Is Soviet control of our politics OK?
As facts are revealed about Russian interference with the 2016 presidential election and each lie of President Trumpís administration is exposed, the official defense of the administration has morphed from Russia might not have interfered with the election, to Russians interfered but there was no collusion between Russia and the Trump team, to there was collusion, but so what?
First, the casual acceptance of lying as standard operating procedure for government officials is disturbing. Trump supporters continue to treat the written and oral words of sociopathic liars as if they mean something.
More importantly, our values have morphed so much that a significant portion of the population thinks it is OK, or at least no big deal, to meet with someone from Russia for the purpose of receiving damaging information on a political opponent. Not only government officials, but many conservative pundits have taken that position.
We have to wonder whether conservative pundits would take that same position if the meeting happened decades ago and the foreigner with dirt on a political opponent was from the now defunct Soviet Union rather than from Russia.
What would be the difference? Years before the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the philosophy created by Karl Marx known as communism had largely become irrelevant where it was not already established. In the final years of the Soviet Union, the practical definition of that country was simply a dictatorship that suppressed opposition and was hostile to western democracies. The same description applies to Russia under Putin.