Pay attention and subscribe right here: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube | Pocket Casts
For the reason that earliest days of the republic, America’s worldwide friendships have formed home politics. And a few of these friendships helped America strengthen its democratic rules. So what occurs if America’s new associates are autocrats? John Bolton, former nationwide safety adviser for President Donald Trump, and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island argue that if America now not leads the democratic world and as an alternative imports secrecy and kleptocracy from the autocratic world, Americans will really feel much more powerless, apathetic, disengaged, and cynical.
That is the fourth episode of Autocracy in America, a five-part collection about authoritarian techniques already at work in the US and the place to search for them.
The next is a transcript of the episode:
John Bolton: It began as we had been going out to the NATO headquarters for the summit. He had spent the evening earlier than within the ambassador’s residence, as presidents usually do. I used to be coming over from the delegation the place we had stayed, and he known as me on the automotive cellphone and mentioned, You able to make historical past as we speak?
Anne Applebaum: That is John Bolton, the previous nationwide safety advisor for President Donald Trump.
Bolton: And I mentioned, Pardon me, or one thing like that. And he mentioned, I believe we have to get out. So I mentioned, Let’s discuss it as quickly as I get there.
And shortly thereafter, Mike Pompeo, secretary of state, got here by. It was very clear what Trump wished to do. And all of us rode out to the NATO headquarters. I known as Jim Mattis, the protection secretary. I known as John Kelly, the chief of workers. I mentioned, It’s all palms on deck.
[Music]
Peter Pomerantsev: Anne, even the concept that America would possibly go away NATO was in and of itself fairly destabilizing for world safety.
Applebaum: Proper. NATO was created to be a deterrent—to stop wars, to cease a Soviet invasion of Europe previously, a Russian invasion now—and it was constructed round a promise of collective protection, that if one of many allies is attacked, the others will come to their assist.
However over the previous 75 years, it additionally got here to characterize one thing else. The alliance helped cement the deep financial, cultural, and political ties between the US, Canada, and Europe. And it labored, largely as a result of many of the members shared the identical values. However as Secretary Bolton informed me, probably the most profitable alliance in historical past virtually didn’t make it by means of the primary Trump administration.
Bolton: Proper up till the second when Trump spoke at that vast desk, within the NATO headquarters, we didn’t know what he was going to do. And I believe he was inside an inch of withdrawing. I imagine that, and I imagine that’s nonetheless what he desires to do.
Applebaum: Trump’s risk implied that he wouldn’t honor the promise of collective protection. It additionally created discomfort as a result of everybody understood that it mirrored one thing deeper: The emergence of a special form of America, an America that might flip away from its democratic companions and, as an alternative, draw nearer to the autocracies—a totally totally different imaginative and prescient of America’s function on the earth.
[Music]
Pomerantsev: Properly, though it was new to the U.S., it’s a transfer straight out of the autocratic handbook.
Applebaum: I’m Anne Applebaum, a workers author at The Atlantic.
Pomerantsev: I’m Peter Pomerantsev, a senior fellow on the SNF Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins College.
Applebaum: That is Autocracy in America.
Pomerantsev: This isn’t a present about America’s future. There are authoritarian techniques already at work, and we’re exhibiting you the place. There’s the rise of conspiracy theories, widening public apathy, politicized investigations, the takeover of the state.
Applebaum: And on this episode: America becoming a member of the kleptocracy membership.
Peter, I’ve at all times considered the US as a rustic that leads an alliance of like-minded democracies. And I by no means questioned our promise to defend them, in Europe in addition to Asia. Now we have navy bases in Germany, Italy, Japan, extra lately in Poland for precisely that function. However currently, I began interested by how our alliances and our friendships around the globe and our guarantees to assist defend folks additionally assist strengthen our democracy right here at dwelling.
Pomerantsev: Traditionally, it’s form of true. Britain is certainly one of America’s oldest allies. And one of many nations America has this lengthy, supposedly particular relationship with, Britain, has had an enormous affect in America. The British abolished slavery earlier than America did, for instance, and a whole lot of British abolitionists impressed the rise of American abolitionism. Frederick Douglass frolicked in Britain, as did many different abolitionists. And American and British campaigners towards slavery supported each other. I believe that mattered.
Applebaum: Yeah, we additionally neglect how, much more lately, American considering has been affected by our consciousness of our worldwide function and popularity. Think about what the Justice Division was saying on the Supreme Courtroom throughout the 1954 Brown v. Board of Schooling case.
They filed a short arguing that desegregation was within the U.S. curiosity, not merely for home causes and never just because it was proper, but additionally as a result of racist legal guidelines prompted, and I quote, “doubts even amongst pleasant nations as to the depth of our devotion to the democratic religion.”
Pomerantsev: That’s fairly a phrase: “our devotion to the democratic religion.”
Applebaum: That’s what I imply by the affect of our allies. America put democracy on the middle of its international coverage, but it surely was additionally part of our nationwide identification: That is who we had been. That is who we wish to be. That is how we wish to be seen. These are the nations that we have now the closest relationships with. Different democracies, different republics—they are often constitutional monarchies. They will have parliaments as an alternative of congresses. However these are our associates, and that is our world. And I believe Individuals felt it was essential to stay in that group, and that had penalties for home coverage as properly.
Pomerantsev: However simply as there’s a community of nations who push one another in the direction of ever extra democracy, there’s additionally a community of autocratic nations whose leaders are kleptocrats, primarily. They’re governments who share the identical curiosity in stealing and hiding cash—
Applebaum: —and oppressing or arresting anyone who tries to cease them.
Pomerantsev: Proper. I imply, they aren’t linked to 1 one other by ideology. They’re not all—I don’t know—theocracies or communist regimes, however they’re united of their have to undermine the rule of legislation and repress their very own folks, on account of desirous to steal cash.
Applebaum: Completely, and nations have moved from one camp to the opposite previously. Have a look at Venezuela.
[Music]
Leopoldo López: Chavez created shut relations with Putin.
Applebaum: Leopoldo López is a former mayor of Chacao, a municipality of Caracas. He noticed issues start to vary there in 2006.
López: It began when Chavez determined to vary the assault rifle of the armed forces of Venezuela from a Belgian FAL rifle to an AK-103 and altering the F-16s [aircrafts] to the Sukhois.
Applebaum: Venezuela was as soon as one of the profitable democracies in our hemisphere. It was the richest nation in South America and on a trajectory to grow to be even richer. However when Hugo Chavez was elected chief—democratically elected—he went on to slowly dismantle Venezuelan courts, to interrupt up the media, and, finally, to undermine the economic system. And Venezuela aligned itself with the group that I prefer to name Autocracy, Inc., or Autocracy, Included.
López: The extent of funding that went from Venezuela to purchase Russian gear was enormous—billions of {dollars} have been reported within the arms—
Applebaum: They usually had been shopping for Russian arms as a result of the Individuals wouldn’t promote them arms, or others?
López: Properly, it began due to that, however then it simply turned extra comfy. After which Chavez invested billions of {dollars} within the air protection.
[Music]
Applebaum: López not solely witnessed the decline of Venezuela, the tip of Venezuelan democracy, however as a long-time outstanding chief of the Venezuelan opposition, he skilled it as a political prisoner in solitary confinement—as a frontrunner behind bars. He now lives in exile, the place he writes and speaks concerning the rise of the fashionable autocratic, kleptocratic community and likewise about how Venezuela turned a part of it. He informed me that Russia wasn’t the one nation that Chávez made offers with.
López: The Chinese language got here in with investments, and that is the follow of China in Africa. It’s very well-known what they do when it comes to locking in investments, that then they principally take possession of important infrastructure. And that occurred in Venezuela.
Applebaum: Peter, López is speaking about billions of {dollars} pouring into Venezuela, however though it was described as a Chinese language funding within the nation, it didn’t ever actually translate into enhancing the well-being of the Venezuelan folks.
López: Simply to present you an instance, one of many flagship initiatives of this relation between China and Venezuela was a practice system.
Applebaum: Sure, that practice system, which was solely partially constructed and even now, 15 years later, reportedly lower than 1 p.c operational—
López: However billions of {dollars} had been channeled into this. Then billions of {dollars} went into packages for housing of the Venezuelan folks, and that’s nowhere to be seen.
Applebaum: All of it simply vanished.
López: All of it simply vanished. The Chinese language don’t ask questions. Principally, it’s about utilizing these funding engagements to create tighter relations and to lock in governments.
In order that’s Russia. That’s China. After which there’s Iran.
[Music]
Applebaum: Peter, Iran got here for enterprise agreements, for financial exchanges, even some involving nuclear vitality. And Iran wasn’t simply funding Venezuela. The Venezuelans additionally started serving to the Iranians.
López: They had been giving Venezuelan passports to Iranian nationals, to people who ended up being members of Hezbollah.
Applebaum: If America continues down an analogous path, away from democracy and in the direction of one thing totally different, what does that imply for nations like Venezuela?
López: Properly, that may imply—I wouldn’t say the tip. However that may imply that the chances to transition for democracy in Venezuela can be drastically affected, indubitably.
NBC Information journalist: 1000’s protesting Venezuela’s contested election, the demand for freedom and democracy taking part in out in cities all through Venezuela as properly, condemning chief Nicolás Maduro, who insists he gained re-election over opposition candidate Edmundo González Urrutia.
[Crowd chanting]
López: Individuals hate Maduro.
Applebaum: Venezuelans voted in enormous numbers towards Maduro in July’s elections, regardless of his monumental marketing campaign of propaganda and harassment. When López and I talked, I had requested him how Maduro managed to remain in energy for thus lengthy.
López: Though there are numerous methods to reply this query, I actually imagine that the principle motive why Maduro continues to be in energy is due to the assist he will get from Russia, from China, from Iran, from Cuba. So the wrestle for a transition to democracy in Venezuela, as a lot as we wish it to be a sovereign concern, it’s not true, as a result of we’re preventing a world battle. We’re preventing actually towards Maduro but additionally towards Putin, towards Xi Jinping, towards the mullahs from Iran, as a result of they’re the lifeline of Maduro.
Srdja Popovic: We found out that authoritarianism, dictatorships are very totally different animals than they had been 20, 30 years in the past.
Pomerantsev: Anne, Srdja Popovic. He’s an activist. He helped overthrow Serbia’s dictator Slobodan Milošević in 2000.
Listening to you communicate with Leopoldo López and his descriptions of the adjustments in Venezuela over the past 20 years made me consider the work Popovic has been doing. He research how dictators operate within the Center East, Latin America, and Asia. And, Anne, Popovic’s analysis helps the thesis of your new e book Autocracy, Inc., and the way you’ve described this membership of autocratic leaders.
Popovic: Learning the sector, working with folks from authoritarian nations—20, 30 years in the past, they might at all times require some form of ideological element. Whether or not you’re speaking concerning the Soviet Union, whether or not you’re speaking concerning the Nazi Germany, it’s a special ideology that’s within the core of it.
Trendy autocracies—take Russia, for instance—they seem like firms. You have got the boss of the company, after which you’ve got, in Russia’s case, tycoons that personal all the businesses. After which you’ve got instruments of sustaining the company, like navy, media. These are all of the instruments. Principally, a part of being included means that you’re cooperating with different components and legs within the company.
[Music]
Pomerantsev: So what Popovich describes right here, Anne, is an authoritarian community that features as a corrupt company, principally.
It’s humorous—I noticed this for myself once I was dwelling in Moscow. It was within the mid-2000s. I bear in mind strolling down the excessive avenue, down Tverskaya, and it was full of those glitzy outlets in all places, and everyone was wearing a really glamorous means, and town was type of bankers and legal professionals, just like the monetary district of many Western capitals.
And each couple of meters, there was a financial institution. And I used to be like, What on earth are all these banks doing? I bear in mind going into one and attempting to open, like, a private checking account. They usually simply stared at me like an absolute moron, like, Why would you open a private account on this financial institution?
So I began asking people who I knew, Russians, What are all these banks doing? They usually simply began laughing, going, Properly, they’re not banks the best way you perceive banks; they’re money-laundering automobiles. They’re automobiles tied to this minister or that businessman, and so they open a great deal of these banks, or pseudo banks, and transfer their cash by means of them after which transfer them overseas.
However they had been in all places. This wasn’t like one little money-laundering train. You already know, the entire metropolis was principally one large money-laundering train. And I bear in mind considering, I don’t perceive the mannequin of this regime very properly in any respect.
Applebaum: And also you didn’t perceive it for a motive. You didn’t perceive it as a result of it was intentionally made extremely sophisticated. Atypical residents, unusual folks aren’t meant to know the place the cash is or what the financial institution does. They’re not meant to have any affect or understanding or data of politics in any respect as a result of the essence of recent autocracy and fashionable dictatorships is secrecy.
You already know, they’ve methods of stealing and extracting cash. They conceal the cash somewhere else around the globe: It’s achieved by means of nameless corporations. It’s achieved by means of shell corporations which can be in a position to transfer cash in a short time from one jurisdiction to a different—so from Cyprus to the Virgin Islands to the Bahamas to Delaware and again once more in a blink of a watch.
It’s very, very troublesome to hint this cash. It’s very laborious for civil servants or cops or white-collar-crime investigators to seek out it. It’s very, very laborious for journalists to seek out it and perceive it. And also you aren’t meant to know, and also you’re meant to be confused by it.
[Music]
Pomerantsev: Up till now, Anne, we’ve been speaking about how these items work somewhere else, but it surely’s right here within the U.S., too.
Applebaum: Sure. Darkish cash, hidden wealth, untransparent purchases, nameless corporations—these aren’t simply issues that exist overseas on palm-fringed Caribbean islands or in some distant dictatorship.
Extra on that after the break.
[Break]
Applebaum: Peter, while you had been speaking concerning the empty banks that weren’t actually banks, I instantly thought: American actual property.
[Music]
Applebaum: Till lately, realtors right here weren’t required to intently look at the supply of the funds getting used to purchase property, and it was completely authorized for nameless corporations to accumulate actual property offering no details about the homeowners, in any respect. And that’s why the sector turned a magnet for international wealth.
Casey Michel: There has by no means been a determine in American political historical past fairly like Trump that opened up himself, his administration, his companies to a lot international entry, a lot international lobbying, a lot international wealth. We’ve actually simply scratched the floor. A lot of that’s as a result of Trump rose from one of many key industries in fashionable kleptocracy: the real-estate—and particularly the posh real-estate—sector.
Applebaum: Casey Michel is the writer of American Kleptocracy.
Michel: I’ve little question in my thoughts that Donald Trump as president would job his administration with rolling again the entire progress we have now seen in the previous few years, not solely when it comes to the transparency necessities for shell corporations that we’ve lastly seen imposed. I’ve little question that he would say, Don’t implement this laws in any way. However that is only one component.
If he’s again within the White Home and aligns himself extra totally with Russia, what we’re going to finish up seeing is the trajectory that Russia has undergone possibly 20, 25, 30 years in the past or maybe what nations like Hungary have undergone 10, 15 years in the past.
Applebaum: Peter, that’s how fashionable autocracies start: not with a coup d’état however by the sluggish emergence of a secretive elite who’re in a position to management monetary assets and who can then conceal their wealth, take it in a foreign country, do what they need with it with out anyone else understanding.
Pomerantsev: They’re not restricted by the identical forces that you simply and I are.
Applebaum: Yeah, a whole lot of journalists have tried to give you names for it— Moneyland or Kleptopia. You already know, this alternate world wherein the conventional guidelines that apply to the economic system that you simply and I reside in don’t apply to them.
Pomerantsev: I believe we underestimate how a lot that degrades democracy.
Sheldon Whitehouse: Secrecy and democracy are antithetical.
Applebaum: Sheldon Whitehouse is a Democratic senator from Rhode Island and a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee.
Whitehouse: If Americans aren’t allowed to know who’s who on the political taking part in area—who’s taking part in for what crew, who they are surely, who they’re representing—you’ve got disabled maybe probably the most elementary basis of democracy.
Steve Scully, host of Washington Journal: Let’s get proper to the difficulty of tremendous PACs and the direct results of the Residents United case, in 2010.
Whitehouse: I first ran for the Senate again in 2006, and I obtained elected and sworn in in 2007. There have been no things like tremendous PACs then. They didn’t exist.
It is a new beast that’s stalking America’s political panorama, and it has no motive for being, besides that you should utilize the tremendous PAC to cover who you might be giving cash. The tremendous PAC solely has to report the final display by means of which the cash got here, not the precise donor, and you’ll dump limitless quantities of cash into politics by means of it.
Sheila Krumholz, government director of Middle for Responsive Politics: Teams that derive their funds from secret sources have spent greater than $21 million up to now, in contrast with simply $6 million at this level in 2012.
Amna Nawaz, anchor for PBS NewsHour: By all accounts, the 2020 election would be the costliest in historical past. It’s a part of a pattern that sees every election extra pricey than the final.
William Brangham, anchor for PBS NewsHour: The 2024 marketing campaign was already shaping as much as be the costliest election of all time. However now a number of high-profile billionaires are dumping large quantities of cash into the presidential race.
Whitehouse: It shifts energy to these large particular pursuits and away from unusual voters. It shifts the eye of Congress away from unusual voters and to these large particular pursuits, who can ship that form of cash secretly.
[Music]
Pomerantsev: Whenever you reside on this world the place you don’t know which cash, which highly effective figures are behind which political selections which can be being made round you and affect you—when it’s all type of wrapped on this type of mist—then you definately really feel form of helpless. You are feeling you haven’t any company. You are feeling you don’t matter. You are feeling as when you’ve got no say.
Whitehouse: Figuring out who’s chatting with you is a reasonably essential proposition in a democracy.
[Music]
Applebaum: And it’s an issue that’s solely getting worse.
Whitehouse: There’s an entire infrastructure that creates this political secrecy proper now. So, there’s a enormous transformation that has taken place, that’s represented by a wholly new bestiary of company entities designed to deprave American elections. That’s new, and that’s terrible, and we must always not get used to it.
Applebaum: And, Peter, it most likely shouldn’t be stunning that what’s, in impact, a brand new political system has additionally given rise to a brand new form of politician.
Bolton: I believe he has bother distinguishing between the nation’s nationwide curiosity and his personal private curiosity. He sees them as essentially the identical factor.
Applebaum: That’s John Bolton once more speaking about his outdated boss Donald Trump.
Bolton: So if he might have, for instance, with Xi Jinping: If he might have good private relations by giving freely one thing that offended Xi however had been determined as a result of it was regarded as in our curiosity, he would do it.
So in a single dialog, a cellphone dialog with Xi Jinping—and I listened in to all these; that’s one of many nationwide safety advisor’s jobs, is to be in all these conversations—Xi complained about sanctions that Wilbur Ross, the secretary of commerce, had imposed on Chinese language telecommunications. And I would say: for superb and adequate motive.
And so in the middle of the dialog, Trump mentioned, I’m going to elevate the sanctions. And he tweeted about it the subsequent day, saying it might assist preserve Chinese language jobs, as if that’s the job of the American president.
[Music]
Applebaum: Trump has been a sympathetic ear for complaints like these. He’s appeared eager to be associates, for instance, with the dictator of North Korea, Kim Jong Un. Kim Jong Un, as we all know, recurrently holds navy workout routines designed to intimidate South Korea. The U.S. leads joint workout routines with South Korea to speak energy and navy readiness again at North Korea. However when Kim Jong Un allegedly expressed frustration over these workout routines—
Bolton: Trump mentioned, You already know, you’re proper. And moreover, they’re costly. I’m going to cancel them.
Simply mentioned it proper there. None of us knew what he was going to say it. Jim Mattis, the protection secretary, known as me after he heard about this on the radio again in Washington and mentioned, What did you do? Why didn’t you inform me? I mentioned, Jim, I’d have been joyful to let you know if I had recognized what he was going to do.
[Music]
Pomerantsev: Anne, the factor is, when governments begin to act like these self-interested firms, it doesn’t simply make these governments much less environment friendly and fewer constructive for the folks; it additionally results in a essentially totally different sort of presidency.
I imply, give it some thought: After getting folks operating the nation who use it to counterpoint themselves, then they don’t wish to let go of that useful resource ever once more. They usually discover methods to verify they, primarily, by no means go away energy. They rig elections. They curtail rights of anybody who desires to problem them. They wish to repress individuals who ask too many questions on the place their cash comes from. After which they institute a system of surveillance and management to be sure that repression succeeds.
Daria Kaleniuk: So kleptocracy is when the state is being owned by a small group of individuals. Like, in Russia, there may be kleptocracy, which truly changed into the entire totalitarianism.
Pomerantsev: Daria Kaleniuk is the manager director of Ukraine’s Anti-corruption Motion Centre.
Kaleniuk: And the identical small quantity of individuals are within the political management of the state. That’s extraordinarily harmful. That implies that kleptocracy is definitely the bridge between democracy, authoritarianism—in the direction of the totalitarianism. And that is what has occurred in Russia.
Applebaum: Peter, what Kaleniuk is describing in Russia, it feels like precisely the identical factor that Ukrainians had been preventing towards in their very own nation over the past decade.
Pomerantsev: Precisely. At the moment, Ukraine was additionally beginning to head within the path of kleptocracy.
Kaleniuk: And that is what has occurred in 2013. Eleven years in the past, there was a revolution of dignity in Ukraine, the place Ukrainians had been pissed off—our president controlling all of the pure assets, controlling all legislation enforcement, all of the judiciary, and we had been pissed off him being supported by Russia.
[Protest sounds]
Pomerantsev: Anne, as , the revolution turned lethal. About 100 folks died—a few of them from corrupt, Russian-allied police, who opened hearth on protestors. However the revolution of dignity succeeded.
[Music]
Kaleniuk: We wish to have freedom. We wish to have dignity. We wish to have belief in our establishments. We wish to have the ability to go to the courtroom and defend our rights. We wish to have justice.
Applebaum: So for Kaleniuk, preventing for democracy and preventing towards corruption was the identical factor?
Pomerantsev: For her and for a lot of in Ukraine.
Kaleniuk: Completely. And it’s nonetheless the case.
Pomerantsev: So, Anne, fast-forward to the beginning of the struggle: In revenge, and in its want to remove Ukraine’s freedom and impose a corrupt, puppet authorities managed by Moscow, Russia invaded, first in 2014 after which at a fair grander scale in February 2022. I’m unsure Ukraine would have been in a position to survive these invasions with out America’s assist.
And so that is the central query and one I requested Kaleniuk: What occurs if America decides it now not cares about preventing corrupt, authoritarian regimes?
Kaleniuk: I wish to imagine that America has robust establishments and American democracy will survive any shake-up. But when it was simply as much as American folks, that may be very straightforward. Nonetheless, if America is uncovered to all these exterior influences of authoritarian techniques and soiled cash, that’s a lot more durable as a result of generally you don’t perceive, truly, who’s performing some operations in your floor, who’s manipulating you. And that may be a very harmful state of affairs.
Pomerantsev: What would it not imply to you if America switched sides? What if America was a part of an alliance of kleptocracies?
Kaleniuk: Properly, if there may be alliance between America and Russia, between America and China, there will probably be finish of democracy in America. It’s so simple as that.
Applebaum: Peter, Ukraine’s two-decades-long flirtation with grand-scale corruption left it actually susceptible. Most of the nation’s elite businessmen had been excited by themselves and their earnings, and never the nation. And that opened the door each for the hollowing out of the establishments of presidency and of the state but additionally the weakening of the navy and the safety equipment. And that was what made Ukraine so susceptible to Russian invasion.
Pomerantsev: However as , Ukraine is preventing heroically towards this invasion. I type of really feel that Ukraine is preventing and dying for beliefs that Individuals appear prepared—indirectly—to stroll away from.
There’s two interlinked tales right here. There’s Ukraine’s battle for freedom, for democracy, and towards strategic corruption. And you’ve got America, which, for the second, continues to be supporting Ukraine on this trigger however can be type of preventing the temptation to grow to be extra corrupt and fewer democratic. And if America loses that battle inside, then Ukraine and, maybe, different susceptible democracies would doubtless lose their battles as properly.
[Music]
Applebaum: Autocracy in America is hosted by Peter Pomerantsev and me, Anne Applebaum. It’s produced by Natalie Brennan and Jocelyn Frank, edited by Dave Shaw, combined by Rob Smierciak fact-check by Yvonne Kim. Claudine Ebeid is the manager producer of Atlantic audio, and Andrea Valdez is our managing editor.
Pomerantsev: Autocracy in America is a podcast from The Atlantic. It’s made potential with assist from the SNF Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins College, an educational and public discussion board devoted to strengthening world democracy by means of highly effective civic engagement and knowledgeable, inclusive dialogue.
Applebaum: Peter, the issues the Ukrainians have achieved to battle again, to protect their freedom, they’re proof of the work it takes to construct a democracy and to maintain it.
Pomerantsev: However in America, freedom is definitely a double-edged sword.
Jefferson Cowie: My nightmare is that fascism involves America, but it surely’s marching underneath the banner of freedom.
Pomerantsev: Subsequent time on Autocracy in America: how “freedom” might be the enemy of democracy.
Applebaum: We’ll be again with extra on that subsequent week.
