How Putin Dog-Walked CarlsonThe “American Exceptionalism” that allowed Tucker Carlson to think he is Putin's equal.
Written 2/12/24 In 1999, I studied in Paris, France at two institutions. La Sorbonne, for French Civilization, and Negocia, for business. During an early discussion at Negocia with students from around the world, I found myself on the losing end of a debate about personal freedom and autonomy. As one of the few Americans in the room and the only Black American present, I thought I had a clear understanding of freedom and how it’s represented via personal choice. A Russian student debunked me and forever changed the way I think. He asked me if I had a social security number. “Yes, I do, I replied.” What do you think that number is for? Confused, I answered, “I use it for employment, school and taxes.” What do you think your government uses it for? “The same things.” “No. Your government uses it to track everything you do. You are the property of your state. You have no freedom. Everything you do is documented and tracked by your government.” We talked about ATM cards and grocery store discount cards, all the developing ways (at the time) to collect data on populations in order to understand and control their habits. In 1999. I couldn’t tell this young man anything about Russian society, other than the long food lines I had seen on TV and that the first McDonald’s that opened there in 1990 had been the largest in the world at the time. I have never again entered a conversation with international counterparts assuming I know more or better because of where I’m from. Tucker Carlson would have done well to have had such a lesson in his youth. I doubt he knows enough to be embarrassed or to even recognize how ill-prepared he was to sit and speak with Russian President, Vladamir Putin, in February 2024. Carlson approached the interview as if it were a casual conversation with an equal in status, stature, power, knowledge, intelligence, or vision. He sat down with a world leader with no reverence or respect and spoke with zero diplomacy or deference. Putin gave him a long-winded history lesson for his presumptuous arrogance.
Americans know Carlson as a racist liar with a belief in a false supremacy based on skin color. I call this delusion an inferiority complex or white inferiority. It’s clear he thought he was sitting with someone he could commiserate with from the height of his upturned nose. Most of Carlson’s questions were obnoxious, small-minded, short-sighted, rude, arrogant, biased, and extremely undiplomatic. At one point, Putin called a question “pesky.” The abrupt start and ending of the aired interview (viewed on @kremlin on YouTube) convinces me that we did not get the full discourse. The burns that were left in the released video make me wonder what Carlson deemed necessary to cut out. All faux supremacists are not the same.In its aired format on Kremlin TV’s YouTube channel, Carlson lost Putin on his first question. He told Putin he was perceived as “paranoid” and demanded he explain himself in regards to his suspicions of the intentions of the United States government against Russia. Putin looked irritated and asked, “Are we having a talk show or a serious conversation?” Carlson smirked and said, “This is a very serious conversation.” It, in fact, was not a serious conversation from Putin’s perspective, nor mine. It was like witnessing a novice checkers player square up against a chess grandmaster. Carlson insisted with a chuckle that the conversation was part of a formidable series. To which Putin asked, “Your educational background is in history? Allow me thirty seconds to a minute to give you historical background.” He then proceeded to dog-walk, Carlson for two hours while taking shots at his naiveté, ignorance and incompetence. Carlson was not prepared for the history lesson or statesmanship he was presented with. Putin began with a 1162 year historical context to frame his claim for Russian boundaries which include Ukraine – its creation and varying perceptions throughout the last millennia. According to Putin, regarding the Russia-Ukraine conflict, “What is happening to a certain extent is civil war. Carlson kept trying to get answers for Russia’s interactions with the United States during the last five to ten years. The range was not there. I’ve never been a Putin fan but there were a few questions for which I was offended on Putin’s behalf. Imagine that! Carlson made Putin appear sympathetic and marginalized! (I’m aghast!) If he were an intelligent man or even a skilled journalist, I would say, “Well played.” But he stumbled into it and did no good for anyone. The first insult was calling Putin paranoid with his opening question. The second was implying Putin could have subdued and claimed Ukraine twenty-four years ago, with the use of nuclear weapons. Carlson suggested Putin had the option of nuclear control – of Ukraine, NATO, and the world – four times throughout the interview. Later he told Putin he’s “clearly bitter” and asked for an explanation as to why the West’s rejection of him has made him so hostile. I clutched my pearls! He asked Putin why he didn’t present a particular piece of information to the world to win a propaganda victory. The audacity! Carlson kept asking Putin about his opinions on United States policy, leadership, politics, and public opinion. Putin gave his primary view of the world, “China is number one. India has 1.5 billion people. Russia is the fifth largest world economy.” At one point, Carlson asked, “Are you willing to say, ‘Congratulations, NATO, you’ve won and just keep the situation where it is now?’” Putin strategically replied, “Well this is a matter for talks. For negotiation. No one is willing to talk about that with us. Or maybe they want talks, I know they do want to, but they do not know how to go about that. They have to think about how to reverse the situation.” To one line of questioning, Putin walked Carlson through how the United States has devalued its own currency with sanctions and restrictions. “Self-conceit is undermining the American power across the world. Why did they do that [restrict Russian spending in dollars]? They thought the Russian economy would collapse, but it didn’t. Yuan transactions rose from 3% to 34%. Other countries are following suit. Do they know what they are doing in the US? They are undermining their own prosperity.” Carlson replied, “I think that’s a fair assessment. The question is what comes next? Maybe you trade one colonial power for another, a much less sentimental and forgiving colonial power.?” Said with arched suggestiveness. The implication seemed to be that Russia is subordinate to the United States and should be grateful for any benevolence it receives. “Are the BRICS in danger of being completely dominated by the Chinese, the Chinese economy in a way that’s not good for their sovereignty? Do you worry about that?” Putin actually chuckled! “In the war of propaganda, it is very difficult to defeat the United States because the United States controls all the world’s media and many European media. The ultimate beneficiary of the biggest European media are American financial institutions. Don't you know that? So, it is possible to get involved in this work, but it is cost-prohibitive, so to speak. We can simply shine the spotlight on our sources of information, and we will not achieve results.” The icing on offensive questions and statements was telling Putin his story version of a prisoner situation wasn’t necessary, but a show of decency by releasing said prisoner would be appreciated. I don’t know how Carlson got out of Russia alive. Or maybe he didn’t…. Has anyone heard from him since? As a Black Woman in the not-quite-so-United States of America, everything Carlson said could gently be categorized as micro-aggressions. A blunter description is condescending baiting. For what purpose? Who knows. Carlson presented as someone with a great amount of self-conceit, a term Putin used repeatedly to describe the United States, and unfounded self-importance. At varying points, Carlson appeared to consider himself an emissary, a knowledgeable political journalist, a political scientist, someone with phone access to the US president, an official representative of the United States of America, and an intellectual. This one interview proved he is none of that and hopefully, he is self-aware enough to recognize most, if not all, of his fallacies. I don’t know enough about Carlson to analyze his personal opinions or beliefs. This is the first interview I’ve watched of his. I know his persona is one of a racist antagonist. I know the country he hails from is stuck in the lie of racial supremacy and dominance. The way he phrased his questions and repeated detrimental themes was frustrating to listen to and clearly irritated Putin as evidenced by his occasional belittling replies Putin’s villain arcPutin represented himself, his thoughts, hopes, and goals very well. His skill as a statesman is especially impressive due to this amateur interview failure. If we were to take Putin at his word, he’s always wanted to join NATO and be in partnership with Western countries. He is not interested in world domination by any block of nations. He believes a sustainable world means all global powers and threats must come together in unity. He's baffled by the United States’ repeated moves against Russia. Putin used this platform to provide historical, cultural, national, regional, and global context to his ambitions. Everything he said is one hundred percent understandable and relatable. Carlson, and most of the American media, may not be willing to see or acknowledge how much sense Putin made. But as a marginalized and stigmatized American, I can certainly recognize how Putin feels pushed to the margins of the “Civilized West.” How he is not seen or treated as an equal by the United States, Europe, or NATO. How Russia has been actively demonized for decades. He’s willing to talk. Has long been ready to end the conflict with Ukraine - so he says. “We have done so many gestures of goodwill out of decency that I think we have run out of them. We have never seen anyone reciprocate to us in a similar manner.” Putin played his fiddle well, quite honestly. Not so well that I can in any way be termed a sympathizer, but well enough to admit the dirt the United States government does no matter who is in the Executive Office. He referenced conversations with Clinton and Bush junior that can be supported by Google searches. He spoke about an interview with Barbara Walters (November 7, 2001 on 9/11). The media accounts we have of his conversations with our leaders and journalists are consistent. He’s been trying to get Russia into the Western alliance for the tenure of his presidency. He recognizes he has been cast in the role of “Big Bad” so the United States can flaunt its brand of faux democracy as the world’s “Good Guy.” This casting, and Putin’s inability to get other leaders to hear him, has led to his deep desire to expose the lie of democracy in the United States of America. For the last decade, the world has witnessed Vladimir Putin grow his canines to unimaginable proportions as he embraced his role as the worlds latest Big Bad. You're currently a free subscriber to Harvest Life on Substack. For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
|
Wednesday, March 5, 2025
How Putin Dog-Walked Carlson
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Latest from Food Politics: Weekend Reading: Teaching Food Studies
Summer J, Classens M, eds. Teaching Food Studies. Elgar Guides to Teaching. Edward Elgar, 2026. 310 pages. I wrote the Foreword to t...
-
LuciD posted: " The first duty of love is to listen. ~Paul Tillich " Respond to this p...
No comments:
Post a Comment