Regimes Around the World Are Starting to TEAM UP (w/ Anne Applebaum) | Shield of the Republic

Video Transcript

Welcome to Truly Right View
Let The Truth Be Told!

Are you ready to hear the real truth unfiltered by bias media or government intervention?
Subscribe to the Truly Right View Channel

it’s also important to to to emphasize that it’s not as if there’s a a secret room somewhere where somebody’s giving orders you know there isn’t you know there’s a scene in one of the James Bond movies where all the bad guys sit around a table and it’s it’s not like that you know I don’t think there’s a room like that and I don’t think they have a they have a a unified command or anything you know it’s not it’s not that level of of of sophistication um it’s more that they see when they have things in common they work together welcome to Shield of the Republic a podcast sponsored by the bullwark and the Miller Center of public affairs at the University of Virginia I’m Eric Edelman counselor at the center for strategic and budgetary assessments a bullwark contributor and a non-resident fellow at the Miller Center and I’m joined in my partner in all things strategery Elliot Cohen the Arley Burke chair of strategy at the center for strategic and International Studies Elliot how are you uh I’m uh doing very well there’s a lot of stuff going on in the world but which we won’t have enough time to talk about but I am very excited about our guest today and uh if you don’t mind I think I’ll introduce her please do so uh Our Guest is actually a colleague of mine twice over um an applebomb she is a senior writer at the Atlantic I’m only a contributing writer but I’ve can get over that um and she is a senior fellow at John’s hop kins University’s SNF Agora Institute and at the school of advanced international studies where I am a professor ameritus uh she’ll be well known to people who listen to this podcast and watch it um a pull of surprise winning author of uh who’s written extraordinarily powerful TOS about uh the goog about the red famine about the the famine imposed on Ukraine under Stalin about the imposition of the Iron Curtain in Eastern Europe and a number of other countries and uh she’s also written some short books uh thank goodness uh and so we’re here to talk about the most recent one of them autocracy Inc the dictators who want to run the world and it is a wonderful um it is a wonderful book maybe I’ll just open the questioning um as as we often do with an author and you want to just tell us why wrote the book and really summarized briefly the basic argument sure um the the the book is essentially an argument about the existence of a network and it’s a network of dictatorships who are not ideologically uh hegemonic they’re they have very different kinds of ideology they don’t have the same ideas so we’re talking about communist China nationalist Russia Theocratic Iran bolivarian socialism in Venezuela whatever you call North Korea um a whole a whole bunch of different kinds of regimes with different Origins different goals different kinds of histories belonging to different parts of the of the world um which nevertheless have begun to cooperate and they cooperate economically they cooperate politically and they also cooperate around their enemies and their enemies are us their enemies are the the liberal Democratic world and the ideas that come out of them and let me I’ll say just a word about what I mean by that these are all dictatorships they’re autocracies who operate their whose regimes or whose leaders some of them are one party State some of them are one man dictatorships um they all are accustomed to ruling without checks and balances without the rule of law without independent judges without an independent legal system um they they they seek to control the information space in their countries uh they don’t have legitimate opposition they don’t recognize any opposition um and so they are um you know they they they they operate with impunity and with total control and the ideas that come both from their own oppositions and from our world argue for something different that there should be checks there should be Justice there should be rights people should have you know should have basic rights there should be the rule of law there should be transparency accountability uh and so you know you have whether you have the nalni anti-corruption movement in Russia or whether you have the Hong Kong democracy movement or the women’s rights movement in Iran all those opposition movements use some in some way or other that that that set of liberal ideas and they push back against these ideas both at home but also increasingly around the world they they see these ideas and and the countries that espouse them as being their Rivals for power and most of them are um they are they are again people or parties who seek to remain in power indefinitely they don’t want to have any kinds of challenges um they seek to protect their power sometimes their money these we we’re talking in many cases about billionaires or at least people whose families and wives and friends and cousins are millionaires um they’re trying to protect their money they’re trying to stay in power and so they push back very hard against the ideas that come from our world and so the book describes both a little bit about how they came to be also how they operate and also how they have alliances not only with one another but they also have some alliances inside the Democratic world and I I’d like to stress that it’s not a depiction of a new Cold War in that I don’t think think this is some kind of geographic you know it’s not like there’s a Berlin wall and there’s good guys on one side and bad guys on the other uh this is more complicated uh it’s a it’s a network they have allies inside our countries they autocratic behaviors and tactics and um and and and actors inside the Democratic world and of course there are also Democrats inside the autocratic world so so the book describes the network its relationships and its relationships to to to us you know I’ve just been finishing up some uh work about the military cooperation among uh these malif factors you know uh Russia’s war in Ukraine essentially being financed by the PRC and supported by dual use Goods transferred you know artillery from North Korea and uh you know drones from Iran but your book really argues that you know it’s not just military this is a group of of uh actors who um go Way Beyond those for and who are actually waging political Warfare against the Us and other democracies every day is that a fair description of what they’re doing yeah it’s a it’s a fair description and as I said especially when you understand that the war they’re waging internationally is the same one that they’re waging at home it makes sense in other words um you know they’re they’re also pushing back against their own internal opposition movements who use the same some of the same language that that we do and and of course they also see us as rivals in all kinds of ways economic Rivals Rivals for resources um Rivals for influence um uh you know and and in the case of particularly in the case of Russia now military Rivals so they see uh you know Russ Russia understands that it’s at war with a coalition of of De of democracies and so it’s seeking to create a coalition of autocracies to support its War aims and I I think it’s also important to say that neither Russia nor China nor Iran um nor even you know even a country like Venezuela necessarily sees those rivalries confined to their own geography or their own immediate you know their own immediate sphere of influence and so the Russians see you know are also competing for influence in Africa as are the Chinese they keep compete for influence in South America as do the Chinese and so they they see this as a kind of global contest uh which you know which they would like to win they they don’t always they I should also say they cooperate with one another opportunistically and transactionally so they don’t they don’t see eye to eye in every matter and they’re it’s not a it’s not an alliance in the old-fashioned sense and I again I deliberately use the word network rather than Alliance or even AIS because I think it’s a it’s it and I and and the metaphor autocracy Inc was also something I came up with to try to describe their behavior because it works functions a little bit like a big one of those big International conglomerates and there are a lot of different companies in it and each one has its own business model and you know they they cooperate when it suits them you know but not all the time and I think that’s that’s the best way to understand it it’s also important to to to emphasize that it’s not as if there’s a a secret room somewhere where somebody’s giving orders you know there isn’t you know there’s a scene in one of the James Bond movies where all the bad guys sit around a table and it’s it’s not like that you know I don’t think there’s a room like that and I don’t think they have a they have a a unified command or anything you know it’s not it’s not that level of of of sophistication um it’s more that they see when they have things in common they work together you know you you really put it together in a remarkably um uh short uh um space and I think uh I think most readers when they read it will go Cy I didn’t realize that all these guys were kind of collaborating conspiring working uh together uh this is quite scary as as as I think is entirely appropriate that we need to do something about this I I am curious whether you think that uh autocracy Inc thinks that they’re they are winning or or do they see this as an opportunity or is it the case that they’ve gone through a period where they they felt that their systems of rule have been particularly vulnerable and so they’re kind of going on what they view as the counter offensive so I so I actually do I think that’s is the latter point is correct I think it is a kind of counter offensive um and I mean it it began some time ago I would say that you can trace it I think 2013 2014 are really important years turning points um and the the counter offensive is against what the Russians called color revolutions um with the Chinese I don’t know what what the Chinese would call would call the you know the Hong Kong um activist movements with the the the the counter offensive is against Civic movements democracy movements um uh all internet organized protest movements of the kind that we have seen breaking out in different parts of the world at different times um they understood that this was a a new kind of problem uh uh I think they understand the power of democracy rhetoric and of liberal rhetoric it’s not always about democracy sometimes it’s about transparency um anti-corruption accountability and I think they understand the power of those things and how those things can move people and and and persuade them to work together and I think their goal is to break up those to undermine those ideas but also to break up Civic activism to make sure it doesn’t happen and as I’m as I’m sure we’ll discuss I think some of their propaganda is aimed at exactly doing that their their propaganda some of the legal changes they’ve made some of the tactics they used is really designed to isolate people and to make them apathetic so they’re they understand that Civic activism and engagement are a threat to them and again they saw this you know Russ Russia saw it in Ukraine in 2014 and actually of course in Russia itself in 2011 uh 2012 and pu Putin saw that happening and he determined to push back against it because because that scenario the scenario of a of an of an organized movement that that has moral power and as well as um and and can and can gain political momentum that’s the thing that he is most afraid of unlikely as it might seem from the outside that doesn’t seem like that would be possible in Russia at all but that seems to be the thing he’s he’s frightened of so do you think that they think that they’ve uh you know they’ve stopped the bleeding that they’re actually being successful or how how do you think they they frame it to themselves and of course that’s asking you to generalize about a whole bunch of different countries where they’re probably different people actually I wouldn’t generalize here I mean I think um I imagine the you know the the the Chinese have have are probably the most advanced in using technology to track people and to track political changes of political mood and engagement so they might feel more confident um you know in in in Venezuela the regime has just lost rather spectacularly actually um a national election so they know how exactly how unpopular they are um and they’re attempting to maintain St in power nevertheless so I imagine there you know there’s a there’s a sliding scale here I mean the B Russian regime is terribly unpopular I think um yellow Russian leader knows that um pu in the case of Putin I I don’t know but it’s hard to say whether he’s popular or unpopular um but he’s certainly aware that he has big liabilities you know that the war in Ukraine is not going remotely the way it was supposed to go uh it was supposed to be over and you know the War battle for Kev was meant to last three days and instead it lasted um two and a half years and so obviously he’s aware that he has important weaknesses um so you’d have you’d have to look regime by regime to ask whether they’re succeeding or not you know an um it’s seems to me and I’m curious for your reaction that we in the West in the democracies have been very slow on the uptake about all this activity um and a point you make is that you know at the end of the Cold War there was a lot of and and with the spread of globalization there was a lot of confidence in the spread of liberal ideas and maybe less awareness that it was possible that in response to the spread of these liberal ideas we could get authoritarian nationalistic illiberal ideas spreading you’ve written about that before um and that they might flow our way um and you know I just if you look around if just look at the election in Austria uh if you look at the recent statements in Hungary about um You by balas Orban no relation to to um Victor orbon that um you know Hungary wouldn’t defend itself against Russia you know there’s no need to why would you want to have a war which you you actually tweeted about and said really why are these guys in NATO if that’s that’s the way they feel but we’ve now got this little block of U Hungary um which is a problem in the EU and in NATO we’ve now got a government in Austria that or likely to get a government in Austria that’s going to be very you know uh Putin adjacent if not outright sympathetic um fito in Slovakia um and now bobbish is talking about coming back in the Czech Republic I mean how do we deal with you know the kind of um calls coming from inside the house as it were so those there’s two different questions there I mean one of them was about the flow of ideas I so it is true that in the 1990s it felt like ideas were going to flow in One Direction you know we talked about democracy moving from west to east or something like that um and it it it it felt like our you know because so many countries had had just become Democratic and because there was a there was a giant wave I mean let’s not forget that it did happen there there was a there was a giant wave of countries not only in Europe but in South America think about South Africa lots of other places there was a movement towards democracy and anyway more inclusive Society East Asia too East Asia of course East Asia um Russia itself you know Russia in the 1990s um certainly there were there were people in Russia in positions of power who also hoped that integration of the with the West with Europe would make Russia a more open place a more liberal place maybe even a democracy and so it wasn’t it wasn’t crazy to imagine that that was that that was possible because there were Russians who wanted it um so but but it but it’s true that the the um we we didn’t account for the idea that globalization is a is politically neutral and that ideas can flow in both directions and once the autocratic World Consolidated itself it too began to look at how to use the global conversation um the the you know the global economy to push autocratic influence and ideas so um so you know so the the only thing the mistake that we made was assuming that there was something inevitable about democracy and inevitable about liberalism um you know nothing is ever inevitable there’s the the nothing happens automatically I’m a I’m a I’m a great believer there is no historical determinism there is no Arc of History nothing happens automatically things only happen because people make them happen um and and I think that was somewhat forgotten in in in our part of the world in in the 1990s and even well into the 2000s when we should have started um sort of recognizing some some of the changes I mean there’s a second thing happening which is that inside a lot of democracies there is there is growing both it’s it’s a combination some in some cases it’s disillusion but it’s also genuine autocratic influence so there are I mean there is a this is mostly a Russian in Europe it’s mostly a uh you know russian-backed autocratic influence campaigns that use money and information to promote the far right sometimes the far left actually sometimes other kinds of separatism they got behind Catalan separatism other kinds of extremism um they they put a lot of money and thought into how to do that I’m not I’m not blaming them for the rise of those things there are other causes too that was one of the topics of my my my previous book um but certainly you know you know if you look at just what they’ve done in our own country I mean there was a major Scandal revealed just a few weeks ago uh RT which is the Russian you know Russian State television was paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to group of American YouTubers based in Tennessee to produce videos some videos about Ukraine but some videos about us politics that were that were accommodating to the autocratic idea so so this was you know enor there’s plenty of evidence the Russians fund quite a lot of this this kind of information disinformation is the wrong word for it I mean I think it’s often just propaganda it’s a it’s a way of seeing the world through an through an autocratic lens um so they put a lot of money and effort into building that they’ve put they’ve invested money into some of these political parties as well and and they do it in different ways they do it through business people who are somehow adjacent to the politicians um actually the Austrian Freedom Party got in trouble for a scandal a few years ago when its leader was caught on tape talking about t you know an arrangement to to what he thought taking money from people he thought were Russians so uh so it’s a it’s it’s it’s pretty common in that group of of in that political world to to have that be the case as well so some it’s partly to do with that it’s partly um um you know it’s it’s partly a the the this I mean this is again slightly different topic you know the speed of change um the the the the the degree of insecurity that people feel because of the change the Nostalgia that that produces for something simpler you know the desire for a simpler form of government um so there a lot of there there there a lot of there are a lot of deeper reasons for it I mean do do be careful because actually other than Hungary in most of these countries in most most European countries if there is a far-right movement it’s rarely has more than 30% is usually the outer limit and the Austrian uh far-right party that just got just was was widely described as having won the election got 30% of the vote so 70% of austrians voted against it um the Dutch far right I think it’s even lower than that it’s 26 27 28% I don’t remember the exact number but they also were widely described as having won the election but actually you know that you know that that wasn’t that wasn’t exactly the result um you know orbon originally won his first elections as a center right candidate originally a liberal then is a center Right leader and then you know it was really after having taken power that he’s able to change the political system to give himself all kinds of advantages but you know you we’re not really looking at farri part ities having huge majorities so that’s we’re not there yet um you know and in most of these countries when the farri does well there’s often a backlash or the farri itself adjusts to um you Marine Le Pen has tried to make herself more palatable and more normal and less anti-nato and who who knows what she would do if she really became president of France but but but there’s it’s not it’s not 100% a bad news story um but it does represent as I said you can see the influence of of Russia and and other autocratic States um you can see how they’ve sought to amplify and enhance existing divisions and unhappiness inside European and American society um and so it’s really a Kind of Perfect Storm in that sense you know on that tenant media Scandal that you were talking about of course uh the some of the recipients uh these sort of YouTube influencers you were describing uh all protest had no idea where the money was coming from although clearly they didn’t do much due diligence because I don’t know Elliott you know do you think several hundred thousand per podcast episode sounds good I mean maybe sounds good to me yeah maybe there’s some money to be made here yeah if you if you read carefully the FBI indictment um it’s pretty clear that they knew it wasn’t normal money I mean certainly the certainly the the the two people who ran the organization could tell I mean it was they I think I I don’t want to misquote the the indictment but they they would they made strange references to the people who were paying them and they seemed to know that it wasn’t wasn’t normal funding I mean the it was some kind of European investor with a kind of Armenian name who sent them a photograph of himself which was obviously a stock photo from a you know dressed as a rich person on a private plane I it was very it was all it was all quite weird I mean there there they they knew it wasn’t wasn’t normal but that doesn’t that in a way it raises the um one of the larger issues which is I mean we obviously have to worry about both our susceptibility to this and what they are doing to us um but I and I guess increasingly I find myself worrying more about our susceptibility to it because as you say even when they know that it’s coming from Russia and when I’m sure they are basically aware of what kind of regime you’re looking at they just don’t care um and that’s not through some occult magic that uh the FSB or other parts of the Russian government have exerted it’s people just genuinely kind of not believing in Liberal democracy and you know that this goes into all kinds of very very deep things including how we educate people you know what we what we think patriotism is the reverence people have for the institutions all all that and I you know one of the you know I think one of the large questions your your book raises is okay what do we do about it and clearly there’s some defensive things you can do uh to deal with corruption transparency laws and so on um there are some things which which are not really the subject of your book which are kind of just strengthening the fiber of our society which I think goes to how we educate kids among other things and what we tell ourselves about our own institutions some of it has to be about playing offense and um I was wondering if I could draw you out a bit on that because you have some discussion of that but I think you’re mainly as I read the book my my feeling was that this is mainly about how do you improve our defenses against this stuff but what are the ways in which we can and should play offense and just to put my cards on the tables I what what stuns me is I don’t think we’re paying playing offense at all you know we’re not doing the kinds of things really that we did during the Cold War without another thought um and whether you’re thinking about the different broadcasting things or things like in counter magazine a whole bunch of different things that we did let alone support for solidarity uh which was kind of a bit more covert um I just don’t have the sense that we’re we’re engaging in a our own counter offensive so um I have elsewhere written about broadcasting um the you know there is this group of you know there’s v v vaa r radio for Europe Radio Liberty um there’s a group of radio they’re really media companies because they’re not radio stations anymore they’re you know they do TV they do radio they do podcasting they do they do they do all kinds of online media um and some of them are very good some of them are less good you know they’re they’re they’re for a lot of reasons hard institutions to run um but they they certainly don’t have anything like the funding of the even just the you know forget about the Russians you know the Chinese State media which has enormous operations all over the world they don’t have that kind of funding um and they don’t have that kind of um sense of purpose I mean they’re they’re you know they’re they’re they’re not there to counter autocratic narratives mostly I mean they still have an idea that they’re they’re simply finding in presenting Independent News which is which is by the way what radio for Europe used to do and in the olden days that was enough um that was that was mostly what they did but they the the the sense of purpose and the direction is still is not what it is not what it used to be um and they they would tell you that themselves actually and and I’ve I’ve I’ve talked to some of the leadership um uh then they don’t really have the funding they don’t have the money I mean there is a you know I think the I think that the US runs um one of the few weager language broadcasts for example um but it’s it’s it’s again relatively low funding relatively few hours relatively um but but nevertheless it exists so we do there there is there is stuff that we do in terms of that but there isn’t a there isn’t a sense of connectedness that the that that effort is tied to you know diplomacy which is tied to um you know our thinking about economics around the world I mean it’s very it’s very sparse and and small and and divided so I would say that I would secondly say that we don’t have um and maybe this is maybe this is unfair of me and if I was inside you know the NSC or the state department I would see it um but from the outside I don’t see us thinking about for example even just take the Russians the the way they think about us um so again for them this is a war the war in Ukraine is uh they’re fighting on many in many ways they’re fighting it in Ukraine they’re fighting it on the airwaves um they’re fighting it through political funding in Europe and America as we’ve just discussed um they’re fighting it through acts of sabotage all over Europe I don’t know this hasn’t really penetrated US news media yet but um you know supermarkets burning down um I believe the this the strange event on the French train system right before the Olympics is thought to be Pro probably Russian again I I don’t think that’s been um that’s been exposed yet but that was the guess at the time you know lots of Acts of sabotage and disruption all over the place weird murders of you know extrajudicial murders of people that Russians um Exiles being poisoned you know so there’s a you know there’s a there’s a way in which they’re conducting operations all over the place and I just unless I’m missing something and I’m not seeing it you know I don’t see it I don’t I don’t see that we’re doing the same thing um I don’t see that we’re challenging the Russians in the Baltic that we’re challenging them in the Middle East um that we’re challenging them you know in the in the many different places is where they are in the world you know as a part of the as a part of the war in Ukraine um we’re very cautious we you know we focus just on aiding the Ukrainian war effort and we don’t we don’t think in that broader way about this being a global challenge um and so I think that’s um you know I think rethinking that thinking more strategically about what do we mean when we say pushing back against Russia or pushing back against China I think we need a broader we need a broader I mean the the the Biden Administrations is beginning to move in a direct in the right direction in terms of thinking about Supply chains um what we produce in the United States you know passing the chips act beginning to understand that the economic trade is not always politically neutral that some aspects of trade have also been weaponized or used this is especially to in the in dealing with China uh as a way of gaining or using political influence beginning to understand that that trade is also part of a part of a competition and a challenge and it it’s not something that you can just leave up to people I think we’re we’re a little bit heading in that direction um but we’re not we’re not there yet I mean we understood that about Russia really too late and it was pretty clear to anybody who was watching that Russia’s gas policy you know it’s gas trading policy for a long time has been you know gas prom was an arm of Russian foreign policy but way too many people I mean we get mad at the Germans for this but it wasn’t just the Germans um way too many people saw gas prom as just some kind of normal company you know but it wasn’t a normal company it was it was owned and operated by the same people who are the political leaders of Russia um so it was both a state company and a private company uh and it was it would it was doing you know was it was it was acting in in in Russian State interests and treating it like it was just a normal company with whom you could have normal contracts um that was a mistake I I think there’s a there’s a kind of dawning realization that that’s the case I don’t know how um H how how how far or how complete it is yet so just a follow up on that and I I agree with that assessment which was really wonderfully put what are the weaknesses on the other side that we should think about exploiting in in this part of the battle space so there are a lot of weaknesses um I mean you know in in in Russia actually the political system is unbelievably fragile so in Russia not only do we not know who would be the next leader of Russia we don’t know how that person will be chosen there’s no succession process there’s no poit bureau there’s no political party um this is a you know this is a this is a it’s a sort of Mafia State organized around Putin but what would come after Putin and how he would be replaced and how that person would attain legitimacy you know we don’t have any idea um and so there is a lot of there’s got to be a lot of insecurity in the Russian system and and exposing Putin’s weaknesses um you know running an information War to accompany our political war you know the the you know the Ukrainian invasion of kusk for example the ukrainians are right now occupying a piece of Russian territory and they’ve been occupying it since the beginning of August it’s now as we’re speaking the end of September um you know that’s amazing that that was Unthinkable nobody could have imagined that if you’d said to us in in February 2022 this is going to happen two and a half years from now you wouldn’t have believed it um but but the Russians have successfully shut down any conversation about Kus on Russian State media so there was some news about it in the first day or two and then it was kind of dead silence um so maybe there’s a role for even even us actors and US politicians at the UN or on the world stage to begin talking about that and speaking about it I mean there’s a you know we the the message that Russia is being occupied by Ukraine I don’t think it’s gotten through to to the Russians and so beginning to point to the weaknesses in the war to undermine them whether it’s through I I know I know that it could be difficult to broadcast into Russia but it’s not impossible um finding other ways to reach Russians talking about Russian weakness um you know when when we can in diplomatic settings in places that get where where that gets repeated and spread I mean I just I just don’t think we think enough in in those terms um all of these states I mean again they range from China which is very stable to Venezuela which is very weak but you know all of these states have inside them um you know other kinds of weaknesses and so I you know I’m not going to say that all human beings want democracy and I’m not and and that you know there’s some there’s a there’s a Jeffersonian majority lurking inside inside China but there is a desire for justice that most people have instinctively you know there’s there’s a reason why a lot of the dissident leaders not all of them but many of the dissident leaders in the autocratic world are often people who emerge almost accidentally I mean if you look at Sana sakova who’s the leader of berus I she’s somebody who was a housewife um who was propelled into politics by an experience of Injustice and it’s a it’s a long story her husband was um upset by an encounter with Beller Russian bureaucracy he started speaking about it he he began to have a a presence um then he was unfair unjustly arrested he’s actually disappeared he we don’t even know what’s happened to him and it was that experience that propelled her uh into into politics and you you find a lot of examples of this that the experience of Injustice pushes people towards towards politics and I think um understanding that um again speaking about it enabling it and we do have in the US and in Europe some institutions that are designed to help people in that part of the world the National Endowment for democracy there’s a there’s a small European equivalent called the European Endowment for democracy there’s a British fund called the Westminster Foundation there’s a there’s a the Germans have a version of it something they do through their political parties I mean some of those some of those institutions can be used can um more prominently more carefully we could we could begin to think about political support for for Democratic movements as opposed to just support for political Civil Society um and also just F focusing on influence where we have it I mean there’s a the Venezuelan election is a really good example so this is a um this is a you there there is a big Democratic opposition in Venezuela it just won an election they can prove they want it they they have the documentation of the from the voting booths from all over the country um Maduro who’s the dictator of Venezuela is not uh is refusing to step down um you know there’s there are a couple of crunch points coming um you know where is the where is the organized pressure from both South American and European Democracies you know where is the targeted um uh you know uh you know the targeted sanctions in response I mean it’s been a little weak that response I mean I think it’s been somehow outsourced people hoped that the Brazilians would deal with it they haven’t wanted to um you know there’s a there there’s a missing sense of urgency and not it’s not just in the United States it’s broader than that I mean it it’s almost as if I I I sometimes feel right now that there is this because there are so many different crises I mean there’s there’s a middle eastern crisis which we haven’t even talked about yet there’s a there’s a Ukraine crisis um it’s almost as if a lot of other smaller uh autocratic regimes are seeing this as a moment when they can take advantage of distraction I would say Venezuela aeran you know the invasion of negoro carab I mean a lot of these things are happening on the fringes now because it feels like a moment when people think they can get away with it and T taking control of that narrative is is is really important and I wonder you know you um you talk a lot about um Russia’s unique role in uh autocracy Inc um and I I wonder if you could talk a little bit about that mean you do a marvelous job of drawing out as the late Karen dawisha did and Katherine Belton the rise of this um personalistic Mafia State around around Putin but you make a very important point that I’d also like you to maybe talk about a bit which is that we do not have Clean Hands in this in the west uh you know both in the US and particularly in London you know uh this kleptocratic regime came to power and has held power um by using uh Western institutions whether it’s financial institutions Banks um whether it’s real estate trans you know anonymized anonymized real estate transactions um Regulators looking the other way um there’s a whole sort of uh you know sort of panoply of of Institutions that appear to have really failed to protect us uh you know from from this and I I wonder if you could talk about that a little bit so I think most Ordinary People Who operate in the real economy who pay taxes who try to comply with regulations who operate their companies or their businesses or their or their or their careers inside the law I think most of us don’t realize that there is also another world there is a kind of alternate economy that exists alongside our our regulated transparent economy um people who write about it have tried to give it a name Oliver bulock who’s a Great British journalist calls it moneyland and there’s another former Financial Times journalist called Tom burges who calls it kpopia and this is the this is the offshore world so the world where you can hide money in tax Havens where you can dodge tax where you can operate through shell companies these are anonymously owned companies whose whose true or orins can sometimes are are concealed behind layers of Law and layers of layers of secrecy um that you’re allowed to buy property um in inside the U certainly the US and the UK but other other European countries as well through these vehicles so you have the phenomenon of big houses in central London that are owned by Anonymous shell companies um or houses in the south of France owned by we don’t know who or indeed condos in Trump owned or Trump branded buildings that have been bought by Anonymous companies we don’t know from where and we don’t know for what purpose and the fact that that economy exists alongside ours is actually to me the more I think about it the more I learn about it is nonsensical why should it exist at all why why do why do we need Anonymous companies why do we need uh why do we need offshore offshore financing of any kind I mean you can ask people in those worlds you know I ask people all the time what’s give the real what’s the necessity for it and people can come up with things you know that the celebrities need to hide where they’re you know what property they are okay I mean I can see okay there’s some exception for Taylor Swift maybe you know but but but but none of them justify the damage that’s being done by the existence of this world there are some accounts that think that something like eight or 10% of the world’s GDP is hidden away in tax Havens um that’s an enormous amount of money an enormous amount of of untransparent wealth and a lot of that wealth comes from the autocratic World a lot of this wealth stolen from Angola or uh Zimbabwe or Russia or Kazakhstan uh and hidden in other places a lot of it is then used to enrich people to keep them in power some of it turns into dark money and and strange funding projects inside the Democratic world I mean all of it should be shut down uh and and could be shut down if we had the political will to do it um and that’s one of the one of the arguments of the book and as I the the more I learn about this world and the more I’m aware of it and I understand how it developed and it and it did develop it is kind of a it was a kind of Russian Russian Western joint project initially I mean you know that the world it existed on the margins of international finance for a long time it just wasn’t very important and it was really the post Soviet world understood how you could how you could use you know secrecy in order to enrich yourself and stay in power and I think we could eliminate it and there again there are few politicians there are few you know members of Congress who understand this actually I think the Biden Administration has talked about it and understood it they just didn’t make it a huge priority but um people understand it they just haven’t prioritized it yet and one of the arguments of the book is that that’s you know that’s something we can do immediately you you know what one of the places uh which you’re intimately familiar with where that’s been the case is of course Great Britain uh and particularly London and I’m just you know since you spent a fair amount of time there you were I think I forgot to mention you were what an associate editor of The Spectator I was the foreign editor of The Spectator foreign editor of The Spectator um no sorry and the deputy edit of The Spectator at one point whoa all right well you just get more impressive the longer I talk to you this is like in the mid90s so yeah um uh what what is your take on where the Brits are because you you know periodically you get a sense that people are kind of look around and say this is lunacy of course you know they first they had a big wave of money from the Persian Gulf uh and there was a lot of discussion about that um I mean do you see other governments and we’ll just stick with the British government for the moment actually beginning to take this seriously I mean part of what I’m trying just trying to figure out is is the tide moving in our Direction or against us so people have people have begun to take it seriously David Cameron talked a lot when he was prime minister talked about pushing back against corruption there were they they tightened up some of the laws on Anonymous companies I I I I just spoke to somebody recently I I I wrote about this in the financial times a few weeks ago um there are there are measures have been taken so that when you register a company in Britain you have to put down I mean I think literally it’s just your name and address address you have to show some kind of ID uh now people are trying to find ways around it but there’s a they’re beginning to be measures like that um Kier starmer who is now the new British prime minister is somebody who was a former human rights lawyer and he was a former he was the crown he was in effect the chief prosecutor that he was in effect attorney Attorney General that’s not the titles work differently in Britain um of you know in Britain um so he’s somebody who has a rule of law in his DNA and he’s somebody who has also talked about about pushing back against this world David Lamy who’s the foreign secretary has has as well so there is some there is some chance that they will begin to tighten up I mean the the trouble is there is a big Lobby pushing back against it it’s the and the lobby is the lobby is is not um is not coming from Russia I mean the lobby is the real estate industry in Britain um I don’t know the the you know their lawyers and accountants and all kinds of professional group groups who make a lot of money from moneya laundering mean the moneya laundering is a huge business in Britain and the in the in the city of London and and and there you know and and and they’re pushing back uh so you know so we we aren’t quite at the Tipping Point yet um to me what’s one of the things that’s mysterious about British politics is why this hasn’t become a bigger political issue in that you know there are there’s an impact in London London is unaffordable for young people you know it’s a Central London has been completely occupied by foreigners and a lot of them a lot of them you know anonymously owned you know Anonymous companies owning property I don’t know why there’s not a bigger backlash coming from young people why why it’s not a more Central issue even just in the in the politics of London um I have one friend actually who ran uh during the during the most recent parliamentary election who ran a campaign uh you you using using a lot of that language unfortunately he lost but that was for other reasons but but it’s a it’s it’s a mystery as to why it’s not a higher rank political issue and I I thought a lot about it I think some of it is to do with the complication you know once you start talking about shell companies even explaining what it is and how they work is difficult unraveling how these schemes work is very complicated it’s hard even for professional journalists and very time consuming um the the Articles and books that get written about it can be hard to understand I mean it’s a it’s a very complicated World um but I you know I I really think this is a this is a problem that somehow needs its idealog I mean I’m waiting for someone to you know create slogans about it and and persuade people to bring it to an end and isn’t it also the case though that um in some instances um the Russians have used Britain’s um very favorable uh Lial laws from their point of view to wage lawfare against against people who’ve written about this stuff I mean Karen dosh’s book was originally supposed to be published by a different publisher a giant lawsuit in British courts uh changed to who she ended up publishing with cther belther belton’s book of course uh uh Roman Abramovich took her to took her to court um uh it’s so there’s that and then there was this very unusual I mean there was this British parliamentary inquiry into all the dirty money dirty Russian money in London which Boris Johnson while he was prime minister basically kept from being you know seeing the light of day I mean there does seem to be some tentacles into at least the Tory party that also explain some of this isn’t that fair yeah no no that’s fair I mean there you know some some of it is you know it doesn’t take very much money to influence British politics so some of it is Russians with British passports who now live in the UK who make political donations some of it is ties of friendship I mean actually the the the leading candidate to be the next leader of the Tory party is somebody whose wife has she’s who’s a lawyer who’s done a lot of business with Russian oligarchs in the past I mean there’s lots and lots of people at this point in history have professional or personal ties uh to that world and are not anxious for those to be revealed and are not anxious to push back against the people people who were their friends or who were important to them financially or politically or or in business terms so yeah and I mean there’s a you know I I I I don’t think it’s fair to say there’s it’s not as if there’s a it’s it’s you know there aren’t they aren’t agents it doesn’t work like spies it’s not a it’s not a nest of secret you know Russian agents inside the Tory party I don’t think it works like that but there is a there’s a wider broader web of influence that that that prevents people from wanting to make this stuff too transparent let me U shift to something um a little bit different you know you we had mentioned when we were talking about Europe but you were saying well Hungary is different of course Hungary is partly different because you have Victor Orban who as authoritarians go in um in Europe seems to be particularly skillful and effective at being an authoritarian of a uh of a certain kind um to to what extent do you think the the success of aocr Inc has really rested on having a number of unusual individuals uh in the shape of Putin and XI Jin ping in particular but you might also say in a different who have been in power for a very very long time who really have complete control um of their governments maybe not of their societies um and who really have a profoundly antagonistic attitude towards the West in general the United States in particular or is this something which is just systemic I mean I you know for safety sake you’ve got to treat it as systemic so that even if uh they go off to their Eternal rewards you know you’re still prepared to to fight against it but do you think we’re looking at a just you know kind of a period in history where uh you have a couple of very powerful very solidly established you know particularly dangerous autocrats that we up against I mean though haven’t haven’t there always been dangerous autocrats if you if you look back in human history most people in most eras throughout the last 10,000 years or so have lived in societies run by autocrats um that’s that’s in some ways the normal form of human society whether it’s a warlord or whether it’s a king or whether it’s a you know whether it’s a dictator that’s that’s how most of human history been organized and whether they’re whether they’re competent or incompetent or or charismatic or not has sometimes depended on you know on on the system and the situation but but that’s the I mean I think that’s the that’s something we need to remember is that what we have um liberal societies open societies that that are in which we ordinary people have some influence over who gets to lead and in which we enjoy rights that are are enshrined by legal system this is very unusual um and so it’s it’s it’s our societies that are unique and and and require special thought and protection and and I think what what is Arisen elsewhere is is just normal I mean um maybe you know it’s true that the there are some aspects of modern technology that that that are that are clearly working in their favor so the the the massive surveillance state that the Chinese have been able to construct which is both online and offline and and increasingly linked where people can be tracked online and then their movements can be tracked through the transportation system um and their you know their consumer purchases and you know everything every everything can be known about a single person by the Chinese State and that’s something that we don’t have any at any moment before in human history um and that system has certainly you know enabled the both the Chinese communist party and she himself to maintain a kind of control that would have been Unthinkable maybe even a few years ago um and you know the the Russian use of online manipulation their their understanding of how to how to make social media work for them I mean that’s also a some of some of that is also to do with um modern technology so so so there so so both I’d say both that it’s normal but also that there are techn logical reasons why it’s easier at the moment for these kinds of leaders to stay in power and we’re running out of time and we could I think Elliot and I could go on with you probably for two or three hours but before we let you go um one of the really powerful parts of the book I um thought was your discussion about the narratives that our adversaries are trying to export to us uh and that they rely essentially on obliterating the truth and breeding as you were saying earlier hopelessness and and cynicism and they do this through uh what you were describing as information laundering um you know creating fake news sites fake press agencies spreading these stories around um and you make a fascinating point that uh first of all Russia is now piggybacking on some of the sort of global infrastructure for spreading this that that the PRC created but also that the PRC is increasingly picking up some of the tactics um that Russia has been using and beginning to use them as well I wonder if you could just yeah so so so this is so it was possible to say a few years ago the Chinese had created this huge International media apparatus it’s television stations radio stations websites all news agency shinan news agency and many many languages lots of African languages um very developed and I think until pretty recently most of it was pretty boring you know the the the news stories about the Chinese trade Envoy appearing in Sierra Leon and you know wasn’t wasn’t too it wasn’t too exciting um the Venezuelans did a similar thing they created a a network in in South a South um South America there there were these n the Iranians have something as well so there was a they existed but they weren’t um you know they were they you know they were they were maybe of dubious use much more recently first of all they’ve begun to work together so they they they will spread the same narratives and you’ll see telesur which is the Venezuelan operation picking up stuff from from the Russian um you know Russian Media or from the Chinese media um and they’ve also beg to share tactics and technology so the the example that I use in the book is a story that was um briefly important at the very beginning of the Ukraine war the the Ukraine fullscale Invasion which was the story of supposed biological Laboratories that the US was supposed to have in Ukraine and it was completely fake there are no biological weapons Laboratories I mean of course Ukraine has some Laboratories like every other country on the planet um but we were not building biological weapons in Ukraine this was repeatedly debunked including at the UN and including at the security Council nevertheless um you know the Russians continued to repeat the story and the Chinese put the story out on their International media so their you know their huge web of of of TV and radio and and you know then and then of course it was picked up by others and I you can find it in in in in Spanish language Publications in Latin America you can find it all over Africa and so on so the so the so I use that story to illustrate how a rumor like that can spread through these interlocking in you know interconnect networks just because it’s of interest to um you know to to to them to use it and I think the larger point is to understand what is the ultimate purpose and the purpose is to build uh a kind of autocratic narrative I you know there there are many different arguments and there are many different you know stories that are told every day and so on but there’re they’re built around a basic structure and the structure is an argument that autocracies are stable and safe and democ rcy is divided and and violent and dangerous and degenerate by which sometimes they mean sexually degenerate and they build on this they work on it they sell it at home they sell it abroad they sell it through their different kinds of stories you know they again telling stories about the irresponsible Americans building biological weapons at laboratories in Ukraine that’s a that’s a piece of this larger narrative um and that’s the you know you can you can and then you can then look at the many different ways in which this these kinds of stories are told some of them as I say overtly Chinese State media some of them covertly information laundering websites that look like they’re native to Ecuador or or or or or the Arabic language world and actually everything’s written in Moscow I mean there’s a there’s a version like that there’s some crudder versions um you know and then there there there are projects like again the one we’ve discussed already the the Russians simply paying Americans um to to do it for them so so so that’s the that that that’s the larger project and it has it has many different aspects and it’s something that we also need to consider and understand when we’re thinking about how we do foreign policy and how we communicate and send messages to the rest of the world Our Guest has been an appam the author of autocracy Inc the dictators who want to run the world uh an there’s been a fascinating hour with you thank you so much for coming back on Shield of the Republic and I know I know Elliot joins me in saying we would love to have you come back again uh down the road I most certainly do thank you both very much great conversation

Truly Right View: Advocating for Free Speech in the Age of Political Censorship

Introduction: What is Free Speech Today?

In a world where political discourse is dominated by big tech, cable news, and social media influencers, free speech is constantly under threat. From censorship of conservative viewpoints to the silencing of dissent on controversial issues, we are witnessing an alarming trend of restrictions on the most fundamental rights of any citizen in our Constitutional Republic: the right to speak freely.

But what does free speech truly mean in today’s context? Are we protecting it, or are we allowing authoritarian ideologies like socialism, communism, fascism, and dictatorships to erode it?

The Constitutional Perspective: Why Free Speech is Non-Negotiable

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution is crystal clear: “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech.” The Founding Fathers understood the importance of free speech in preserving a free society. Without it, the ability to challenge government, expose corruption, and advocate for truth would be crushed.

Yet today, under the guise of protecting people from “misinformation” and “hate speech,” powerful institutions are curbing our ability to express ideas that do not conform to their narratives.

Do we not see this as a slippery slope toward authoritarianism?

Shouldn’t we, as citizens, be the ones who decide what we can or cannot hear, not a centralized body or corporation?

Social Media and Cable News: Platforms or Gatekeepers?

Social media was once hailed as the bastion of free speech. It allowed ordinary individuals to share their thoughts, advocate for causes, and hold the powerful accountable. However, over the years, major platforms like Twitter (now X), Facebook, and YouTube have become gatekeepers rather than facilitators of free expression.

Algorithms favor certain ideologies, while alternative viewpoints—especially those with a more conservative or constitutional slant—are shadow-banned, demonetized, or outright censored.

Does this not resemble the tactics of monarchies, communistic or fascist regimes that control what their citizens can see and hear?

Shouldn’t a true democracy allow the free flow of ideas, even if those ideas challenge the status quo?

Social Media Influencers: Fighters for Freedom or Puppets of Censorship?

Many social media influencers, especially those aligned with constitutional values, have become modern-day warriors for free speech. Yet, they face intense backlash, censorship, and de-platforming for voicing opinions that challenge globalist or left-leaning narratives.

How many times have we seen influential voices banned simply for questioning government policies, election results, or health mandates?

Isn’t it concerning that only a select group of elites can decide what is “acceptable” discourse?

While some influencers fall in line with these restrictive policies, others have emerged as champions for free speech, using their platforms to resist censorship and uphold constitutional rights. The question is: Will we support these voices, or will we allow them to be drowned out by corporate and governmental censorship?

The Dangers of Socialism, Communism, and Fascism: A Threat to Free Speech

At the heart of socialism, communism, and fascism lies a common tactic—control over speech. These ideologies have historically sought to suppress dissent, limit expression, and create a monolithic narrative that favors those in power.

Look no further than authoritarian regimes past and present, where dissenters are imprisoned, media is state-controlled, and free speech is criminalized. Can we really ignore the striking similarities between these oppressive ideologies and the current state of political discourse in America?

Is the suppression of speech today not a precursor to more draconian measures tomorrow?

Should we not fight to preserve the right to freely express political, social, and economic ideas?

The Truly Right View: Defending Freedom in the Digital Age

At Truly Right View, we believe in the unwavering defense of free speech as enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. We reject the encroaching influences of socialism, communism, fascism, and any form of dictatorship that seeks to undermine this fundamental right.

Our platform is dedicated to bringing you uncensored news, analysis, and commentary from a truly constitutional perspective. We provide a space where voices that have been silenced or marginalized can be heard, and where you—the citizen—can engage in the free exchange of ideas.

Join the Fight: Sign Up for Our Channel and Newsletter

Do you value free speech?

Do you believe that the right to express your thoughts, opinions, and beliefs should never be compromised, no matter how controversial they may be?

If so, we invite you to join the fight for free speech by subscribing to the Truly Right View channel and newsletter. Stay informed on the latest developments in free speech advocacy, political commentary, and constitutional rights. Together, we can stand against the creeping influence of censorship and authoritarianism.

Why wait for others to defend your rights?

Become part of a movement that fights for the truly free society envisioned by our Founding Fathers.

Will You Speak Up or Stay Silent?

In the end, the future of free speech rests in our hands. We can either stand idly by as it is eroded by corporate and governmental overreach, or we can take action to protect and preserve it.

Will you speak up for your rights, or will you allow them to be taken away piece by piece?

The choice is yours.

Subscribe to the channel for Truly Right View today, and support our patriots shop together, let’s ensure that free speech remains the bedrock of our Constitutional Republic.

Trending Tags

Trending Tags

Trending Tags

Trending Tags

Trending Tags

Regimes Around the World Are Starting to TEAM UP (w/ Anne Applebaum) | Shield of the Republic

Truly Right View: Advocating for Free Speech in the Age of Political Censorship

Introduction: What is Free Speech Today?

The Constitutional Perspective: Why Free Speech is Non-Negotiable

Social Media and Cable News: Platforms or Gatekeepers?

Social Media Influencers: Fighters for Freedom or Puppets of Censorship?

The Dangers of Socialism, Communism, and Fascism: A Threat to Free Speech

The Truly Right View: Defending Freedom in the Digital Age

Join the Fight: Sign Up for Our Channel and Newsletter

Will You Speak Up or Stay Silent?

The GREATEST Trump Ad They DON’T Want YOU To See

Harris holds narrow lead over Trump in ‘blue wall’ states Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin: poll

Navigate Site

Follow Us

Welcome Back!

Create New Account!

Retrieve your password