Stephen Kotkin & Orville Schell: What Drives Putin and Xi (Part One) | The Foreign Affairs Interview

[@timty8224]

It's always a great day when I discover a newly posted Stephen Kotkin presentation on KZbin. His perspective on geopolitics is always informative (of course), nuanced, and strangely calming. I've learned a great deal from this man, a true sage for this particularly tense era.

[@dancaulfield1008]

Babe, wake up, Kotkin did another interview.

[@shadyberger5695]

me, racing home to listen in

[@MarcosElMalo2]

Kotkin should be given a major league contract.

[@dsadawrware]

literally me

[@treverblanco]

Kotkin is a treasure.

[@gaiusvincent9643]

I agree, rather afraid he would too!

[@Panzerino02]

No, He isn't... .

[@gogudelagaze1585]

I cannot express how much respect I have for both of these people. I never thought I'd see them in a dialogue like this. Thanks for making this happen!

[@CuriousPersonUSA]

Fascinating discussion. Kotkin and Schell discussing this important topic is such a treat! I am glad you decided to make it a 2 part and cant't wait for the next one!

[@kaylidington]

Both experts in their fields and articulate, but Kotkin never ceases to amaze. His understanding of issues challenges and expands any listener prepared to listen and think.

[@TheDavidlloydjones]

He's great on Russia, a dull thudd, right-wing barstool nut when he gets around to the United States.

[@dimitrioskantakouzinos8590]

Kotkin is impressive, but also a neocon.

[@dannyv2468va2]

@@dimitrioskantakouzinos8590 He is in no way a neocon He lays out the causes of the present situation.

[@jannichi6431]

Any interviewee that expands on the given question is okay by me.

[@neidringhaus1915]

Looking forward to my commute for once to listen, can't wait for part 2! Thanks to everyone involved

[@andyreznick]

Fascinating. Thanks. Looking forward to part two.

[@stephenohara3014]

Amazing interview. I can't wait to hear the second half. There is never enough Stephen Kotkin content out there to meet the demand. This was my introduction to Orville Schell. I look forward to hearing more from him.

[@v_skeezy]

Steven Kotkin you are a great historian. Thank you for all your work!

[@johnmaisonneuve9057]

When is Prof. Kotkin’s third volume of Stalin’s biography coming out? The first two could not put them down, they were so fantastic.

[@tnndll4294]

It will come-out when George RR Martin's finishes Winds of Winter.

[@edwardfowle2404]

OMG!!! Two of the greatest intellectuals our world has created!! Fascinating. Love it!!

[@stevesmith8155]

Thank you all. Illuminating. Understanding is so crucial. I look forward to next parts....

[@tonycamacho7473]

Fascinating. Great to hear from knowledgeable people who, are more information scientists rather than individuals that have an ax to grind, are sensationalists, and seem to be fine people. Thank you for the segment. Looking forward to the following segments.

[@christophercousins184]

Fantastic conversation, thanks so much and looking forward to more.

[@KathysGuess]

I can’t tell you how much I enjoyed this 2 part! Both are gems, their historical significance is amazing. I’m just overwhelmed by their knowledge of history. I could listen all day to the three of you. Thank you for moderating this conversation in such a timely manner to bring historical context for these dangerous times👍🇺🇦🙏🏼🇺🇸🙏🏼 P.S. please do it again soon. I feel we’ve only scratched the surface of this topic.

[@MandalayMoore33]

LOVE Stephen Kotkin and I say that as someone who's extremely difficult to please. Now, where's part II?

[@eugeney4892]

Brilliant minds! Well done and keep this series up!

[@willdon.1279]

What an immense illumination of the two leaders, so critical of where the world is today. Presented in a way my old brain could understand. I had simply thought Putin was afraid his own people would have more comparisons of how many ex-Soviets dealt with corruption - much better than his embedded Kleptocracy. Now, only part of the story. Splendid that we have minds like this to help. I remember, when our Brexit catastrophe was unfolding, a pro Brexiteer, Gove, said “Britain is sick of experts” I enjoyed one response - "well, I’m volunteering to save some money for the NHS by offering my services as his next surgeon" (from a journalist I presume?) 🙂

[@gaoxiaen1]

Too short. I can't wait for part two.

[@williambamann1845]

I could listen to these guys for hours and hours

[@Sanctimonium]

8:24 "you know the way people get tapped on the back of the shoulder at Yale to run the United States" 😂

[@muskduh]

Thanks for the audio presentation.

[@MarcosElMalo2]

A half hour is too short.

[@trytwicelikemice3190]

He mentions in the intro, the conversation was longer and will be released in two parts.

[@6663000]

Way too short.

[@6663000]

17:05 Mr. Kotkin saying the word "youths" is great. I almost feel as though he said it with a smile on his face. I think he knows what people will be thinking. Haha

[@kempfkempfkempf]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/fqabpYtod6Z3Z80

[@KT-sl4js]

lol!

[@gaoxiaen1]

Stephen Kotkin doesn't appear on KZbin nearly enough!

[@joannamoore4477]

I will listen to anything from Stephen

[@dro355]

I love how all these heavy-handed leaders dont ask what their people want and do that. They do what they want

[@Dogsnark]

Fascinating! I’m very eager to hear the second half of the interview.

[@bottomhat2534]

Simply exceptional. I'll need to listen to it a few more times.

[@kbone8137]

What an excellent duo to have on and compare notes on their respective foci of studies. Thoroughly enjoyed. I would love to hear them discuss in more depth HOW the allure of communism was likely fashioned by each of their respective countries to make it pallatable to any extent they tried (i.e., the culturo-philosophical bent of the societies). Here, they primarily looked at the historical settings, but there would be some wonderfully nuanced interpretations that they could provide considering the in-depth and brilliant clarity on the cultures, politics, history, etc. Thank you for providing the venue. Would LOVE to hear more!

[@LetoAtreides-i4c]

These are still western perspectives, which are not difficult to find in the media. Although Schell is supposedly a China expert, he lacks sympathy for the Chinese perspective and only wants to see China become more like the west. This puts a fundamental limitation on his understanding of China. To better understand other people and civilisations around the world, we need more perspectives from the actual people we are trying to understand, instead of relying mainly on analysis and interpretations from western experts.

[@nerva-]

Interesting how Kotkin, like so many others, doesn't seem to be aware of the fact Deng Xiaoping actually TRIED both economic and POLITICAL liberalization early in his reign, but like Mao's experiments with allowing more speech, it quickly degenerated into ever-increasing criticism of the CCP, followed by a crackdown. Deng then avoided further loosening, but when Zhao Ziyang took the reins he tried his own experiment with allowing more political freedoms, which culminated in Tienanmen Square and his own removal from office. So, the Chinese actually had far more experience with this than the USSR -- Deng was far more like Gorbachev than people realize, but the difference was Deng pulled back in time for the CCP to retain control. It was Gorbachev who didn't learn from Deng's failed experiment with political liberalization.

[@snslifestyleorg]

That's the genius of Deng, making sure democracy was introduced gradually and not at the expense of the collapse of China like the USSR.

[@gaoxiaen1]

Lenin was anti-colonialist/anti-imperialist towards Eastern Europe, Africa, and North and South America, but was certainly colonialist and imperialist towards his own East. The eastern minority "republics" didn't and don't want Moscow's dictatorial rule, oppression, and conscription, especially the Gulags.

[@kreek22]

Pure nonsense. Lenin was so eager to colonize Poland that he invaded Poland before he had won the Russian Civil War. The Poles crushed his invasion.

[@chrisfreebairn870]

The USSR was a Russian colonial enterprise; the Ukrainians, released from Polish Lithuanian colonisation resisted it violently, but lost. They had reason to believe they'd escaped Russian dominance after 1991, but by 2014 Putin was clearly not going to let that happen without a fight. Ukraine was not ready then militarily, nor was the West politically to back them; hopes for Russia & China developing as global partners superseded concerns for Ukraine - or just the economic benefits of doing business with both. By 2022, the USA & Europe were ready to respond to Putin's continued aggression, with guilt about 2014 & frustration with China's double game, key elements in the resolve to act decisively at this time. This is in effect a proxy war between China & the USA, with Russia as the useful idiot & Ukraine the pawn that can become a king if it can survive the gauntlet & get to the other side; well a princeling, at least.

Really looking forward to the second part!

[@widanarallage]

It’s interesting to hear the western interpretation of the data points. Thank you for bringing these options forward. Hiran

[@martavdz4972]

Good points! They also explain the rift between Russia and Europe, including most Slavic-speaking countries. Most Slavic-speaking countries - unlike Russia - have the same experience as the rest of Europe. Europe is a bunch of small and middle-sized countries who fought each other for 1.000 years. And now, with just a few exceptions, are fed up to their teeth with war. If you're American - imagine 1.000 years of civil wars and school shootings everywhere. Everyone is surrounded by neighbours whom he has wronged and who have wronged him. We know history very well but we usually don't bring it up in a negative way, because it would be like "What about what your country did to my country in the 19th century?!" "But what about YOUR country did to my country in the 18th century?" "And what did YOUR country do to MY country in the 17th century?!?!?"..... It would never end, so we just choose to ignore it and look forward instead. Russia is a younger country, it doesn't have this super-long history of wars, so it isn't tired of it yet; nor does it have the need to keep balance between neighbours of roughly the same size. Russia has been trying to use this to sew discord among European nations. But its success is very limited, because it doesn't understand that there are so DARNED MANY historical wrongs we could hold against each other. So we don't easily get emotionally involved in one particular one.

[@chrisfreebairn870]

Snyder says the 'tired of war' narrative is a convenient fiction, that 'Europe' is the remedy of small states that lost their overseas empires being inviable; Russia, unable to build a maritime empire, built a land one, & unable to export the communist revolution globally, the Russians colonised their own subjects instead - with collectivisation. Much of what Russia says is pure self justification, bluff & bluster; they've resented the West for centuries; their problem is geographic & political, but they can't admit that, so they invent the grand civilization & victimhood narrative as a distraction. Also, they can wage war without political consequence bc their apparatus of political repression is so effective. I think your conception is wrong.

[@seanmellows1348]

Great stuff, look forward to the second part.

[@istvancsorgo3840]

Thank you.

[@PC-ee7tz]

The best! Thank you!

[@sbaumgartner9848]

Terrific. I'm looking forward to the second interview.

[@Main.Account]

Great insights…can’t wait for part II

[@ceceliablair9177]

Claiming a victim identity succeeds both as a power-seeking move as well as a claim for morality. You get power plus the status of being moral.

[@richardfox2865]

Excellent, discussion.

[@HughFromAlice]

Very perceptive big pic level comments that were highly thought provoking. Make sure to listen to part 2 !!!

[@thefisherking78]

That was SO GOOD 😊👍

[@mja4wp]

Jonathan D.T. Ward had access to CCP documentation and writes about it in his new work, The Decisive Decade: 'American grand Strategy for Triumph over China'. Dr Kotkin spoke about digging down and finding the aims and goals of the CCP ideology and Ward does a nice job of revealing that.

[@j.d.snyder4466]

Epic intellectual discourse! Thank you for posting it on YT. I know a little about Russian and Ukrainian history and Chinese history from my graduate studies. I know and respect Schell's work but IMO he overstates the Leninist lens on the Chinese victimhood. With its millennial culture and history that is embodied in its self-reference as the Middle Kingdom, that is, the center of the universe, Leninism isn't required for the Chinese to feel victimized by western imperialism. Their impeccable kingdom was pecked at and bleeding throughout most of the 19th century. It's somewhat ironic that the Chinese kingdom demise from dry rot came 6 years before the Bolshevik revolution in 1917.

[@iguana1677]

An above-the-rim type quality discussion.

[@wegder]

Fantastic discussion

[@W.Khairi]

Really enjoyed the insights and discussion, Many Thanks.

[@beback_]

23:33 "The Mullahs don't represent Persian civilization through the centuries." Couldn't have said it better. As an Iranian, it frustrates me to no end when westerners equate "our culture" with Islam and a fanatical interpretation of Islam for that matter. It really does play into the hand of the mullahs' regime.

[@Leshic2]

Iranian friends of mine feel the same way.

[@suewong6833]

My friend told me that Xi came from peasant class and hated corrupt officials. This video is quite informative

[@juerbert1]

Powerfully portrayed, congratulations !😮😊

[@alanaadams7440]

I would love to know the difference between communism in China and communism in Russia what are the policy differences

[@2000brettpaul]

"Mao put numbers up on the board, that Hitler never put up, never mind the British". Kotkin's incredulous voice here makes me chuckle.

[@chrisfreebairn870]

Yep, loved that point about selective victimhood, such a pathetic self serving excuse for building nationalistic anti westernism as a political tool; "the Chinese ppl may decide not to buy Australian beef, wine, coal, lobsters, timber or barley". The Chinese ppl are far more inclined to resist authority than the Russians - hence welding doors closed during covid, bc the CCP does not provide the safety net that the Russian state does via state enterprises etc, it's work or starve. The CCP knows this well, & the anti zero covid uprising showed Xi just how far 'Xi Xinping thought' could be relied upon when shit was hitting the fan. This nationalistic manipulation of the public through fear, & the impact on government it can have is clearly evident in the USA right now too, with Fox & the GOP shit scared to alienate tRumps base (hoping while verbally bashing them that the DOJ is going to save them by taking him out). Russia & the CCP have tools available to manipulate, manage & suppress such civic emotion that the USA does not have, which may explain why they stoke that fire to greater heights. They're both shit scared of it though, hence the brutality of the crackdowns when they're deemed necessary. It's all such a damned waste of time, resources & innocent human lives, consuming the future with myths of the past.

[@SpaceCafeCanada]

Sweeet, a fantastico podcast this I know this will be...

[@keesdevos4816]

great references

[@olivierbeltrami]

The audio podcast version of this is only 6 minutes long. Can it be fixed ?

[@foreignaffairs]

Hi. Thank you for your question. Can you provide more details, please? What platform are you using for podcast listening?

[@Michael-tz7tj]

Kotkin Nation!

[@michaelhenault1444]

First Rate Discussion 😊

[@yi4913]

Modern identity politics is all about being victims.

[@martavdz4972]

For some strange reason, that doesn't work for central Europe much - Austria, Slovenia, Poland etc. I'm from Czechia and talking about being the victim isn't that common in our politics. Except for one politician, and he isn't Czech. Some Czechs watch Russia's victimizing of itself and idealizing of its "grand" past with contempt. We know history very well, but look into the future. Russia is immeasurably larger and more powerful than we are, it has potential and natural resources, and yet it looks into history and views itself as a victim? Wtf? Czechia used to be basically a colony of Austria, yet we don't hold a grudge and don't feel like victims, even though there was some persecution from Austria in the 17th-19th centuries. But our relationship with Austria today is equal and friendly. I think that's the difference between Russia and most of Europe - Europe is fed to its teeth with war. We don't bring it up while talking, because it would be like "What about what your country did to my country in the 19th century?!" "But what about YOUR country did to my country in the 18th century?" "And what did your country do to my country in the 17th century?!?!?" It would never end, so we just choose to ignore it and look forward instead. Russia doesn't have this attitude.

[@kreek22]

It is about the pretense of victimhood being used to attain power. This moral game originated in Christianity, but was perverted by Marxism.

[@d0lvl0]

When's part 2?!

[@alvin8391]

Stephen Kotkin and Stephen Cohen were both professors at Princeton's Russian department, but they were very different in their political views. Professor Cohen, who died a few years ago, was independent of the establishment represented in Foreign Affairs. His independent views presented a more honest view of Russia, in my opinion. Kotkin is, I suspect, an intellectual tool of the US effort to suppress Russia's recovery from the collapse of the USSR as a sovereign state.

[@johnd2058]

21:30 I propose we call Kotkin's framing 'The Ninety Years' War' for differentiation.

[@canadiangemstones7636]

Nice to see Andy Warhol still weighing in on politics.

[@jessiejb4684]

Kotkin is a great story teller and makes a good living telling westerns that coincidentally all geopolitical competitors to the u.s. empire are uniquely bad, while we are always good. This only validates our moral right to demonize, set out to destabilize within and around other country’s borders, arm rebels, wage proxy war, or even direct war. The rest of the world sees this judgment entirely differently. Perhaps we are the baddies? Tragically, the u.s. rivals some of the world’s historical monsters in causing the death/slaughter of populations. An unpopular statement, and admittedly, an inherently repulsive idea, however, if you think critically about it, there is truth. We must look inward instead of continuously looking for monsters abroad and using guys like kotkin to reassure ourselves of our morality and righteousness.

[@rezzob]

Interest and prosperity of their people

[@tb8865]

If Vladimir Putin doesn't own the legacy of Russian civilization, what does that say about the United States government and American civilization? Would Peter the Great's assessment of the state of modern Russia be more or less hostile than George Washington's reaction to the America of today?

[@rymnbn]

Fantastic stuff 👏🙌

[@Mr.Altavoz]

Would love to hear what professor Kotkins has to say on what happened in Moscow 🎉🎉🎉

[@locutusmdv]

Seeing the West as upstarts compared to the ancient Eastern empires is a lack of understanding that the West is but a continuation of ancient Greece and then of the Roman republic and empire. Thus 2500 years old. The West not only is old, but is exploratory and curious. The East is conservative and closed.

[@VincentAutos]

Great interview. i like both of them. Especially, respect Schell's dedication on China study. However he has a too fixed mindset. He always complain why Xi does not do revenge on CCP. Xi has a sense of history. He do what he think is good for the country and the history, not much personal revenge. How can a sparrow know the ambition of a swan. 燕雀焉知鸿之志。I wish Schell can make great contribution in the history in the future.

[@dkoz8321]

Prof. Kotkin's side hustle is as Joe Pesci voice impersenator.

[@cymbalspecialist]

To the last question Mr. Schell presents, asking what is it about the eternal culture of victimization that appeals to the Chinese, in my opinion it provides a deflection, a diversion to direct hatred at the "other", thereby "legitimizing" the Party's very existence. When it comes to the people's anger regarding the myriad of problems in China, there's only one party responsible, and that's the CCP: when you control every single aspect of people's lives, you are ultimately responsible for both the good and the bad. There is so much that falls into the bad category, due to the CCP, that it's essential for the Party to convince everyone to place all blame for all ills toward "external forces".

[@davidlai399]

The West can also take some responsibility for not doing more to integrate post Soviet Russia into Europe. Instead, it saw Russia as a resource rich privatisation cash cow. Similarly, rather than fixating on Mao’s era, the West can give more credit to CCP’s unprecedented achievement in lifting its 800 million people out of poverty and its significant contribution to global economic prosperity in the past 30 years.

[@p.d.stanhope7088]

Both countries have a long history of antagonistic behavior toward their neighbors. They will act the same way on a global basis in the 21st Century.

[@kreek22]

What countries don't have long histories of antagonistic behavior toward their neighbors?

[@williestyle35]

12:17 this is an important point and reminder. The "Tiananmen Square massacre" will be 35 years ago, on June 3 (lots of historical events seem to happen around this date). I was so hopeful that this would truly "open China to the 'West' ". But the tanks, bullets, and soldiers of the People's Liberation Army changed that (as I had fears it would). Those student "peaceful protesters" were swept aside and purged from the... collective conscience of China because they were unable to get ; the "countryside", the apparatchiks, academia, and (most importantly), the military or any large group in Communist "leadership", to either listen enough to let the protesters continue or join with them - sorta similar problems as the "Hungarian Revolution of 1956" and "Prague Spring 1968" had tried facing down and also lost. There is an old Star Trek 'meme' - "Only Nixon can go to China' (it is a sort of tricky triple entendre about popularity as a tool of diplomacy, perceived left - right and right - left policies and "values" , and that only a populist "strong leader" that is actually as... corrupted as his counterpart, can go to an... inscrutable and "closed society" to make "deals" that result in opening trade and diplomacy to a wider w more opne world.). That meme had some "truthiness" in it, but also maintained an element of the same nonsense about "understanding China" that goes back to the days of Marco Polo. China is far more xenophobic and intentionally closed (and closed minded) to outside forces and influences than many in the West can contemplate, for several reasons including the perceived "superiority" of China among Chinese people. 35 years, and China is just as closed off from everyday contact with Western institutions and people as it was back then. 35 years, and we in the West have failed to convince the Chinese people or leadership that "freedom", "democracy", and our systems, that anything we have is good enough or valuable enough for China to really join with us - instead of just using "free markets" and our financial systems to shift wealth and resources to them. Despite what Kotkin or the Hover Institution (where he "works") might tell you - China has played us and is still stealing; our technology, our money, our intellectual property, and "our" world's shared resources (look at the CCP'$ activities (looting) in the Pacific Ocean and on the seabed (even WWI and WWII Ally sunken ships that are "war graves" have been scooped up and taken), vast unsustainable fishing, awful pollution and dumping, "claiming" areas and whole regions that have never been connected to China, then outright stealing land from neighbors. their avarice knows no bounds and they would never agree to anything that does significantly restrain then).).

[@seventhapex]

why two parts?

[@delta5297]

If Xi wants respect (it's too late for Putin) then he should undertake democratic reforms. Being an economic and military superpower means nothing if your rule is unjust.

[@snslifestyleorg]

Wrong. China will introduce democracy at its own pace, not by Western standard. China's main priority is to eradicate poverty rather than political freedom.

[@nathanngumi8467]

Word.

[@steve-real]

wow! that was so good. As an average dude i just can’t imagine thinking from their perspective because it just doesn’t cross my mind. I’m too busy doing my own thing.

[@Alex-ig2xr]

The world is fluid. It’s dynamic. You can’t use M&L theory to generalize China’s effort to create a better system. The two professors assume Chinese government is evil autocracy first based on the past events. That makes their conclusions destined to fail.

[@toughr1506]

Who is the host?

[@tocreatee3585]

some people want to draw conclusion from evidences, other people look for evidence that support conclusion they want.

[@melodymaker135]

I didn’t know Andy Warhol was still alive

[@ridethecurve55]

I'll pass on this cast, to wait for the next episode which will (hopefully) include the latest event around the attempted coup in Russia. Looking forward to it.

[@jusmeetsingh1907]

Threatening NATO Summits During the 90s and 00s, the Russian Elites were all hyperventilating to see NATO creep towards the Russian border in 4 tranches. And it was not as if Russia had been defeated and overrun at the end of the Cold War. They had taken an internal decision to step back and opt out of being a military state. And it was in good faith and good faith was expected in return. And good faith was promised as well to allay Russian strategic fears. And then the West started backtracking and cornering Russia. The facts are all there. The Russian strategists were screaming about it throughout the 90s and 00s. Forget the Russians, all US ambassadors to Russia, like William Burns, all the top US military strategists like George Keenan were warning how dangerous a step that betrayal.. that NATO imperialist advance was going to be. And how Ukraine was the ultimate red line after Gorbachev had been promised that NATO would not advance even an inch. Does that sound like Russia apologists to you? It was a bullying advance which kept advancing relentlessly. On and on. Even at last late step was Russia expected to sit paralyzed and mute?? One must be clear that this war has been Europe's choice! Under American Deep State's unbearable pressures.

[@awf6554]

To reframe it in a balanced way: ex Soviet colonial states chose collective security against their coloniser by joining NATO.

[@lucasvarela9632]

Robing Hilton is very cooool…..

[@pepsee0]

Simple...no one person should control all power end of discussion!

[@franknjamen3044]

Supremacist always criticises other thinking their system is the best. Stop forcing ur ideology on others

[@jimmynickles828]

“Not even Mao and Stalin…” Are you nuts?

[@dgib1694]

My god! I just read M. Scholl's article "Life of the Party" Recommended in the description above, and its cultural bias is unbelievable (as well as being extraordinarily parochial for a foreign affair text). I understand better the interview in this video.

[@Leshic2]

24:37 - Great explanation of the victimization mentality, and the "You hurt the feelings of the Chinese People"

[@deenzmartin6695]

serious question: is kotkin affiliated with the CIA?

[@noneone3310]

6:00 since all of that are just speculation and guess about someone's mind and psyche, the description of young XI's psyche is more likely what Mir.Stephen Kotkin imagines XI to be, or prefers XI to be, or what he himself would be in that kind of circumstance, or all above. so it in fact reveals something that not necessarily about XI, but about Mir.Stephen Kotkin himself. interesting.

[@politicalqueso]

The CCP tried to destroy Chinese culture not that long ago. It should be easy enough to separate the two

[@edwarding4355]

I think what's driving Xi and Putin is a little different. Putin drive is for his oligarchy and his own imperial ambition and all of Russia is his instrument without regard to the people of Russia. Xi feels checked by responsibility to the people of China ultimately and the CCP is his instrument, though he is acting on his narrow understanding of what is good for China and the Chinese people.

[@malloc7108]

I think you can't get inside anyone's head that much. It doesn't matter what Xi's underlying intentions are, it matters what he does to his government, people, and neighborhood.

[@katewoolf6059]

Nah. It's all about himself, just like every other garden-variety tyrant

[@andyreznick]

Good comment. Xi seems to be an actual Social leftist, but at the same time a right wing Nationalist. Putin seems to be mostly about personal power and survival, irrespective of its effects on Russia or the world, perhaps somewhat like a sociopath. I'm still not sold on Putin's sincerity of "restoring Russian greatness". I still believe it may be protective camouflage for personal ambition and security. Xi, on the other hand, does seem to have internalized at least some aspects of belief in the Mandate of Heaven.

[@yp77738yp77739]

I think you are correct about Xi. As a European with close ties to China for many years, I see Xi as acting wholly in the interest of his people and his state. I just wish our leaders in the west were similarly acting in our interest. What I find particularly positive is that he is currently acting to try and reduce the wealth gap between citizens, which will be the cause of disintegration of western societies.

[@JameBlack]

As long as China is growin CCP cares about the source of this growth - the people.

[@XE1GXG]

Although interesting, the context of THIS conversation must be taken into account: both of these scholars emerge from the gringoi mindset.

[@anwiycti1585]

One more person closely ties with these two, DJT ! He comes handy if you try to understand either one or both : D