No, We Don't Need To Become More Like Putin To Contain Him

Illiberalism in the defense of liberalism is a vice.


Anne Applebaum, an author whose Central European perspective and longtime aversion to Russian revanchism I share, has an almost comically pessimistic piece in The Atlantic positing that, "Unless democracies defend themselves, the forces of autocracy will destroy them."

The essay serves as a useful reminder that civilizational apocalypticism is hardly limited to the right-populist Flight 93 Election set and that the centrist/interventionist fun-house-mirror image has not learned the post-9/11 lesson that wise policy does not automatically tumble forth from mashing the Do Something button.

"Russia is not the only nation in the world that covets its neighbors' territory, that seeks to destroy entire populations, that has no qualms about the use of mass violence," Applebaum warns in a statement that has never not been true since the advent of nations. "North Korea can attack South Korea at any time, and has nuclear weapons that can hit Japan. China seeks to eliminate the Uyghurs as a distinct ethnic group, and has imperial designs on Taiwan."

That indeed sounds scary. Now rewrite that passage after spinning the wheel and landing on any other year in history. Here's a stab at 1948: "North Korea can attack South Korea at any time (and in fact will in 1950, leading to 3 million deaths, including 54,000 Americans). China is on the verge of a communist revolution, and the Soviet Union just engineered a coup in Czechoslovakia and a blockade of West Berlin while beginning the process of Stalinist show trials across all its imperial holdings. Five Arab nations have attacked the newly formed country of Israel, Mahatma Gandhi has just been assassinated, India and Pakistan remain at war, South Africa has just instituted apartheid, the Greek civil war rages on, and most of Europe still lies in shambles." Do I really need to go on?

We are always, one supposes, only one bad sneeze away from an all-out thermonuclear war, so I get why that can make some people jittery in 2022. (Russian President Vladimir Putin isn't helping such anxieties by generating such headlines as "Russian planes 'armed with nukes' chased out of Swedish airspace.")

But it shows a shocking lack of faith in the wealth, power, and institutions of the free world to gaze upon Putin's military stalemate against a drastically outgunned non-nuclear power with no usable security guarantees and declare that unless democracies make some big changes pronto, Asia's brutal, behemoth backwaters will not just continue murdering people in their neighborhoods but literally "destroy" us all.

Like political apocalypticism everywhere, this rhetorical device is designed to frighten people into supporting choices that in calmer times would be unthinkable. And like panicked (or opportunistic) proposals after 9/11, Applebaum's are filled with government-led force and mobilizations, including those patterned directly on what didn't work 20 years ago.

"Much as we assembled the Department of Homeland Security out of disparate agencies after 9/11," she writes, unpromisingly, "we now need to pull together the disparate parts of the U.S. government that think about communication, not to do propaganda but to reach more people around the world with better information and to stop autocracies from distorting that knowledge."

Where to start? "The Department of Homeland Security is a mess of misconduct and ineptitude," J.D. Tuccille wrote here in 2019, keying off an inspector general report. In fact, a former senior DHS official wrote a detailed piece for Reason in 2015 about "why we should eliminate" it.

And though it's largely been memory-holed, 9/11, too, saw the creation of a bunch of new government-funded, foreign-language, please-don't-call-it-propaganda media outlets. How did those go? Here are our findings from 2011:

In the last ten years you have paid for the Al-Hurra TV network, the Sawa radio network and the teen magazine Hi, among other State Department media ventures in the Arab nations. The TV network has failed to gain viewers and its costs have been going up. The State Department's inspector general says the radio station has failed to fulfill its mandate. At least the teen magazine was allowed to go out of business.

Applebaum wants to "stop autocracies from distorting…knowledge," but democracies do plenty of distorting on their own, as anyone who has followed Washington's COVID-related messaging can attest. Governmental attempts to quash disinformation very easily become governmental successes in quashing dissent.

A perhaps-surprising commonality between Applebaum and the American populists who tend to despise her is that both camps think trading with China was a mistake. "Trading with autocrats promotes autocracy, not democracy," she italicizes. But Russia's invasion, and its subsequent ejection from the liberal trading order, suggests another conclusion entirely: Maybe autocratic countries, seeing the privations exacted on Russia not just by members of the World Trade Organization but by individuals and companies, will take more seriously the negative consequences to aggressive, murderous imperialism.  

As Cato Institute Director of General Economics and Trade Scott Lincicome told me recently, "The literature on the connection between trade and peace is pretty darn good. It doesn't say that trade and economic interconnectedness prevents armed conflict; it just simply reduces the chances of it. And there are all sorts of reasons for that."

Reasonable liberals can agree to disagree (or agree to be ambivalent) about trading with authoritarians. But Applebaum has fire in her eyes:

[W]e can go much further, because there is no reason for any company, property, or trust ever to be held anonymously. Every U.S. state, and every democratic country, should immediately make all ownership transparent. Tax havens should be illegal. The only people who need to keep their houses, businesses, and income secret are crooks and tax cheats.

This is illiberal authoritarianism in the name of fighting illiberal authoritarianism. More plainly, it's nuts. Hungary is a democracy (albeit one that Applebaum claims is "at war with us," which is an awkward move from a NATO ally)—does she really believe that only crooks in Budapest have cause to keep some of their assets out of the prying eyes of Viktor Orbán's government? Financial privacy, which has its roots in Calvinists fleeing religious persecution, is a bulwark not just against despotic governments but also against liberal democratic governments capable of behaving despotically, which is to say, all of them.

Applebaum's radical government-imposed-transparency proposal is going nowhere, thankfully. But the mindset behind it is a perennial vice. When a situation or a bad actor becomes intolerable, there is a temptation among those empathetic with the victims to let exasperation overwhelm intellect, to drive a bulldozer through every real and imagined bureaucratic, legalistic, diplomatic, or otherwise real-world obstacle.

But those obstacles are often key planks of the liberal order Applebaum claims to be defending. Dismantling them makes liberalism less worth defending.

There have been such acts of impatience all around these past five weeks, both governmental and private. Deplatforming RT, canceling performances by Russian musicians, indicating that due process niceties might be dispensed with in the seizing of Russian oligarchs' property—none of this is helpful. Lowering judicial standards and engaging in acts of collective punishment is a grotesque way of objecting to a lawless ruler inflicting deadly collective punishment as we speak.

It's not just possible but preferable to keep our liberal-democratic wits about us even as our hearts break. Russia has a long and ugly history of inflicting brutal war and authoritarian rule on countries that have the bad luck of living near the bear. A century-plus of that has produced a diminished and unloved country flanked by examples of the wealth, democracy, and resolve that come with true independence from Moscow. We need not fear such atavistic outliers; we should recognize them for the Potemkin bullies they are and mindfully protect the liberalism they're too blinkered to embrace.

NEXT: Department of Education Prepares Rules Prohibiting School Discrimination Against Gay and Trans Students

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Putin must be stopped at all costs. All costs...

    1. By any means necessary, jack.

    2. Not any cost, ALL costs. Don't do something, do everything!

    3. It's gonna take money
      A whole lotta spending money
      It's gonna take plenty of money
      To do it right child
      It's gonna take time
      A whole lot of precious time
      It's gonna take patience and time, ummm
      To do it, to do it, to do it, to do it, to do it
      To do it right child

    4. Nuclear War is a small price to pay to defeat putinmanbad!

    5. You talk pretty big but these people are actually doing something.

  2. We’ve already become more like China.
    That’s cool, right?

  3. Only authoritarians can safe us from authoritarians. I've actually heard people say this with a straight face.

    1. Me too. 😐

  4. Complacency
    "lack of faith in the... institutions of the free world" warranted.
    Does Reason have such faith? Really? Or do they just not want to pay all those taxes to send all of those javelins?

  5. Anne Applebaum is a dispiriting example of how a champion of the Enlightenment can go batshit insane at the drop of a hat. That's what's really scary.

    1. Champions of the Enlightenment™ tend to be batshit insane by definition. What else is new?

      1. The label itself kinda screams Savior/Messiah Complex.

  6. Lowering judicial standards and engaging in acts of collective punishment is a grotesque way of objecting to a lawless ruler inflicting deadly collective punishment as we speak.

    The people running this country, and their purchased propagandists, are no different than Putin. They lament the existence of obstacles to absolute power. Their gripe with Putin is that they cannot wield their power they way he does. Their real target, is you.

    1. ^

      And they're worse than Putin, who appears to at least not be driven by a desire to rule the entire world, to not fundamentally hate humanity, and has a personality despite his ruthlessness.
      Our leaders are cruel not out of necessity or expedience, but because it's pleasurable to them.

      1. Our leaders are cruel not out of necessity or expedience, but because it's pleasurable to them.

        If even that. At least one of them doesn't appear to derive any more pleasure from any given action than my dog does from obeying my commands. As long as it gets its pudding cup and to some hair to sniff, zero shits given as to why it's doing what it's doing.

  7. Fortunately, we can stop him just by cutting Russia out of the global economy and starving the people there and in half of Europe. No need to be evil...

  8. Bad news: the globalist push for totalitarianism and subjugation of the world's population into serfdom started, and accelerated, prior to a month ago.
    In fact, none of what "the world" (aka just the anglosphere plus Europe and Japan) has imposed upon Russia in response to the invasion of Ukraine hasn't already been used on us.
    Russia going to war in Ukraine doesn't erase the measures taken against Trump, in the name of covid, to combat "misinformation", or myriad other totalitarian acts by our democratic rulers...


    Washington: We have verified that Russian forces have detained American citizens in Ukraine.


    The efforts of NATO and the western alliance to crush the Russian currency have failed. The Russian ruble currency has jumped back from the sanctions and is now even stronger than before the sanctions were put into place. Now, with demands that Europe pay for oil and gas in rubles, Europe and the western alliance find themselves in a position of vulnerability.

    1. "Meanwhile, Putin’s domestic favorability within Russia is climbing as the Wall Street Journal noted:

      (Wall Street Journal) – President Vladimir Putin’s approval rating in Russia has soared since he launched his invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24—to 83% from 71% last month—according to independent Russian pollster Levada Center.

      Surveys by Levada Center and state-backed pollsters indicate that around two-thirds of Russians back Mr. Putin’s war, which the Kremlin refers to as a special military operation. Experts have cautioned against taking current Russian polls on face value, given that Russian authorities have pursued a crackdown against dissent, including a media blackout of any reports contrary to the Kremlin’s narrative about Russia’s actions in Ukraine.

      Mr. Putin’s approval rating had for the past few years hovered in the 60s, according to Levada, which has tracked the longtime Russian leader’s rating since he became prime minister in 1999.

      […] Levada, which was designated a foreign agent by Russian authorities, also found that the percentage of Russians who believe the country is moving in the right direction increased since the war began: 69% of Russians now believe Russia is headed in the right direction, compared with 52% in February and 50% in January, the poll showed. (link)"

    2. "The walls are closing in!"

      1. Russians should've switched to BTC, then their currency *and freedom* would be up 17% since starting the war, right?

        1. Yes, mad.casual, cryptocurrencies help ordinary Russians avoid some of the pain of Western sanctions.

          As an actual libertarian, I think that's a good thing.

          Thanks for pointing that out.

  11. UCLA is facing a new free speech controversy after its Director of Race and Equity, Jonathan Perkins, tweeted that he (like many) hoped Justice Clarence Thomas would die rather than recover from his recent illness. UCLA recently disciplined a student for controversial statements, but has stood by the right of Perkins to express such hateful viewpoints. Ironically, Perkins’ office has long posted anti-free speech positions to justify censorship and speech codes.
    Perkins is a lawyer (with a J.D. from the University of Virginia) and previously worked in the General Counsel’s office of Harvard University.
    When news spread of the hospitalization of Thomas, Perkins declared “No one wants to openly admit [we all] hope Clarence Thomas dies. Whatever you need to tell yourselves.” He further referred to objections to wishing death upon others as “silly” while adding a racist attack: “Uncle Thomas is a sexist token who’s committed himself to making us all share in he and his treasonous wife’s misery.”

    1. I fail to see any "free speech controversy". Perkins is clearly entitled to make such statements on his own time. And you are clearly entitled to draw your own conclusions about the political and social climate at UCLA.

      1. I fail to see any "free speech controversy".

        Of course you don't. If you look past the fact that UCLA is a public, land-grant school and then look past the fact that they punished a student athlete for a private phone conversation made from his car that someone else posted on social media, then you're right, nothing to see here.

        1. And of course you do. Because in your world, federal power should extend down to every atom of this country. Like it does in China or Nazi Germany.


    Latvia bans letters ‘V’ and ‘Z’ as symbols of ‘Russian aggression’

    1. Germany beat them to it. Also, no "#Z" on Tweets:

      German "state security" is watching! Penalties for violation: up to 3 years in prison!

      You can take Hitler out of Germany, but you can't take the fascism out of German culture.

    2. ???? ????✌

      - As the kids would say

      1. *winky face* *OK sign* *V sign* for the unicode illiterate.

  13. No, We Don't Need To Become More Like Putin To Contain Him

    it isn't America's job to "contain" Putin in the first place. Nor should US taxpayers have to pay for Putin's containment, or for the refugee crisis he has created.

  14. You know what can make your experience even more adrenaline-filled? Yes, we’re talking about those pump paintball guns. They’re a bit different and more challenging to use than regular paint guns. If you’re looking for the best paintball gun guide or the best speedball gun, then this isn’t the guide for you.

  15. I have thought since the beginning that invading Cuba would be the right retaliation. Our war would be over by now.

  16. "...against a drastically outgunned non-nuclear power..."

    Are we really absolutely, positively, certain that Ukraine didn't keep a nuke or ten, just in case?

  17. Good for Matt Welsh calling out the fools who are canceling all things Russian. That was Putins complaint also. Putin also said that there were many opportunities to listen and accommodate Russian concerns over years to avoid the conflict. U.S leadership has been bomb craters all over the world in the 21st century. Where are the peacemakers? We just want to screw Putin. Our job...screw Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad. All better now.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.