←back to thread

Mikhail Gorbachev has died

(www.reuters.com)
970 points homarp | 5 comments | 30 Aug 22 20:37 UTC | HN request time: 0.826s | source
Show context
lapcat ◴[30 Aug 22 21:07 UTC] No.32655071[source]▶
The United States didn't do enough to help Russia transition to democracy in the 1990s. There was no "Marshall Plan" after the Cold War like there was after World War II. This was a huge mistake, and we see the consequences now, with Russia having turned back toward totalitarianism and imperialism. Sadly, it seems that Gorbachev's efforts were mostly for naught. But it was courageous at the time to open up the Soviet Union to glasnost and perestroika.

Of course Yeltsin was a big part of the problem too.

replies(64): >>32655130 #>>32655132 #>>32655148 #>>32655171 #>>32655208 #>>32655210 #>>32655213 #>>32655216 #>>32655220 #>>32655250 #>>32655277 #>>32655379 #>>32655385 #>>32655397 #>>32655429 #>>32655455 #>>32655478 #>>32655495 #>>32655531 #>>32655556 #>>32655561 #>>32655593 #>>32655659 #>>32655665 #>>32655728 #>>32655739 #>>32655805 #>>32655833 #>>32655891 #>>32655943 #>>32655957 #>>32655967 #>>32655988 #>>32655989 #>>32655995 #>>32656055 #>>32656063 #>>32656083 #>>32656097 #>>32656101 #>>32656343 #>>32656419 #>>32656578 #>>32656655 #>>32656671 #>>32656849 #>>32656968 #>>32656998 #>>32657100 #>>32657198 #>>32657263 #>>32657318 #>>32657872 #>>32657920 #>>32657940 #>>32658274 #>>32658285 #>>32658654 #>>32658705 #>>32658804 #>>32658817 #>>32659007 #>>32659408 #>>32659688 #
karaterobot ◴[30 Aug 22 21:49 UTC] No.32655593[source]▶
Your comment makes it sounds like you believe the U.S. had the power to decide whether or not Russia would turn into a kleptocracy or not. Maybe I'm misinterpreting you, but if I'm not, I'm skeptical. Marshall plan notwithstanding, I would give credit to the people and government of Japan for their post-war success: it could easily have gone another direction, and the U.S. couldn't have stopped that from happening. Likewise, the people of Russia and their government are ultimately the ones with agency in their case. I don't think the U.S. should take on the burden of developing other countries; going down that road has been a bad idea more often than not.
replies(6): >>32655804 #>>32655984 #>>32656237 #>>32656254 #>>32656462 #>>32661025 #
1. colechristensen ◴[30 Aug 22 23:23 UTC] No.32656462[source]▶
> I don't think the U.S. should take on the burden of developing other countries; going down that road has been a bad idea more often than not.

From what I can tell from history, our successes involved US taking sovereignty and ruling absolutely for a period of years while setting up a government of our choosing to replace us. Our failures involved quickly setting up a local democracy and allowing self rule while we tried and failed to help. It seems we lost the stomach to use power after military victory and the incompetent governments we set up doom the countries involved to decades of failure.

I really don’t think we should continue getting involved in places we don’t have the guts to set up a military government for a decade. It is clear you have to force societal change on a place at gunpoint in order to get good outcomes, if you’re just going to topple governments and hope whatever rises from the ashes is nice, you might as well not bother.

replies(3): >>32656530 #>>32658384 #>>32659180 #
2. gpm ◴[30 Aug 22 23:32 UTC] No.32656530[source]▶
What successes are you thinking of?

The only two that come to mind for me are Korea and Japan (I could easily be overlooking some), and really the former happened as a part of the latter (Korea was ruled by Japan for the 35 years prior to WWII).

As I understand it South Korea was at least nominally under local democratic rule from the start.

I'm not sure that's a big enough sample set to be making generalizations from, and even if you are happy with a sample set of 2 I'm not really sure south korea fits the mold you're describing.

That said, I could definitely be missing some examples that would make the argument more convincing.

replies(1): >>32657022 #
3. drpancake ◴[31 Aug 22 00:46 UTC] No.32657022[source]▶
Post-WW2 Germany, too. Although that was a joint effort.
4. cowtools ◴[31 Aug 22 04:29 UTC] No.32658384[source]▶
It depends. Pulling out of afganistan earlier would have saved us a lot of time and money.
5. qwytw ◴[31 Aug 22 06:50 UTC] No.32659180[source]▶
> our successes involved US taking sovereignty and ruling absolutely for a period of years while setting up a government of our choosing to replace us

Like Haiti, Cuba or the Philippines, right? Those were obviously great successes...