Not many politicians can be said to have changed the course of world history and even fewer can be said to have changed it for the better. But Gorbachev succeeded in bloodlessly ending the Cold War and creating the circumstances in which democracy could thrive in countries previously under the iron grip of the Kremlin.
It’s true that other forces contributed to the collapse of the Soviet empire. Poland’s Solidarity trade union movement, by mounting the first effective challenge against Soviet control in Eastern Europe, generated momentum for economic and political reform that culminated in the toppling of the Berlin Wall.
Ronald Reagan played his part too, subjecting the Soviet Union to sustained economic and military pressure that exposed the weakness behind its belligerent posturing.
Gorbachev, although a committed member of the Communist Party, was smart enough to realise the game was up for Soviet totalitarianism. Just as importantly, he had the sensibility to manage its dismantling in a way that minimised the damage. He was the first Soviet leader since Khrushchev who seemed more or less human.
Most of all, he had the courage to do what needed to be done, notwithstanding the reactionary forces arrayed against him.
The great irony is that while he earned the respect and gratitude of the West for defusing the ideological tension that had dominated world politics since the 1940s, he was unloved in his own land. An opinion poll in 2017 showed that an overwhelming majority of Russians viewed him negatively.
That could largely be explained by the fact that neither democracy nor capitalism lived up to its promise in Russia. An open-slather economy allowed corrupt oligarchs to flourish and democracy never stood a chance after the chaos of the Boris Yeltsin years.
The result was Vladimir Putin. The Russian people wanted a strongman who promised order, and they got him. Russia today is almost as authoritarian as it was in the days of Khrushchev and Brezhnev. Information is tightly controlled, dissent is brutally suppressed and many Russians seem to like it that way. The evidence suggests that Putin understands his people far better than Gorbachev did.
But there’s another even bigger and more tragic irony that Gorbachev’s death forces us to confront. While we smugly complimented ourselves on winning the Cold War, the democratic, capitalist West was all along being systematically undermined from within by ideological forces far more insidious than Soviet communism.
Call it the culture wars, call it identity politics, call it wokeism, call it neo-Marxism … whatever the label, a multi-faceted assault on Western values has been fermenting for decades, mostly in our institutions of learning, and is now happening in plain sight.
It aggressively manifests itself in attacks on all the values that define Western society and culture: free speech, property rights, the rule of law, economic liberalism, history, science, literature, philosophy and, most damagingly, democracy itself. The attacks are sanctioned by our own institutions, including the media, and have largely gone unopposed by nominally conservative politicians who give the impression of being in a state of paralysis.
We watched enthralled as Gorbachev defied political gravity and neutralised what we regarded as a potential threat to the free world, but I wonder who will save us from the even more menacing enemy within.
Karl du Fresne, a freelance journalist, is the former editor of The Dominion newspaper. He blogs at karldufresne.blogspot.co.nz.
Ronald Reagan played his part too, subjecting the Soviet Union to sustained economic and military pressure that exposed the weakness behind its belligerent posturing.
Gorbachev, although a committed member of the Communist Party, was smart enough to realise the game was up for Soviet totalitarianism. Just as importantly, he had the sensibility to manage its dismantling in a way that minimised the damage. He was the first Soviet leader since Khrushchev who seemed more or less human.
Most of all, he had the courage to do what needed to be done, notwithstanding the reactionary forces arrayed against him.
The great irony is that while he earned the respect and gratitude of the West for defusing the ideological tension that had dominated world politics since the 1940s, he was unloved in his own land. An opinion poll in 2017 showed that an overwhelming majority of Russians viewed him negatively.
That could largely be explained by the fact that neither democracy nor capitalism lived up to its promise in Russia. An open-slather economy allowed corrupt oligarchs to flourish and democracy never stood a chance after the chaos of the Boris Yeltsin years.
The result was Vladimir Putin. The Russian people wanted a strongman who promised order, and they got him. Russia today is almost as authoritarian as it was in the days of Khrushchev and Brezhnev. Information is tightly controlled, dissent is brutally suppressed and many Russians seem to like it that way. The evidence suggests that Putin understands his people far better than Gorbachev did.
But there’s another even bigger and more tragic irony that Gorbachev’s death forces us to confront. While we smugly complimented ourselves on winning the Cold War, the democratic, capitalist West was all along being systematically undermined from within by ideological forces far more insidious than Soviet communism.
Call it the culture wars, call it identity politics, call it wokeism, call it neo-Marxism … whatever the label, a multi-faceted assault on Western values has been fermenting for decades, mostly in our institutions of learning, and is now happening in plain sight.
It aggressively manifests itself in attacks on all the values that define Western society and culture: free speech, property rights, the rule of law, economic liberalism, history, science, literature, philosophy and, most damagingly, democracy itself. The attacks are sanctioned by our own institutions, including the media, and have largely gone unopposed by nominally conservative politicians who give the impression of being in a state of paralysis.
We watched enthralled as Gorbachev defied political gravity and neutralised what we regarded as a potential threat to the free world, but I wonder who will save us from the even more menacing enemy within.
Karl du Fresne, a freelance journalist, is the former editor of The Dominion newspaper. He blogs at karldufresne.blogspot.co.nz.
4 comments:
I so do not want to accept what you write although the signs are all there. What I can't understand is why? I can't see anything attractive or intellectually gripping about postmodernism. Why would anyone be attracted to Foucoult? Sure there is a lot wrong with capitalism - in my view - but postmodernism does not address this. Sadly most people do not want to think, but there are exceptions - you (and me, but I don't get it yet)
How stupid are we?
Pretty much the whole crop of Western politicians are cut from the same cloth when it comes to woke values, regardless of political leaning.
People power will be the only thing that forces our future leaders to represent the values the majority wants and holds dear. Nothing focuses the mind of a PM or President more than a huge vociferous "mob" demanding proper representation.
As long as the majority chooses to stay silent and just take it on the chin then the more emboldened and extreme our out-of-touch, virtue-signaling politicians will become. A better example of which is hard to find anywhere other than in NZ.
Agree with you Dee M.
In Chile this week the people rejected the proposed new constitution which was leaning too far left. I checked to see if their president is a Young Global Leader and yes he is, just like our PM. At least they were asked about changes but we have been "gifted" He Pua Pua in transparent secrecy.
As Karl says we have been undermined from within. Wake up NZers, don't betray our country and all the good things we have for untested (or proven failed) ideologies.
MC
Frederick the Great wrote to Voltaire and said only 1/1,000 people think for themselves. Voltaire wrote back and said the figure was 1/100,000. Mass democracy has clearly failed. Should we not return to enlightened despotism?
Post a Comment