unusual for anyone describable as an intellectual to feel a very deep attachment to his own country. Public opinion – that is, the section of public opinion of which he as an intellectual is aware – will not allow him to do so. Most of the people surrounding him are sceptical and disaffected, and he may adopt the same attitude from imitativeness or sheer cowardice: in that case he will have abandoned the form of nationalism that lies nearest to hand without getting any closer to a genuinely internationalist outlook. He still feels the need for a Fatherland, and it is natural to look for one somewhere abroad. Having found it, he can wallow unrestrainedly in exactly those emotions from which he believes that he has emancipated himself. God, the King, the Empire, the Union Jack – all the overthrown idols can reappear under different names, and because they are not recognized for what they are they can be worshipped with a good conscience. Transferred nationalism, like the use of scapegoats, is a way of attaining salvation without altering one’s conduct.

[OneGrassRoot]

23. Oh my goodness...

THIS. This right here. This describes so much of what I'm seeing.

The pathological cynicism. An almost anti-US position. (Most of us who are informed have a healthy skepticism, and are aware of our country's sins. It doesn't make us fall into allegiance with Putin.)

THANK YOU!

[The Magistrate]

26. The Man Never Grows Old, Sir

As most of his commentary is some eighty years old, many of his cultural referents have become unfamiliar, but the gist comes through.

[uponit7771]

38. "It doesn't make us fall into allegiance with Putin" +1, even among Americans who have a good case

... for doing so, we see the promise in perfecting the union.

[JonLP24]

25. I think skepticism is healthy

But you're right there is a lot of Russia denial. Some think it is the Democrats coming up with this stuff when it was FBI Counterintelligence & other agencies investigating Russian interference.

Others severely downplay it.

I think it has to do with what Russia gave Wikileaks on the DNC but they even defended Russia over Ukraine and I even fell in that trap but Russia keeps doing things that cause them to lose whatever moral high ground they ever have.

Also you have people that try to portray Assad as some innocent person when he is one of the world's worst human rights violators.

[OneGrassRoot]

27. Very true...

and I agree having a healthy degree of skepticism is a positive thing, and believe most of us do so.

[regnaD kciN]

28. The only individual I know in person who held that line...

...was someone who was big for Sanders in the 2016 primaries but rejected him as "just as corrupt as the rest of them" when he endorsed Clinton before the election. Since then, that person got really into video commentaries from Jimmy Dore, who not only seems to hold that the mainstream Democratic leadership is too centrist and tied to big money, but also wants to claim that this was the only reason for the 2016 loss. They really seem to see it as an either/or: that, if you hold that Russia interfered in the election, you're saying that none of the criticisms of the Democratic establishment have any validity at all (whereas most criticism from the left doesn't hold to such a strict dichotomy -- those in that section, like myself, think it undeniable that Russia interfered, and may have been the critical factor in the election's outcome, while at the same time granting that the 2016 campaign was a weak effort that alienated some crucial traditionally-Democratic voting blocs, allowing Trump to stay close enough that Russia could steal it in the end).

Like I said, this is only one person, but I've seen enough others online with the same talking points that I assume it's the dogma held by at least a small-but-significant group.

Incidentally, the individual I mentioned is backing Biden this time around; even though they think he's "just another conservative," they see that as infinitely preferable to the "fascist" we're stuck with now.

[OneGrassRoot]

29. You described it perfectly...

"...if you hold that Russia interfered in the election, you're saying that none of the criticisms of the Democratic establishment have any validity at all (whereas most criticism from the left doesn't hold to such a strict dichotomy -- those in that section, like myself, think it undeniable that Russia interfered, and may have been the critical factor in the election's outcome, while at the same time granting that the 2016 campaign was a weak effort that alienated some crucial traditionally-Democratic voting blocs, allowing Trump to stay close enough that Russia could steal it in the end."

THAT is what I have observed that I've been trying to nail down, and your description here hits the nail on the head. I think that's largely it in the people I'm thinking of, although there is an intellectual elitism involved with others I follow and the Orwell quote which The Magistrate shared above is also applicable.

I'm glad your friend recognizes the fascism that is here and wants to help stop it. Yay!

[Azathoth]

30. Putin is magnet for anti-Democratic Party cranks

The Stein/Greenwald "left" are far more interested in destroying the Democratic Party than they are in defeating Republicans.

[OneGrassRoot]

32. The Anti-Dem vibe is veryyyyy strong...

I read a few months ago that part of the social media disinformation strategy wasn't to so much prop up the GOP but was instead to tear down Democrats. There is fertile ground for that and I find it especially vicious. As mentioned above, I sense nihilism.

[JonLP24]

36. They have messages for both sides

During Ukraine Russia told the left the problem in Ukraine was nationalist neo Nazis. When it came to the right they blamed it on Jewish Oligarchs. This was reported in the HBO documentary Agents of Chaos. It was also true many on the left did blame the situation in Ukraine on neo nazis.

A lot of reports out there that they do specifically favor Trump. The GOP troll accounts were far more popular. One gained 10,000 followers in a week tweeting on #BasketofDeplorables (which Russian trolls got trending).

When it comes to the left I blame Greenwald, Jimmy Dore, Aaron Mate, etc for Russia denial. However, liberals/progressives hating the Third Way or moderate Democrats predates Russian interference. A lot of them blame Bill Clinton for changing the party into a centrist party. Anyways, that is what I learned from reading DU and left wing circles for about 12 years.

[OneGrassRoot]

43. Thank you...

and thank you for the information upthread too.

[JI7]

31. Many of them as bought and paid for also. Their goal is also Republicans

in office.

[OneGrassRoot]

33. You mean the actual politicians and pundits?

Yes, I can see that.

[betsuni]

34. They can't admit to themselves they've been manipulated by Russian propaganda.

They believe things that aren't true. That Democrats have the same economic policies as Republicans. That Hillary's policies weren't progressive (according to VOTER Survey data, Sanders and Clinton supporters were only 0.02 points apart on economic policy preferences -- the difference was that Sanders supporters were more pessimistic and imagined they were more progressive). Now the same with Biden (ironic that Hillary's health care plan was more progressive: Medicare at 55 while Biden's is 60). That people vote based on policy. That people voted for Trump because of economic anxiety. That black turnout was down because voters didn't like Clinton, when the reality was that black turnout was up 5 percent higher than in any elections in history in 2008 and 2012 and returned to usual in 2016.

They fell for all the Hillary propaganda. The New York Times called it the biggest trolling operation in history.

Steve Almond tells the story of Jon, a young friend of his, both Bernie Sanders supporters. When he saw him in June 2016, he was impressed by the way Jon spoke of economic injustice. But after the Democratic convention, he changed. Began to link to anti-Clinton stuff from strange websites. From "Bad Stories":

"The Russians made a calculated bet that a guy like Jon, if sufficiently goaded, would shift from an agenda driven by progressive goals to one driven by animus toward Clinton. Jon professed disgust for Trump. But his Facebook page was filled with links to articles vilifying Clinton. ... Here, too, his logic was tough to follow. 'This country can't survive another Clinton presidency,' he wrote to his chat group, who all just happened to be female Clinton supporters. 'Clinton will lead us into war. She'll create a corporate controlled police state.' When another member of his chat group asked him about the dangers of electing Trump, he replied, 'Why are you stuck on fear mongering?'

"I recognized Jon's rhetorical posture from my own years as a Ralph Nader crusader. He wanted to vote for someone he believed in, not the lesser of two evils, But his logic was that of a fatalist: the system was broken beyond repair, policies were empty promises to wage slaves like him. The conservative movement fosters this false equivalence, which breeds apathy and depresses turnout. 'A vote for hillary is a vote for trump,' Jon wrote a few weeks before the election, which is how you know he isn't a person of color, or a Muslim, or an immigrant. ... I only know that he spent hours upon hours online, absorbing agitprop aimed at him, and that he turned away from issues of economic uplift and committed himself, with increasing vigor, to trashing Clinton and agitating her voters. ... Over the course of a single campaign, his immersion in internet culture had transformed him from an American idealist into a Russian bot."

I was a member for years of an international chat group, considered them good friends. But they began to link to those fake news sites that I spent far too much time debunking. From the Snowden incident on, increasingly anti-American pro-Russia stuff. By 2015 I knew what was coming with Hillary, but it was much much worse than I ever thought possible. I lost respect for a lot of people for being so easily manipulated by transparently false garbage.

[UCmeNdc]

39. Agree!

[uponit7771]

40. +1, sounds like Sunk Cost Fallacy where people go all in on a position and tie too much to affirming

... it than the position is worth.

This explains a ... GOOD ... part of Trump support right now IMHO, not all of it but a huge chunk of it.

The rest are like Albert Hess; deplorable true believers.

[OneGrassRoot]

44. Well said...

As with the QAnon cultists, there was something within them that made them vulnerable to believing lies - I believe something deeper than confirmation bias.

[Codeine]

41. Tankies are nothing new on the Left. nt

[OneGrassRoot]

45. Had to look that up!

Thanks for the new word.

Tankie is a pejorative reference to hard-line, pro-Soviet members of the Communist Party of Great Britain. Tankie or Tankies may also refer to: The Tankies, the nickname of the Royal Tank Regiment.

[Codeine]

46. It's taken on a more general meaning now,

a way to reference the reflexive urge some on the Left have to excuse or minimize the actions of any dictator or demagogue as long as they mouth the right anti-Western platitudes, e.g. Chavez, Assad, or Mugabe.