Economy
In reply to the discussion: Weekend Economists Be Mother May 8-10, 2015 [View all]MattSh
(3,714 posts)Robert Parry hits it out of the park with this one...
Gifting Russia Free-Market Extremism | Consortiumnews
By Robert Parry
If the Washington Posts clueless editorial page editor Fred Hiatt had been around during the genocidal wars against Native Americans in the 1870s, he probably would have accused Sitting Bull and other Indian leaders of paranoia and historical revisionism for not recognizing the beneficent intentions of the Europeans when they landed in the New World.
The Europeans, after all, were bringing the savages Christianitys promise of eternal life and introducing them to the wonders of the Old World, like guns and cannons, not to mention the value that civilized people place on owning land and possessing gold. Why did these Indian leaders insist on seeing the Europeans as their enemies?
But Hiatt wasnt around in the 1870s so at least the Native Americans were spared his condescension about the kindness and exceptionalism of the United States as it sent armies to herd the redskins onto reservations and slaughter those who wouldnt go along with this solution to the Indian problem.
.....
And, while these U.S. economic advisers helped put Russia onto its back, there was also the expansion of NATO despite some verbal promises from George H.W. Bushs administration that the anti-Russian alliance would not be pushed east of Germany. Instead, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush shoved NATO right up to Russias border and touched a raw Russian nerve by taking aim at Ukraine, too.
But Russian President Putin simply doesnt appreciate the generosity of the United States in making these sacrifices. The paranoid Putin with his historical revisionism insists on seeing these acts of charity as uncharitable acts.
.....
Hiatt and his cohorts do acknowledge that not everything worked out as peachy as predicted. There were, for instance, a few bumps in the road like the unprecedented collapse in life expectancy for a developed country not at war. Plus, there were the glaring disparities between the shiny and lascivious nightlife of Moscows upscale enclaves, frequented by American businessmen and journalists, and the savage and depressing poverty that gripped and crushed much of the country.
Or, as the Posts editorial antiseptically describes these shortcomings: Certainly, the Western effort was flawed. Markets were distorted by crony and oligarchic capitalism; democratic practice often faltered; many Russians genuinely felt a sense of defeat, humiliation and exhaustion. Theres much to regret but not the central fact that a generous hand was extended to post-Soviet Russia, offering the best of Western values and know-how.
The Russian people benefit from this benevolence even now, and, above Mr. Putins self-serving hysterics, they ought to hear the truth: The United States did not come to bury you.
Or, as a Fred Hiatt of the 1870s might have commented about Native Americans who resisted the well-intentioned Bureau of Indian Affairs and didnt appreciate the gentleness of the U.S. Army or the benevolence of life on the reservations: Above Sitting Bulls self-serving hysterics, Indians ought to hear the truth: The white man did not come to exterminate you.
Complete story at - https://consortiumnews.com/2015/05/05/gifting-russia-free-market-extremism/