The Road to Unfreedom by Timothy Snyder

Hi and welcome back to two guys one book. I'm Tim and I'm Brian. Yes, because they said in the intro Yes. What are we reading this week Tim? This week's book was the road to unfreedom by Timothy Snyder. Yes, and it is about Russia, Ukraine and the United States. I would kind of classify it as a recent history book like a modern history, right? How what would you say? I agree recent history, especially pertaining. It was a lot of details about Russia and Ukraine and Russia invading in annexing Crimea and not just like what happened and everything but also the politics behind everything and also more into the depth of the Russian mentality when it comes to politics post Soviet Union and that have led up to this feeling of isolation almost I would say that you see these used slowly picking up all these Eastern European countries that used to be part of the Soviet Union. Russia is now lashing out trying to protect their interests and invading Crimea was. One of them and then it goes go into details about the 2016 presidential election, which were interesting and yeah, just like it was written by Timothy Snyder's a professor and storing specializing in Eastern European affairs so seem like very credible guy very knowledgeable and there are a lot of notes at the end of the book to to back up what he was saying because that was my thing is like as I was reading it. I'm like this guy's like. I feel like at times he was reporting certain things as fact when I didn't really see the connection of the dots, but I did the note section in the back. I just glanced at it briefly, I did not go into detail, but it led me to believe that. Before we go too deep into it. No, that's fine . Now that was a good kind of summary of what he was going for. But I think first I'll just say what made me choose it and then we can do our first impressions. So I think it's just an interesting set of topics with Russia Ukraine United States how everything kind of is interconnected. The role of Russia's influence on our elections, our presidential elections, their interference in the EU with Russia the UK and brexit Germany refugees. There are so many different factors here and I feel like he did a pretty good job of covering a lot of them and I do have my critiques of the book. But what is your overall first impression of it?. It's this this book I have an internal conflict with this book because I like the subject matter. I respect the author for being a knowledgeable person. But like I felt like it was kind of.  Kind of drug on a little bit repetitive. I felt like honestly, this should have just been a like a New Yorker article. Instead of a whole book so but I mean I still appreciate it and learned a lot about what was going on, especially the Ukraine bits because that was in back in 2014. I don't remember all those details. I don't remember even the whole Russia Ukraine thing being that big of a deal in America, you know, so. I mean to it was I was very much glad I read it. Yes, but felt like there were definitely some flaws. I think that's a fair critique. There were times where it felt a little like it was dragging to me the Ukraine section. Although it. I found I found it interesting. I also thought it was maybe a little longer than it needed to be because I think he was just setting the context for. How those strategies and tactics Russia was using were applied to the US and the EU but to me the most interesting chapter was at the end when he was talking about the influence on the U.S. Politics and we both live in the United States. So we're biased in that regard, but for me, I was kind of like waiting for that material to come. I completely agree, the last the end of the book I found the most fascinating. Where he goes into the details of how Russia used their a similar miss-information campaign that they used in Ukraine and they duplicated that in America and how we were just totally oblivious to the Ukraine situation. So we were not prepared to handle the rush attack during the 2016 presidential election. And yes, I did find that the most interesting because he had I felt like that was where he backed up. All the rhetoric he was talking about with a little more substantial information about you know, the social media followers of different sites, you know, and so yes, I found the end much more interesting because like the beginning is like the very the very very beginning is about this. Politician Ilion or something or maybe not a politician. He was like an exile of Soviet. It's like during during the Bolshevik Revolution. He was exiled to Germany and like wrote about Soviet the Soviet political theorist. Ya think ya know ya. Well done Tim. So the people know and he influenced Putin like years later, even though a lot of Putin's philosophies were different you could kind of take that and then form it into propaganda for modern Russia, right? So I I mean I think. So the fact that we enjoy the last end of the book is that in part because of all the groundwork Snyder lays in the first third in the middle of the book going into full detail almost singing long-winded at times about how Russia did all this stuff and he was dropping so many Russian names. Could you keep them all apart? I am I mean keep them separate and it's tough. Yeah, it's tough. I think it yeah if the book was a bit shorter and focused more on that material in the last chapter. I think I would have found a more captivating but in general I do think he did a good job of picking important topics and then piecing together some of the history. One other critique I had though was I think he does oversimplify some things a bit and he uses this sort of abstract language such as the politics of inevitability versus eternity. Yep, and we'll go into that. And like unfreedom, how would you just like in my mind? I don't even know what that means. I don't know if he ever expressed explicitly defined the road to unfreedom. What is unfreedom. That is a good question Tim. I don't think he explicitly says what he means by the road to unfreedom like America is slowly going down the path of Russia with our misinformation and not trusting facts and rhetoric. You know people telling blatant lies and getting away with it because no one trusts what's true anymore and but like that's almost like the road to untruth more than the road to unfreedom. But I guess that he's saying that that ultimately leads to authoritarian governments, but you're right. He doesn't say that very much at all. He he beats us over the head with his this inevitability versus eternity stuff. Do you fully understand that? Well, I mean it just seemed to me like I guess I guess my thought about that is should we explain it first? Yes, explain it first now. Okay. I picked a couple of good quotes from the beginning. Okay, so inevitable, it's hard. It's hard. Okay inevitability. He says Americans and Europeans were guided through the new century by a tale about the end of History by what I will call the politics of inevitability a sense that the future is just more of the present that the laws of progress are known that there are no Alternatives and therefore nothing really to be done. In the American capitalist version of the story nature brought the market which brought timocracy which brought happiness in the European version history brought the nation which learned from war that peace was good and hence chose integration and prosperity. That's inevitability inevitability of one for eternity eternity. He says hmm. Okay. So he says in power eternity politicians manufacture crisis and manipulate the result in emotion. To distract from their inability or unwillingness to reform, eternity politicians instruct their citizens to experience elation and outraged at short intervals drowning the future in the present. In foreign policy eternity politicians belittle and undo the achievements of countries that might seem like models to their own citizens. Using technology to transmit political fiction both at home and abroad eternity politicians deny truth and seek to reduce life to spectacle and feeling right. So, what does that mean? That's the thing. They're they're sort of broad definitions. So I think he wants us to consider them more as concepts than a definite. But the general idea I think is interesting because like if you think about inevitability with Americans Europeans a lot of us probably and it's somewhat arrogant point of view is just that everybody will evolve into our way of life with capitalism, democracy and it's just not that simple like with China they've ended up doing very successful in their own way without following our sort of path. So yeah, I actually got another quote that I think help help explains that more as well. Within inevitability no one is responsible because we all know that the details will sort themselves out for the better. With eternity no one is responsible because we all know that the enemy is coming no matter what we do. So, I mean, they're very similar, but just yielding two different results like. My impression is that inevitability means that like, what is that like things will ultimately end up working out things will be okay in the end. Eternity to me is why bother, an individual can't do anything against the eternity politics of history. That just means that the person doesn't matter that things are always going to be. The enemy is coming no matter what we do. So that's a good way to put it. I think it's sort of like the sense of complacency in both areas. So either things are going to end up how we expect or there's nothing we can do right? So so it's rather Bleak I think both of them. I feel like. I feel like I don't know. I didn't that didn't resonate with me the inevitability eternity whole bit didn't resonate with me and I feel like he had to keep explaining what he meant over and over like, oh, here's an example of The Eternity politics that Putin does and and as I get it that's all kind of a point of the book, but I feel like if. If someone if he was more imaginative with coming up with a better way to describe the difference between the west and Russia and maybe like I said before maybe it could just be condensed to like a New Yorker article and not you know have to be a whole book. I feel like that's what drag bogs down the book at times as him just going over and over again this difference between eternity and inevitability. It felt like there was a tension between whether he wanted this to be a historical book or a philosophical book or a political like Theory Book, right? So it's like he couldn't really decide which genre, you know, he was going for. I guess you can almost make the argument that say we're still this is like a living history book almost because it is a lot of stuff that's so recent. Like even Ukraine Russia invading Ukraine was just 4 years ago presidential election is two years ago. So like we're still living in the aftermath of those very current events still so we don't know how things are going to shape out. So I guess he's that's why he's kind of melting the history with the current political Theory to kind of. I guess try to as almost as a warning to say like hey, these are two paths. But like I said, I don't feel like these are the only two paths it is just like I said, it just it's kind of complacent like either way inevitability or eternity. Both options make me as an individual feel like there's nothing I can do and I feel like he should have maybe offered a third route. I agree. I think his thesis though is that we need to take on responsibility and try to see past these two mindsets, but he doesn't really offer what that looks like. No, he doesn't. Yeah, so I mean which yeah, which is too bad. So a little over simplified maybe but let's talk about, you know, some of the details in the book and what interested you, okay? I don't want to skip over Ukraine because I know a lot of that is important. But just I mean, yeah, I mean like that did really piqued my interest at the same time. I was reading about the Ukraine stuff and being interested. I was still like glossing over the Russian names like okay, it's just one guy. Oh, he's talking about this other guy. Now who said these things it's just seemed like. It seemed like he went into detail about the different Russians because he's an expert he knows all the different Russians. But to me, I I keep in touch with current events, but I don't know all the these Russian guys in the Russian government or on Russian TV. And so I just, you know, you get the gist of it that yeah in Russia. They were having a spin campaign to spin it like. Oh the russian-speaking people in Ukraine are being persecuted. So we have to go into Ukraine and help them out. But like I didn't I just got bogged down in the weeds sometimes yeah the names and everything just hard to keep us engaged. But what I did take away from that chapter that I thought was interesting was just Russia’s tactics in general with Ukraine how they would send people unmarked and uniform in uniform. Which is very unlike many other past Wars it seems and so and then run Putin would just like deny that there's a war going on. Which is just it's really crazy that you could have this Mass lie that everybody knows is not true and that still deny it in public. It's like there's these different realities and it's like they just flooded the news with so much fiction and so many storylines of what's going on so that people get sort of bogged down and exhausted about the day-to-day what's actually happening. Right, so and he touched a little just a little bit briefly because it wasn't the point of this book. But when Putin became a rose to power after Boris Yeltsin like the whole chechnyan War.  Was kind of fabricated we when Putin Putin got appointed to prime minister and most of Russians were like who's Putin who's this prime minister under Yeltsin and then they had the Chechen War. Cut and there's a whole good Frontline documentary about this Putin's rise to power or something like that. I think is what it's called. That this Chechen war was pretty much fabricated by the Russian government. So that Putin could become a strong figure to the Russian people and that he would then succeed Yeltsin as president and he was also at the same time a friend of Yeltsin so. He would be okay letting Yeltsin off the hook with some of his more like Yeltsin did some like embezzlement or something like that. I'm not sure that I figured the details but like they needed somebody who was a friend of Yeltsin but needed somebody to promote in the eyes of the Russian people and he touched that only briefly but I found that fascinating because Putin has been. Conniving yeah on many fronts from a long long time. I think I saw a documentary a long time ago. And I remember it was very good something about like they claim the chechens were doing these terrorist attacks or things like that and they get like whether or not that was true. They used it as an opportunity to seize more power and Putin specifically. Well, I mean it was I mean, it was pretty much untrue because like there was. Like witnesses that saw Russian officials leave one of the buildings that that was supposed to be bombed but the bomb didn't go off and they found this bomb and that then they apprehended somebody and he was a Russian operative and also liked it. I mean, it was pretty much fabricated by the Russian government and which is despicable and well, I guess. Should I watch my language on this podcast in case Putin is happened to I think we're not on his radar as far as they can't find us right me to go baby personally if we were Russian citizens, we'd probably be found. Yeah, and we're gonna um, but anyway, so that's just a little bit but so yeah some Putin's been doing this for years and yeah, he can blatantly lying public because they control the media and they can just. You know control what the Russian population see and hear. And yes this and this book made me thankful that I live in America with the First Amendment and the freedom of the press. I think we do take for granted the freedom of speech because you can't just speak out the same way and in Russia or say certain things. I think when one part of the book he mentions that the Russian Supreme Court has ruled that it that Russian citizens can go to jail for posting like historical facts about World War 2 that Russia doesn't like right, which is crazy. But that's the way it is. Yeah, it's unfortunate. Well, let's just think of our list some of the things he's involved in as far as it was like the early 2000s to 2010 era. So he. Supported brexit. I don't know without moscow's help in the propaganda campaign if that would have happened. He supported all of these separatist movements like the Scottish movement I think was one and I didn't really know much about that. But and then just these candidates like Le Pen in France and then in Germany, which I thought was just crazy is that. He’s helping Assad in Syria bombing whatever supplying military things to help produce more refugees because he knows Merkel is going to take them in and that will destabilize things and then regardless of how well they integrate he's going to use propaganda to make it look like these are like very dangerous refugees and terrorists and things like that. Isn’t that crazy? He is bombing. He's helping Assad bomb Syria to create more refugees to go to Germany where he will put out more propaganda against refugees. But it's all a zero-sum game, which is so crazy. It's like Russia can't be as strong as these other countries. So their whole strategy is weakening these Western countries. Yeah, I'm that. It is absolutely right and that is pathetic. Well, I mean, it's we have to give him credit that it's working. I’m not admiring it. I'm not objectively like okay, he's got to look at what's happened with brexit with Trump. I mean, yeah, they've done they've done. Well, I guess from their side. Yeah. Yeah. So yeah, they they've been involved heavily and throughout Europe and trying to destabilize Western Europe and then. Like I said before like Eston- like other Eastern European countries are joining the EU Lithuania Latvia Estonia. I think there are some other ones and then in 2013 Ukraine was up to trying to get their act together to join the EU and that I guess I did learn more about the EU because it's not. there's no like there's nothing. The benefits of the EU the countries get to join the EU to be trade partners with all these other countries, but they have to I think I have a written down so I'll find it here in a second, In order to join the European Union, these countries had to demonstrate their sovereignty and specific ways that Russia had not; by creating a market that could bear competition, an administration that could Implement EU law, and a democracy that held free and fair elections. So to get in to for the for the economic and Security benefits of joining the EU. EU has these benchmarks that countries must meet in their own country to get to be able to join the EU and I think that is a clever way of doing it. I never really knew like exactly what determines the country get it in the EU and why some countries are in other countries are not. Did you know that Switzerland is not in the EU? I don't know you would have thought Switzerland would be but I think it's because they’re neutral on everything that they don't even join any organization but besides that little side note, but but I learned more about what the EU uses as a standard let countries in and join their organization. And so in 2013, Ukraine was getting their act together to try to join the EU and Russia saw that as. Almost like the Domino Theory U.S. had in Vietnam. Like if Communism spread to Vietnam the no topple and go to all these other countries. Russia felt like well if Ukraine goes to EU then that's right on Russia's doorstep. The Russian citizens are going to want free and fair elections. They're going to want you no more equal economy where the rich don't control like there. There was multiple times. He said that Russia was the most unequal country in terms of wealth distribution, which I mean, I believe it from what I other other sources I read and hear about the all the Oleg arcs in Russia. So I found all that interesting as well. Yeah, they make a crazy amount of like oil money and health but something about the inequality is. So they like try to distract their population. I think by just focusing on like the west and blaming them for things but in the US like we have an inequality problem as well, but it's a little because it's such like an emphasis on a meritocracy and capitalism and things like that. It's hard to. To wrap our heads around it, I think and to find Solutions, but you could argue that a lot of the economic issues are the reason that helped Trump get elected like his performance in but Midwestern states, especially and how the local economies and people are kind of struggling right? So I think there's a pattern there right? But yeah, but but it's interesting because like Russia does not target the US on that grounds, right because there's so much worse. They target the West on are more social Liberty socially liberal stances particularly in gay and gay rights that that's kind of one thing that he said that they equate Russia was equating the West with you know, sodomy at one point to us so that everything associated with the West including democracy got a smear campaign because the West is all about sodomy. It was crazy how much Putin like sexualized things in general is he would just in natural or national dialogue interviews things like that. He would just have just a really homophobic perspective and a lot of things and use that as a way to filter into the propaganda associated like you said like West with this, right right, and that's really sad. Because I think I'm sure it's not been good for the Russian people who are lgbtq. but anyway so solely so then Ukraine wanted to join the EU so that and that's kind of what motivated Russia to act and invade Crimea and use all these tactics in Ukraine that the author goes into detail about. And then is the very next step and he talks about Paul Manafort a little bit and Yanukovych the president of Ukraine who he said it way. It's kind of ironic that the country invading Russia invaded Ukraine and the president of Ukraine flees to Russia the the country invading Ukraine, but that's what happened and then then the brexit vote happens and then 2016 presidential election happens. So he talks about how Russia need to needed to create this fiction of trump the successful businessmen and this has been going back for years before the 2016 presidential election that Russian Banks and Russian businesspeople were laundering money through Trump Tower condos and things like that and. Helping build the Trump Tower in SoHo and giving Trump a proceeds alike the profits when he didn't really do anything other than just let his name be on the building. So he talks about all that background to Russians supporting Trump kind of propping him up. And then he goes on to be The Apprentice has The Apprentice TV show is successful that way and then eventually becomes a presidential candidate and I think. I don't know. I don't know if it is it can be known but my question is did Russia did Russia support Trump, give him all this money and everything, in the anticipation that he could become president? I don't think that's very likely. I just think they gave him money and help support him because he was such a predominant American figure. That they felt like if they keep giving him money and feeding him money, then they're he's gonna owe him like there. He's going to be in their pocket for some day like The Godfather. Some day, and that day may never come, I will call upon you to do a service for me. You know, they'll own him. So do you think that Russians really thought that Trump could one day be president or that they were just feeding him money just to have. I think they underestimated how well he ended up doing in the elections. And I think like we underestimated. Yes the people who would vote for him. Right? So there are just so many factors here. I think that led to his election we can go into those but as you were saying, I think it's more that they were just getting him in their pocket and to pay like, Have something on him for later on but his whole campaign was about sort of this polarization sort of violating these norms we usually go by I mean, there are times a couple of times. He like suggested not that discreetly that someone should like murder Hillary Clinton just like I hope the Second Amendment people just like crazy stuff. Yeah, and that's like, you know third world like dictatorship type tactics. And it's pretty scary and I didn't I don't think they thought he would actually win and if he didn't win he said he might not take the election results seriously, which is a huge Norm to violate exactly. I mean, that's just it they ate the Russians were just wanting to upset the apple cart in American politics and boy did they. I mean en and Trump would have done that even if he would have lost I agree. But the funny thing is that might have backfired in the long run really in so here my perspective Okay, so. And I've heard other people talk about this sort of as well. So it's not yours. It's something I've heard and I relate to and I'll expand on it. But basically like they didn't think he would win. So if he didn't win then there's still be all this tension from that base of supporters that that voted for him. So it's almost like this cathartic thing that they let these people who felt underrepresented and under empowered got someone elected and so their voices heard in the mainstream now and like they showed the elite globalist. Whatever blah blah blah, and then really what's happening though is like Trump's popularity ratings in the Republican party and all of that stuff has really damaged them in the long run. So even though he's got he got elected and he's had these few years one might argue that in the long run maybe it's helped our country sort. It's like a virus that you get stronger by dealing with it, you know like vaccine or yeah, I got you. But yeah, I kind of agree with that because like it's Trump did Lucy the presidential election would we have learned all about the nefarious doings of the Russian trolls and online all that stuff? I think we are much more aware now of what information across the internet can do and the fact that Russia was a big player in our on our 2016 presidential election. And if he Woulda lost maybe we don't know all those specifics so we're not as aware so they can do it again in the future. I think I did see a report that like 2018 the midterms was pretty pretty secure. So like I have I have confidence going forward that we know will be better prepared in the future to handle what may come whereas it trumpet a loss maybe would have but it would have been still lackadaisical and Russia would have been able to influence our our populace that but still. Yeah like with Facebook like would they have been held as accountable as they have been without him actually getting elected and and yeah, they some things he mentions in the book. It's like it's crazy that they didn't catch some of this stuff or act upon it. Oh, yeah, there are there are. There are several times when he talks about Putin and the Russian media and stuff the practices that they go they have there and I'm like same thing could be said for Trump. It's kind of sad. Well part of the flaw in our system is that with the Internet it's all about like an attention economy. He mentioned so it sort of thrives on these emotion appeals to our emotion to make us angry or whatever. We're more likely to share something Clickbait type thing and Facebook didn't do a good job of regulating that and because they're not editors Tim. Yeah, you're really a tech company. They provide a platform. Yeah. I am being very facetious in my tone. Well, it's like it's kind of were all part of the problem though is because we let all of our local newspapers sort of die off is what he mentioned which I sort of underestimated that as a factor, but. You don't read that quote about that's a good quote. Yeah, go ahead and porters check finally here. It was a good one. Where there are local reporters journalism concerns events that people see and care about. When local reporters disappear the news becomes abstract. It becomes a kind of entertainment rather than a report about the familiar. That's a great quote. Oh absolutely and he has several nuggets like that in this book that don't even really pertain to Russia per se but are very, very powerful because that is that is so true. It's so unfortunate. Well, it's a shame that people. And us included don't really want to pay for news. It's like if things are out there, we'll just get them on the Internet until we don't have to pay for News. Why would we Tim that's capitalism 101, right? Like if you can get something for free why pay for it. But is it Facebook news, or is it propaganda? Clickbait it have to be a where consumer of news online and. Some places charge you a monthly subscription to view the website now and I feel like that's totally fair. Does that automatically validate their news? You could say no because anybody can charge a subscription for a website, but I feel like. if that is a source you trust.  Which I think is most of them are valid. So go ahead and do. I think they just need to evolve and find a better business model. I know that's an over simplified approach, but think about it think about like music streaming right like with music streaming, you know, everybody wanted everything for free just because it was the easiest way to get music but then you get like Spotify you pay a subscription but with news like I can't subscribe pay for the Economist, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, local news here this edited, you know, like how many subscriptions are there going to be it? A little heart like it's one thing to have one subscription for one music source with Spotify or Netflix and movies. But like how many news subscriptions are you going to get? Well, you can make the argument may be that you'd only need one if you read it thoroughly and it like, you know, the Cincinnati Enquirer. I mean you could have an online subscription there. It will give you the local news and we'll probably have AP articles. About World stuff. Would it be the most in-depth? Maybe not but do you need all that? I would I would argue that and say that you could get by with one news subscription. Are you paying for any news right now? I actually am what is well, I mean, I do get a magazine too foreign policy FP. Yeah, you're more informed than the average citizen. I think well, thank you. And you read the magazine website to they're actually going to feature me in a little blurb on their website because I filled out a survey and first person to fill out surveys is the blurb. That's cool. What is the survey about? It was just like a customer survey. Like are you are you pleased with FP and the website then the magazine? What do. What do you like what you don't like that kind of thing. So I sent a little blurb. I just fill out the survey to do them a favor and then they emailed me back like a month later saying hey, we're going to feature your is okay. We feature your responses on some of our Publications. I'm like sure that's cool. Yeah again easy as advertising. Yeah exactly. I subscribe to Fortune Magazine to like, I feel like so you're saying online subscriptions from news. is still a work in progress. It could be better for the consumer like and I noticed this was video streaming to is it starting to get a little bloated where you have you have to pay for Prime and to keep getting Netflix sling whatever but people don't want to have ten subscriptions going but like Prime they make it part of your shipping package. That's like a creative way where it's yeah, but I feel like it's gone. I feel like it's only going to get more you're going to have Disney you already have ESPN plus but Disney's going to have one. You know Apple might come out with their streaming server a streaming service. So like it's I mean an HBO has one so like you what do you do? You you sign up your credit card to get it charged once a month and you forget about it and you can go on there and watch as much as you want. Well options are great, but also consumers want simplicity and not to be charged bang bang bang like a million times or different things. I mean, they'll find a balance I think eventually but. It's not substantive sustainable to have infinite subscriber platforms. I think but you're reaching the lawn niche of the market the long tail where Niche markets like there's like a $5 a month horror movie streaming that looks you know, like there's like things like that. Yeah, so but yeah, I agree that I feel like there is ice on my argument is that it's only gonna get worse before it gets better, too. And I but I agree that I feel like there will be something after all this subscription. It takes time. Yeah. Oh absolutely. See who's going to stick around. One last thing I'll say about the news though is that I think it's good to have a variety of sources because each one sort of inherently like leans left or leans right a little bit for the most part and. And so if you have a balance then you can kind of way those biases and so I think instead of subscribing to there should be an option like a bundle, you know, you bundle cable. Why don't you bundle newspapers and you pay x amount for that. That would be the best consumer option. I don't know maybe that is the thing. I just haven't heard of it, but right that would be cool. It's a good question. I just came up with a new business. Yeah for all five of our listeners. Yeah, startup gold bundling news sources one subscription you get to the top articles. I think I'm on to something. I think you're onto something will be I think it'd be tough because I think you got decades of culture between newspapers of competition. I'll be tough to find them. Once it would be willing to bundle together. I agree that makes sense, but they need to evolve and you know, I agree. We can move on anyway, so yeah, so then eventually we are we like yeah, so Putin invades Ukraine. We don't really give a shit and so we're not ready in 2016 when Russia attacks our presidential election. So end of story. That's a good summary. Yes. What I will say that I'm mentioning Paul Manafort at the end of that chapter isn't good transition to the chapter about Thrones because it's just insane that this guy becomes the Trump's campaign manager. It's like how blatant can you get Russian ties? No. Oh, but he wasn't he wasn't with he wasn't with Trump for very long Tim, so, you know, nothing absolutely nothing. You know, there's no connection. It's amazing though their campaign. Yeah, he just bought a lot of fancy rugs. There's so much like orwellian doublespeak. So crazy gone is there but the ties to the Trump family are crazy. Like I didn't realize so like selling Trump property like you said in the tower for years and like mobs, so they're laundering money that way and then like Deutsche Bank or whatever. Is that how you pronounce? Deutsche Bank Deutsche Bank, they so they're the only bank that would lend him money because he was so in debt and then they also lent money to like Kushner, Jared Kushner and then like right before the presidential right and then they he had a firm that donated a bunch of money to like Facebook and Twitter and stuff. So it's like they're sort of got a got a hand in that area. So and then and here's something in the. In the half year between his nomination as the Republican candidate and his victory in the general election. Some 70 percent of the units sold and Trump's buildings were purchased not by human beings, but by limited liability companies. That's insane. 70% of the unit saloons buildings were purchased by llc's. which he's not like these are like condos and yeah, how is that possible? It's like legally. Are like the Russian oligarch buying a property for like 30 million more dollars and it's worth. It's like how obvious do you have to get right? Just to mention again on the ties to Russia. So if you think about like. Who's the guy Jeff Sessions met with Russians Rex Tillerson secretary of state was appointed like best friend of Russia. Like seriously, I think I know that was seriously the title isn’t it when he was when he was Exxon see it CEO. Yeah. Yeah, and then he became Secretary of State and our secretary. Like that's a period where so many diplomats like positions weren't being filled. So he just did a terrible job it seems and just all of these different appointments like Michael Flynn people are just having these really strong connections to Russia. It's very concerning. Yeah. So anyway, I think the molar Mueller more molar molar investigation is wrapping up. So it'll be interesting. I were to see where it goes. Everyone thinks their wrapping up. You think it was still going on for a while. I mean. Yes, I do. I think it'll still be six months. At least I had and my concern is that one of my co-workers asked like well, by the time this thing gets done is people are people going to care and I think there will be a lot of people that say hell, yes. Well, then there'll be the middle of the road people that are like yeah, what is taking so long, you know, why can't they wrap this thing up and I am. To me that that I'm not one of those people but I feel like there is some sentiment like that. So. my I am I am pessimistic that the Mueller investigation whatever it turns out is going to be taken with with the gravitas that it needs to be taken with because I feel like people are just going to shrug it off like they shrug off everything else Trump says and does. That's very cynical perspective. But let me just offer my thoughts here. I think he waited until after the midterm. So it wouldn't be politicized work as much that being said. I wish there were still a timeline where it's like the end is in sight. He's going to come out with information now, it seems like it's getting to a point in time where impeaching almost doesn't make sense because you can just wait for the next election and I'm hoping there will be enough bombs drop that. I know it seems like people are apathetic to a certain degree. But from what it sounds like with Cohen and how much he's been talking. It seems like there could be some pretty heavy stuff. That'd be hard to ignore and Manafort was playing this game of like maybe I'll get a pardon or maybe I talk. I know I think he's betting on Pardon but probably going to be out of luck. So. The final thing I'll say I think is that someone put this well that they said Trump is like a spectacle like an Entertainer and like The Apprentice the show is really popular but eventually people got tired of it and it seems like people are getting tired of trump the spectacle at a certain point. It's like, you know, you get sick of the seeing the same thing over and over again on the news even his fanbase even though they might might or might not agree that he's full of crap. Just seeing him day in and day out trying to stir up drama and polarization. I think will grow old. So that's my hope. I hope so. I hope you're right, Tim, but I'll still be cynical. I'll be The Optimist here. Yeah, okay, we can do credit going to close down. I just I just there's some other good ones like the local reporters one was good. All these are all from the end. So I'll start. Sure all this is a good one. All right, like all immorality eternity politics Begins by making an exception for itself. All else in creation might be evil, but I and my group are good because I am myself and my group is mine. Others might be confused and bewitched by the facts and passions of history, but my nation and myself have maintained a prehistorical innocence. Since the only good is this invisible quality that resides in us, the only policy is one that safeguards our innocence regardless of the cost those who accept eternity politics do not expect to live longer, happier, and more fruitful lives. They accept suffering as a mark of righteousness if they think that guilty others are suffering more. Life is nasty brutish and short the pleasure of life is that it can be made nastier more brutish and shorter for others. This you go only this talks exactly what you said earlier. That is that Putin Russia Putin Russia can't be like the west and America so they want to bring everybody down to their level. That at one point I think he says that Russia is playing a negative sum game. Whereas I may be losing but you're losing more and that's all that matters. And that's this is why I'm cynical Tim. Okay. Okay fair enough. That's okay. That's a good quote. Yeah, I like it because like you said, it's the negative some it's not even zeros. No. Yeah. They're actively harming these countries. Getting in their way of policies and things why not improving lives life in Russia there just. What's the opposite of improving they're they're dragging other countries down without lifting the Russia up at. So like as a Russian citizen you wonder how their perspective what it's like and how they can support the government or to what extent they weighed the benefit of opposing the government versus just going on with their lives, but the propaganda arm of Russia just so powerful that let's not focus on how unequal the wealth is here. Let's just focus on all these other countries and blame them for that. But one interesting tangent, I thought was worth going on. I heard the You Know Who Wants To Be A Millionaire the show? Yeah, the Russian version. They had to take out the ask an audience question or option because people were actively giving the wrong answer to sabotage the person because they didn't want them to win the money my goodness. Yeah, super interesting. Yeah is fascinating. It was like a sociological experiment. It is must yeah, but it's just if you think about it, like culturally it's just compared comparing Russians with the United States or something. That's just how they see other people. They don't want this millionaire to have a bunch of luck they want I mean that's a simplification but you know, I mean, I think it does it is a window into the psyche of the average Russian. So speaking about eternity have one quote sure be good. If Russia could not become the West let the West become Russia if the flaws of American democracy could be exploited to elect a Russian client than Putin could prove that the world outside is no better than Russia were the European Union or the United States to disintegrate during Putin's lifetime. He could cultivate an illusion of Eternity. That's a good one too. Yeah, I mean there were glimpses when I kind of understood why he called it an eternity politics, but still I feel like you could have come up with a more imaginative. He needs like a branding expert to help him out here. This is a little tip that I found interesting for. This is about brexit. All right, 419 Twitter accounts that posted on Brexit were localized to Russia's internet research agency. Later, every single one of them would also post on behalf of Donald Trump's presidential campaign about a third of the of the discussion of brexit on Twitter was generated by Bots and more than 90% of the Bots tweeting political material were not located in the United Kingdom. That's crazy. Isn't that crazy? It's the same accounts that were helping brexit were helping the campaign and like they weren't even trying to like create new ones. They're like, hi. There said no one's watching. Yeah. This is all because because this is all, you know written out and on the internet that we could go back and view it that the time we had no idea. That's just it no one was watching from their perspective is it that they didn't create separate accounts because they didn't think they'd be found out or just like they're so Brash that we don't care we're doing this anyway. Could be bit of both I would think you know that at Twitter account, Tennessee GOP or something. Yeah, that's an example of that. Okay, you only read it off. Yeah. Sure here somewhere. I got a couple things some more about social media. All right. So the first one you said, the Russian version of the Tennessee Republican party had ten times more Twitter followers than the actual Tennessee Republican Party. 10 times. That's crazy. And here's another one. Despite all this the Heart of Texas Facebook page had more followers in 2016 than those of the Texas Republican party or the Texas Democratic party or indeed both of them combined. Everyone who liked followed and supported Heart of Texas was taking part in Russian intervention in American politics designed to destroy the United States of. Yeah crazy. I'm getting fired up man. So let's talk about it for a second. Alright, so talk about what those those accounts. That's what I'm saying. You have to hand it to Russian propaganda for success. Absolutely. Like I completely agree like they got they got they put us in check. They didn't put us in checkmate. So we were able to get out of it, but now we're now we're playing behind. And we got it. We got it. We got to catch up and we got to be aware and you and what you said before is absolutely right. It is on each individual. It's a it's a it's a conundrum. It's a it's a definitely. how do you does there need to be an education campaign? How do you get the individual to do the work? Because there's so much misinformation out there.  Yeah, if you are one of these users who fell for this propaganda, I think many of them won't even admit it. Would they even know Tim would they even know? Well, if you told them this is a fake account you spread or liked fake and information would they even admit it or a great little bit? Well you would have to you would have to literally hand people a screenshot of their account with a like or share with a with the Heart of Texas account, but people people people don't remember that they won't remember that but you would have to confront them and say look at this you shared this account and and with you so you're saying is that with a even a minute? I would say that they wouldn't even know that they. I'm not yeah, I'm not saying the memory is the issue. I'm just saying like the campaign and everything politics these days is so like polarized and people are so stuck in their biases that psychologically. I don't know if many of them could bring themselves to say they might just say like, oh that was fake or that's fake news that's doctored up something because they can’t see that possibility or if they can't if one more thing if they can't do that then what they do is they it's like what about-ism where they just deflect and focus on because I'll say this to like people in Ohio and possibly not too far for me be like, oh, this is crazy. Have you thought about this? Maybe not in that calm tone? But then they'll be like well, what about Hillary's emails or something just like we weren't we're not talking about that. Right? What about ism is a disease in our society. Yeah, because it is saying that two completely different things are equal when they have no real connection whatsoever and sometimes it might be legitimate. Where are you bring up one thing and they're like, well, what about this? And so there are times when there are dominoes that fall that one thing leads to another and can create a quagmire or something what we're what you're absolutely right is that people always deflect and talk about something else that is wrong when. Two wrongs don't make a right. Well, no one wants to admit. They were wrong for our that they like to fake account correct propaganda. So are you saying that these people would do it willingly or almost like reflexively? Mmm, it's an emotional response. I think so reflexively almost is what you're saying. Like they like they would be almost so caught up in their emotional connection that they have to their beliefs and politics that they won't even be able to recognize that they had a contributed to the spread of those Russian propaganda. Their ego and psyche I don't think it'd bring themselves to admit it. Even if the facts are there. Okay? Okay, I agree with you there. I thought at first you were saying like people will be would be aware that something is going on in still still refuse to say that they contributed in it because they were embarrassed or something like that. Well that too, you know, yeah, but I feel like if people truly get a their eyes open to this kind of stuff. I feel like they would want to just. They won't even have to make amends or anything. Just going forward from this point on have your. Have your eyes open your ears open and be and be on the lookout for a fake stuff and stuff that if it doesn't smell right, you know, it's probably B.S. My sense is that people are starting to realize how toxic these conversations are like it's good to like have political discussions if they're calm but if we're just like spewing our hatred and just hate both sides, that's we're not going to heal or evolve. Oh, no, I completely agree. But the thing is that that. Politics has taken root in almost like the emotional centers of our brain to the point where we identify ourselves in this Society with our beliefs about political issues and we will let those political issues determine how we vote and determine what we choose to believe and what we choose not to believe and I think that's dangerous and I do agree there needs to be more willingness to view the other side's perspective to work together. Especially and and not be so your identity is not who you vote for your identity is not your political party. Your identity is so much more than hat and I feel like. people need to recognize that and be accepting of everybody and just take a break from the news for a while. Yeah, it's way for news Cycles. Not not only okay. You got some more quotes. here's something. and this was. the author writing about this Russian guy named Dugan d-- u d-- i n i kind of forget who he was but Dugan stole the show with his passionate case that only a United far-right could save Europe from gay Satan. And that's the kind of rhetoric that that fuels what we just talked about this this division in humanity between us and Them versus right and left and it's just completely sad and and I even made a little note about that that. Fear is very very powerful and I did not mean to make political generalizations, but it seems to be that like racism xenophobia people that get so afraid of people that are different from them. that. The people that politicians and media have used that fear to motivate people and fear is one of the most powerful emotions we have so there is nothing really as powerful to counterbalance that. That was my and so thus, you know, all these politicians and media people that that fuel fan the Flames of that fear. It's gaining Steam. And the rest of us were like, oh we need to do something to stop that and and. like I could be really hokey here and say that love is the only thing that can counterbalance that but like it just seems like there's no again then my cynical side comes out and be like. Well, there is no love anymore in the world. So just so everyone knows Brian has had one beer and it he's talking like he's had 10. I know I for some reason tonight. I think we should all love each other. Yeah, I mean it just I agree with you. Rhetoric matters. I know people say, oh he just he didn't mean what he said, you know, but at the end of the day. You rhetoric does matter because it's just sets the tone of what is acceptable as a society and what is not and we just have to take a stand put our foot down and say that you can't say certain things. We have the freedom of speech Yes, but you can't. say that you can shoot somebody in the middle of Fifth Avenue and not lose a single vote. You can't say that Mexicans are rapists. And I'm and I don't you know, anyway, I agree with you. Yeah, I think this is a very important topic but I know we are very much digressing. No. No, I want to talk a little more about this. Okay, I think yeah, like you're saying the fact that he could get away with racist comments with these comments about like you're just mocking like a disabled person just crazy basic human things that you think are out of. How could anybody's campaign survived because he never apologizes. He just courts attention at all costs but so on some level were all to blame because we take in this Media news cycle, whatever gets the most attention whatever gets the most hits is whatever it causes the most outrage. So he's just playing the system. Right? But one more thing I would say is that it goes on both sides that the name-calling and the the terms and things like that. There are these like. Pretty high-level liberals who will call people in the Midwest and south rednecks and white trash and things like that. And so I agree with you that all those like racist remarks are terrible. But at the same time you have to understand the perspective of a trump voter is that people in this area the part of the country they think oh it's the coastal elites calling us flyover country. Like that our lives don't really matter that sort of thing. So it's like, oh we'll show you will elect this person, right? All right couple things about that. I completely agree that liberals can be just as bad as the far Right and I mean just as bad and but I would also have to say that no president has ever said has no president has had the rhetoric that Trump has had. And I think that is very very in public. You're right. The Nixon tapes were pretty bad I guess but and I would also say that. the midwesterners feeling feelings about the coastal Elites. How much of that is anchored in legitimate comments and how much is fanned by the media? And I'm not going to say that the media is solely responsible for that the midwesterners thinking that the coastal Elites don't think anything of them because it's true because there is some. Resentment that liberals think that people from Nebraska and Iowa and all the other midwest states or just like yeah rednecks or whatever like you said, but but but my other put my greater point is the one that we never had leaders of our country to be saying these things and that is where we have to draw the line. Right as a leader his character leaves so much to be desired. Yes, he does. Someone made a meme the other day of like the seven deadly sins and he just like had a picture of him and body and each one like lust sloth greed Envy but one okay, I'll transition out of this topic by saying there was this correlation between Midwestern states in the opioid crisis and states that voted for Trump and I don't think that's a coincidence, you know. So I'll just mention this quote. He says the association between declining health and Trump voting was strong and important states that Obama had won in 2012. But which Trump took in 2016 such as Ohio, Florida, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania when life is short and the future is troubled the politics of Eternity beckons. So it's like these people I just think they feel at a loss like both parties are kind of ignoring them. So they just say why not go for this Outsider who's at least acknowledging us and our suffering. And of the to politics that he talks about in The Book of inevitability and in eternity when you're faced with despair, you're going to go towards eternity. You're just going to bend that direction because despair you have no hope. And you're like, well, let's just go with Trump. Let's just do it. Let's get the an outsider in there and shake things up in Washington. But I just think I don't know if we want to go down this road, but Bernie Sanders as a populist was appealing to a lot of people even if you think his policies were unrealistic, even if you could argue he damaged the Democratic party's chances in the real election if it were Sanders versus Trump, I want to think more people would have gotten behind Sanders then Clinton because to me what she represented was not it wasn't getting a lot of people excited. It was just like here's another Clinton. Here's someone who doesn't really care about me. It's just she comes off kind of fake and that's unfortunate. Yes, I agree because I feel like she is actually a good governor of you good person to have in government. But you're right she comes off as insincere and that's unfortunate. She had the experience and she had I think she would have been a good leader. Right especially relative to Trump. It's just yeah about rallying people and being someone they can do you think. Part of me also thinks that the 2016 presidential election was a pendulum swing due to having our first African-American president. I think that's a factor and it's crazy like the Russian propaganda how much they played up the birth certificate thing. It's like they're just trying to for years and years just doing resentment. So they're feeding into that whole mindset. And then with like Sanders and Clinton at the convention. It's like they release these hacked emails and things like that. So with Donald Trump jr. Meeting with Wikileaks and all of these actors are kind of. Conspiring together here. Mmm. or this is when the last quotes I have but . So on October 7th Trump seemed to be in trouble when a tape revealed his view that powerful men should sexually assault women. 30 minutes after that tape was published Russia release the emails of the chairman of Clinton's campaign, John podesta, thereby hindering a serious discussion of Trumps history of sexual predation. So that's a good example, I think of how. We couldn't focus on this huge glaring flaw of his or controversial incident because they're keeping the news cycle going by saying. Hey, look at this other thing. Well, it's what about ISM practical? Yes, though. It's a sir. Yes. Absolutely distraction. Yeah, there was some other good ones. There was an interesting quote. Puerto Rico has more inhabitants than 21 of the 50 American states, but it's American citizens have no influence on presidential elections. How crazy is that? That's messed up right there there. They are American citizens. What's their legal the their country? Okay, they should have representation. John Oliver, I think had a good special on this or segment on Puerto Rico statehood. Yeah. I'm pretty sure and then when you talk about like the hurricane and things it's like we barely really helped out as a country. So Trump adopted the Russian double standard. He was permitted to lie all the time. But any minor error by a journalist discredited the entire profession of Journalism. Isn't that sad? It should worry everybody how much he attacked journalists in general, and then here's the laundry list of Trumps stuff and eternity politician defines foes rather than formulating policies Trump did so by denying that the Holocaust concerned Jews, by using the expression son of a bitch in reference to black athletes, by calling a political opponent Pocahontas, by overseeing a denunciation program that targeted Mexicans, by publishing a list of crimes committed by immigrants, by transforming an office on terrorism into an office on Islamic terrorism, by helping hurricane victims in Texas and Florida, but not in Puerto Rico, by speaking of shit hole countries, by referring to reporters as enemies of the people American people, by claiming that protesters were paid and so on. And so on like that it's just. There's always something new like every week with Trump. So if you actually compiled all the shit he said and stuff. It's just pathetic. It's exhausting to it is to keep up with so here. This will be my last quote. Okay. In the end though freedom depends on citizens who are able to make a distinction between what is true and what they want to hear. Authoritarianism arrives not because people say that they want it but because they lose the ability to distinguish between facts and desires. There's your road to unfreedom Tim. That's good. That's good. People get complacent. They don't take responsibility. And we devolve into authoritarianism. Yeah. Can I say one more quote? Absolutely. Okay. This is my last one. So, okay. He says in the Russian model investigative reporting must be marginalized so that news can become a daily spectacle. The point of spectacle is to summon the emotions of both supporters and detractors and to confirm and strengthen polarization. Every new cycle creates Euphoria or depression and reinforces a conviction that politics is about friends and enemies at home rather than about policy that might improve the lives of citizens. Trump governs just as he had run for office as a producer of outrage rather than as a formulator of policy. See so true. That is so true was a professor of outrage producer producer. Yeah producer of outrage because it's like what policy has he done the tax bill and I was actually credit that was mostly Congress. He just signed the damn thing. Yeah. It's just we all need to find a way to move past this outrage culture as practical culture. I am heartened by history because the 60s and 70s weren't were tumultuous as well Nixon. We had a president resign because he was going to be impeached anyway, so. And then, you know Vietnam War and civil rights movement and everything. So. what the past two years have taught me is that history is cyclical and we will get through this. But what this book taught me is not to be complacent and to be a knowledgeable consumer of news everywhere, social media included. That's a good take away. All right, I think the main thing for me is just to have some empathy for both sides of the political spectrum, recognize how big of an influence the political propaganda machines were right influencing us, and try to just take a step back and not be so emotional and try to move forward rather than stay stuck in this eternity. Yeah to of unfreedom. All right. Yeah. So Tim. Yeah, what would you rate this book? Are we doing half Stars? I never do we ever design. Oh, I don't want to do half Stars. Okay one half star ready. Let me guess. You're going to say. Why don't you go first? Well, I'm conflicted. Yeah, because I found this topic and this I found that the subject matter interesting so and out of respect to the author. I'm going to give it higher than what I should. I'm gonna give it a three.  As a book it's probably the one. Oh, yeah, I mean that I mean like that that is a little harsh. That's a little harsh. This is probably the longest discussion we've had. I know this is a long as this session we have because it's been it has been a launching pad for to discuss what's going on in the world because it is very relevant, right but. I would not recommend this book to anybody unless they were really interested in Russia. And like I said before I think it's just been a long article in New York or something. I think books have more staying power though. Like I just I disagree with this one. I do not think 10 years from now this one will. I mean because this is such a this is about stuff that's just happened. So in 10 20 years. I don't disagree with you that this could have been a news article. All I'm saying is that physically a book can be on the Shelf in 10 years. Whereas most articles seem to be pushed to the back burner. You don't ever think back on articles you read years ago doing well. Maybe I'm a foreign policies subscriber, I fill out surveys. All right, whatever. I was stuck between three and four. Oh, okay, I think because of the topics because of the time we're living in these are important things to read. I wish he had made it more accessible to people to say here's what you should really take away from it right said of the all the Ukraine stuff. I know it's really important for context but. It's more of just a warning. It's what do they call that when it's story? Cautionary tale it is a cautionary tale with no solution or plan of action going forward other than just to be aware of this. Russia. Yeah, it's important though. It is. I'm not saying it's not important. I'm just saying it could have been better. Yeah, I give it a 3, okay. Okay. So next time next book will be Calypso by David Sedaris will be my pick a happy one and finally, yes, but all right, so we're done. Yeah, I'm those as a good talk.