The heading cannot be more counterintuitive. No freedom of speech, arbitrary arrests, unbelievable corruption, authoritarian regime. But still – how are the US and Russia similar? In my article, you will find similarities, yet please note this: They may not be proportionally the same, even though they can be found on a huge level in respective countries.
Very rich politicians in Russia
In Russia, corruption and wealth accumulation among politicians are pervasive, with several prominent examples that highlight the close relationship between power and money. Vladimir Putin, although his personal wealth is difficult to confirm officially, is widely rumored to be one of the richest men in the world. This is because of his connections with oligarchs and control over major state resources. Some estimates suggest that Putin’s personal fortune could be in the tens of billions, though the Kremlin denies these claims. His close associates, including Igor Sechin, head of Rosneft, and others linked to state-controlled corporations, have seen significant wealth increase over the years, primarily through control of the energy sector.
Alexei Navalny, the opposition leader, has been a vocal critic of Russian political corruption, revealing massive schemes involving state officials. In one of his most famous investigations, Navalny exposed a luxury palace allegedly built for Putin on the Black Sea. It was valued at over $1 billion. This palace, funded through a complex network of corporations and officials, was emblematic of how Putin and his inner circle have used state resources for personal gain. Navalny has also targeted figures like Dmitry Medvedev, the former Russian president, accusing him of accumulating luxury properties and estates through illicit deals with oligarchs and state-owned companies.
Beyond Putin, other Russian officials have used their political power to enrich themselves. Sergey Chemezov, head of the state conglomerate Rostec, and Arkady Rotenberg, a businessman and Putin’s childhood friend, have amassed significant fortunes through government contracts and projects like the Sochi Olympics and the Kerch Strait Bridge. These projects were plagued by allegations of inflated costs and money siphoning. This makes them prime examples of how the Russian political elite uses state-controlled enterprises and mega-projects to line their own pockets.
The American shadow political billionaires
In the U.S., political corruption is often linked to corporate lobbying, especially in industries like defense and energy. George W. Bush’s administration, for example, was closely tied to the military-industrial complex, particularly during the Iraq War. Critics argue that defense contractors like Halliburton, which was run by Dick Cheney before he became vice president, benefited immensely from the war. Halliburton received billions in contracts for rebuilding and oil extraction, raising questions about conflicts of interest and cronyism. The revolving door between government and private industry has long been a hallmark of how defense contractors profit from policies that keep the U.S. engaged in prolonged military conflicts.
Joe Biden, while not directly implicated in the same way, has faced scrutiny over his family’s business dealings. His son, Hunter Biden, was criticized for securing lucrative positions with foreign companies, such as Burisma in Ukraine, during Biden’s time as vice president. Although no formal charges or direct corruption have been proven against Joe Biden himself, these ties have raised concerns about whether his political position indirectly benefited his family’s financial interests. Republicans have used this as a talking point. They claimed it exemplifies the broader issue of Washington insiders gaining financially from political power.
Madeleine Albright, former Secretary of State under Bill Clinton, co-founded Albright Stonebridge Group, a consulting firm that advises corporations and governments on international matters. While not overtly corrupt, her transition from public service to a private firm serving global corporations highlights the “revolving door” phenomenon in U.S. politics. Additionally, Albright had investments in Kosovo’s telecommunications industry after advocating for U.S. involvement in the Kosovo conflict. Critics have pointed out as an example of how foreign policy decisions can potentially benefit officials financially after they leave office.
Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell
Another example is Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, who has come under fire for stock trading by her husband, Paul Pelosi. While not directly tied to her legislative actions, critics have pointed out that her husband made several profitable trades in tech stocks, particularly in companies like Nvidia, right before important legislative decisions that could affect those businesses. Although insider trading by members of Congress is technically illegal, the lack of stringent rules around how lawmakers handle their investments has raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest.
Mitch McConnell, the Senate Minority Leader, has also faced scrutiny for his wife, Elaine Chao, business and political connections. Chao served as the Secretary of Transportation under Donald Trump. And her family has deep ties to the shipping industry through the Foremost Group. This group was run by her father. While serving in government, Chao was accused of using her position to promote her family’s business interests, especially in dealings with China, where the company has substantial investments. Critics argue that McConnell and Chao’s financial ties to foreign interests could compromise their impartiality on policy decisions.
Are you so naive that you think their service to the super-rich won’t enrich them?
This applies both to the US and Russia. In order to be a top politician, you must dedicate your political life (which tends to be short) to serving the rich who control the country.
Don’t get me wrong. The US definitely doesn’t have so corrupt, state-pervasive, and mobster-like oligarchs. But there are political billionaires anyway.
The Bush family, with two presidents, is frequently tied to claims of deep connections with the oil industry and defense contractors. George H. W. Bush, as both CIA director and president, is seen by critics as having links to secret government operations and the military-industrial complex. Theories suggest that the Bush family profited from wars, especially the Iraq War. Companies like Halliburton, once run by Dick Cheney, received large contracts. Many believe the Bushes used their political power to enrich themselves and their allies through these ventures.
The Kennedy family is another target, with many focusing on their wealth and tragic history. The family’s wealth reportedly came from Joseph Kennedy Sr., who allegedly made a fortune through bootlegging during Prohibition and stock market dealings. Despite the Kennedys’ public image as advocates for peace and civil rights, their vast wealth has allowed them to wield hidden influence over American institutions for decades. These two families are central figures in the belief that elite dynasties manipulate political events from behind the scenes.
Only Russia has an oligarchy. Wait a minute! How are the US and Russia similar?
Some of the most prominent Russian oligarchs today are Vladimir Potanin, Leonid Mikhelson, and Alexey Mordashov, each with immense wealth tied to key sectors of the Russian economy. Vladimir Potanin is the richest man in Russia, with a fortune of around $23.5 billion, primarily from his stake in Norilsk Nickel, the world’s largest producer of nickel and palladium. Potanin was a major player in the controversial loans-for-shares program in the 1990s that allowed him to acquire vast industrial assets for a fraction of their value. Leonid Mikhelson, another leading figure, amassed a fortune of over $22 billion from his involvement in Novatek, Russia’s largest non-state-owned gas company. Mikhelson’s business interests, particularly in energy, have expanded globally.
Alexey Mordashov, with a fortune of over $21 billion, derives his wealth primarily from his steel and mining company Severstal. He has diversified his holdings into industries like gold mining and power generation. Another notable oligarch is Alisher Usmanov, worth around $19 billion, with investments spanning from Metalloinvest, a metals and mining giant, to technology companies like Mail.ru. Usmanov also had a stake in the English football club Arsenal before selling it. These oligarchs have not only amassed wealth but wield significant influence within Russia, maintaining close ties with the Kremlin, which bolsters their economic power in the country.
Is the US oligarchy? Some say yes, some say no
Once again, the US and Russia are so similar. No doubt, the influence of lobbyists (in the US) is remarkable and the super-rich families and their bankers pour money via them (SuperPACs and so on).
But some say that Rockefellers, Vanderbilts, Astors, and Morgans are so rich and too close to the state apparatus (judicial, executive, legislative). So the influence over politicians with the absence of lobbyists makes the US a functional oligarchy.
US, Russia and clientelism
In Russia, clientelism operates through a hierarchical network of patron-client relationships. Political figures and business elites engage in mutually beneficial exchanges of favors and resources. At the top of the pyramid, influential figures like Vladimir Putin act as the key patrons, distributing economic and political favors to loyal oligarchs and regional leaders. In return, these elites provide financial support, political endorsements, and control over key sectors of the economy. For example, major state contracts, especially in industries like energy and infrastructure, are awarded to businesses owned by trusted individuals within Putin’s inner circle. These oligarchs, in turn, finance pro-government media outlets, sponsor political campaigns, or fund local projects that boost the government’s image.
On a regional level, clientelism works by local governors or leaders cultivating a base of loyalists through the distribution of jobs, business opportunities, or government contracts. These leaders, in exchange for loyalty, ensure their regions support the central government during elections and political campaigns. Local elites provide favors like easier access to business permits, government subsidies, or public services to individuals or groups that demonstrate their political support. In return, these regional leaders maintain their own power and influence. They often use state resources to create personal networks of supporters who rely on them for economic or political stability. This system helps the Kremlin maintain control across Russia by ensuring that loyalty is rewarded with concrete benefits. While dissent is often punished or excluded from these clientelist networks.
An awful form of clientelism is in the USA
And here we are again! Do you think the USA is not ridden with clientelism? Do you think the super-rich families and big banks don’t have the proper connections to the FBI, CIA, attorneys, judges, not to mention politicians? And when the system works, suddenly suspicious deaths happen.
Extra-judicial killings: “There are a lot of killers. You think our country’s so innocent?”
I am truly sorry for the largest minority of my readers, who are Americans. If you cherish your country to some extent, Donald Trump summed it up: “There are a lot of killers. You think our country’s so innocent?”
In Russia, they don’t need any legal process; they have likely killed an unimaginable number of people without proper trials.
Wars, genocides, human experiments, massive human rights breaches
The United States has a long history of involvement in human rights abuses. It goes from the genocide of Native Americans to the exploitation of enslaved people. Its imperialist actions, driven by economic interests, continue in modern times through wars and covert operations. The CIA’s use of torture post-9/11 and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan highlight a pattern of violating international law. Economic gain drives these actions, as corporations profit from war and reconstruction, leaving a legacy of unaccounted atrocities and global instability fueled by U.S. power interests.
The U.S.-led War on Terror, initiated in response to the 9/11 attacks, has had profound and far-reaching consequences, particularly in the Middle East. Since 2001, U.S. military operations in countries such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, and Pakistan have contributed to the deaths of an estimated 4.5 million people, either directly or indirectly. These conflicts have also led to the displacement of millions, creating humanitarian crises that continue to this day.
The Los Angeles Times noted that “U.S. military forces have been at war for all eight years of Obama’s tenure, the first two-term president with that distinction.” The ongoing violence and instability in these regions have raised serious questions about the effectiveness of the War on Terror and whether it has achieved its intended goals. The human cost of these wars, in terms of lives lost and communities destroyed, remains a significant and tragic legacy of U.S. foreign policy.
Additionally, unethical human experiments, such as the infamous Tuskegee Syphilis Study and Project MKUltra, further expose how the U.S. government has exploited vulnerable populations. These experiments, carried out under the guise of scientific research or national security, inflicted long-term harm on individuals, demonstrating a profound disregard for human rights in pursuit of control and power.
We just want to destroy your country
In the post-9/11 era, the U.S. intensified its methods, with torture and secret detention sites becoming central to its security strategy. The Iraq and Afghanistan wars serve as prime examples of how the U.S. has engaged in illegal invasions, disregarded international norms, and inflicted widespread suffering, all while facing little global accountability. Guantanamo Bay stands as a lasting symbol of indefinite detention and the abuse of legal processes in the name of security.
The driving force behind these actions centers on economic and political dominance. U.S. corporations, particularly in defense and reconstruction, have profited significantly from these conflicts. By manipulating international power structures, the U.S. has largely avoided repercussions, creating a system where profit and political interests take precedence over the protection of human rights and justice.
The Vietnam War serves as a key example, where U.S. involvement was influenced by the desire to maintain economic and political dominance in Southeast Asia, particularly in securing markets and resources. The war resulted in the deaths of millions of Vietnamese civilians and soldiers, as well as significant losses for the U.S., both in terms of lives and economic cost. This conflict, and others like it, illustrate how economic imperatives can shape foreign policy decisions, often with devastating consequences.
Russia is much worse
Since WWII, Russia (and the Soviet Union) has been involved in numerous direct and proxy wars. The Soviet-Afghan War (1979-1989) resulted in 1-2 million deaths, while the Chechen Wars in the 1990s and 2000s claimed 100,000 to 200,000 lives. Proxy conflicts, including those in Vietnam, Korea, Angola, Mozambique, and Yemen, involved Soviet or Russian support, increasing the toll. Recent involvement in Georgia (2008), Ukraine (2014-present), and Syria (2015-present) adds tens of thousands more casualties. Overall, the total death toll across these conflicts exceeds 2 million.
Torture
Torture in Russia is a persistent and deeply embedded issue, often used as a tool of control by law enforcement and security agencies. Victims frequently report physical and psychological abuse at the hands of police, prison guards, and security officials. Methods include beatings, electric shocks, suffocation, and prolonged isolation. Detainees, particularly in pre-trial detention, are vulnerable to torture, as confessions are often coerced through violent means. These confessions are later used in court, contributing to a culture where the ends justify the means. Despite the brutality, many cases go unreported due to fear of retaliation or a lack of trust in the legal system.
Human rights organizations such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Memorial have documented numerous cases of torture in Russian detention facilities. The North Caucasus region, including Chechnya, is notorious for its particularly brutal methods. Authorities target political dissidents, activists, and minorities. In Chechnya, under the rule of Ramzan Kadyrov, torture has become a routine tool of repression, especially against those suspected of terrorism or LGBTQ+ individuals. While these cases have gained some international attention, Russian authorities often deny the existence of widespread abuse, framing these reports as foreign interference or attempts to discredit the government.
Russian legal system is complicit
The legal system in Russia is complicit in allowing torture to thrive. Prosecutors and judges often turn a blind eye to evidence of abuse, and victims struggle to receive justice. Investigations into torture allegations are rare, and when they do occur, they often result in no consequences for the perpetrators. Corruption within the judiciary and law enforcement further fuels the problem. International bodies, including the European Court of Human Rights, have repeatedly condemned Russia for failing to address the issue, but the government largely ignores these rulings. Torture continues to be an effective tool for maintaining control and suppressing dissent in the country.
Torture has a dark history in the United States, not only during wartime but also within its own borders. For decades, police officers and correction officers routinely tortured suspects and prisoners, particularly in cities like Chicago. In the 1970s and 1980s, under the leadership of police commander Jon Burge, Chicago police used electric shocks, beatings, and mock executions to extract confessions from primarily African American suspects. These abuses were part of a systematic pattern, where officers felt justified in using extreme force to gain information or secure convictions. Similar practices were reported in correctional facilities across the U.S., where inmates were subjected to beatings, isolation, and psychological torture, often with little accountability. This domestic use of torture, although not as widely publicized as overseas abuses, reflects a long-standing culture of violence within U.S. law enforcement that persisted until relatively recently.
War on Terror and torture
Internationally, the U.S. faced significant scrutiny for its use of torture during the Iraq War and the War on Terror. In Iraq, U.S. military personnel were caught torturing detainees at Abu Ghraib prison. Soldiers subjected prisoners to beatings, sexual humiliation, and psychological torment, often under the direction or with the complicity of commanding officers. These acts of abuse, which shocked the world when they came to light in 2004, were not isolated but part of a broader culture of impunity in U.S. detention centers during that time. The military’s actions mirrored the CIA’s use of enhanced interrogation techniques in secret “black sites” around the world, where detainees were tortured under the guise of national security.
Beyond the Middle East, the U.S. has a history of facilitating torture abroad. During the Cold War, the CIA played a key role in training and supporting Latin American dictatorships that routinely tortured political dissidents. In countries like Chile, Argentina, and Brazil, the CIA provided resources and intelligence to authoritarian regimes that used electric shocks, beatings, and psychological terror to maintain control. Operation Condor, a CIA-backed effort, allowed these regimes to collaborate in targeting and torturing leftists across borders. This legacy of U.S.-backed torture in Latin America contributed to decades of human rights abuses and the disappearance of thousands of people.
While the U.S. has officially banned the use of torture, the lack of accountability for past actions – both domestically and abroad – continues to tarnish its reputation. Many of those responsible for overseeing or authorizing torture, whether in the police forces, military, or CIA, have faced minimal consequences. Human rights organizations continue to call for justice for the victims of these practices, but the scars of torture in the U.S. and its global involvement remain unresolved.
Corruption
Gross corruption in Russia is far more systemic and pervasive than in the U.S., costing the country significantly. Some estimates place the cost of corruption in Russia as high as 25% of GDP, which, in 2023, translates to around $500 billion annually. This corruption involves bribes, kickbacks, and embezzlement in sectors like government contracts, education, healthcare, and law enforcement. It affects nearly every aspect of daily life, with citizens often required to pay bribes for basic services, and powerful elites using corrupt means to enrich themselves and maintain control over the economy and political system.
In contrast, the U.S. experiences corruption, but on a smaller scale and more in isolated cases, though still costly. Corruption in the U.S. is estimated to cost the country around $1 trillion annually, or about 4% of GDP. While the U.S. ranks significantly better than Russia in global corruption indexes, the costs still include fraud in government contracts, embezzlement by public officials, and abuse of power for personal gain. High-profile cases, such as those involving defense contractors and local government officials, continue to emerge, though the systemic nature of corruption is less entrenched than in Russia.
Russian corruption is huge
In Russia, corruption is deeply integrated into the political system. High-ranking officials, including oligarchs and government elites, regularly use their positions to funnel money out of state resources. Sectors like construction, defense, and natural resources are particularly prone to corruption. The shadow economy, driven by corruption, is a massive portion of the overall economy, and public trust in the legal system remains low, as law enforcement itself is deeply corrupt.
In the U.S., corruption is more often exposed and punished, though it still causes economic and social damage. Public scandals involving corrupt officials, such as misusing public funds or bribery, regularly make headlines, but the legal framework in the U.S. is generally more robust in prosecuting corruption. The difference lies in the scale and entrenchment, as Russia’s corruption runs through almost every layer of society, while in the U.S., it is more fragmented and typically involves specific individuals or groups.
Disregard for human life
Vladimir Putin has shown us, with the common citizens, that Russian life doesn’t cost anything. And it has always in this way in the history of Russia. Eternal wars, alcoholism, drug use, poor health care, mismanagement of COVID-19 pandemic. But this goes without saying.
However, what about the US? War on Drugs, Iraq War, Afghanistan War, Special Ops, Opioid crisis, mismanagement of COVID-19 pandemic. Vietnam War, Hurricane Katrina, homelessness crisis, veteran neglect, and so on.
Developing vs developed countries with the same economic inequality
Economic inequality in both Russia and the U.S. presents a serious challenge, despite their different political and economic structures. Russia’s Gini index in 2023 stands at 36.0, while the U.S. has a Gini index of 41.1, reflecting high levels of income disparity in both nations. In Russia, the top 10% of the population controls an overwhelming share of wealth, with corruption and oligarchy playing a major role in maintaining this inequality. For ordinary Russians, this leads to limited social mobility, inadequate healthcare, and insufficient public services. The consequences are stark: millions struggle with poverty, while the ultra-rich thrive.
In the U.S., economic inequality is driven more by corporate concentration of wealth, especially in sectors like technology and finance. The U.S. ranks worse than Russia on the Gini index, showing greater income disparity. The wealth gap leaves millions of Americans without access to affordable healthcare, education, or housing, especially in lower-income and minority communities. The rise in costs, especially in healthcare, alongside stagnant wages for the working class, exacerbates this divide. Roughly 37 million Americans live in poverty, a figure that underscores the impact of inequality on everyday life.
For ordinary people in both countries, the effects of inequality are profound. In Russia, the wealth concentrated among elites and poor infrastructure result in underfunded public services, leading to widespread dissatisfaction and limited opportunities for those at the bottom. In the U.S., rising costs and a lack of social safety nets push many into cycles of debt, homelessness, or poor health outcomes.
Inequality in both nations fosters disillusionment and political unrest. While Russia’s inequality stems from corruption and oligarchic control, the U.S. faces challenges from systemic income disparity, with both nations struggling to provide opportunities for those left behind by their economic systems.
Massive surveillance
Russia and the U.S. both engage in massive surveillance, but their approaches reflect the differences between an autocracy and a democracy. In Russia, the government implements strict control through laws like SORM and the Yarovaya Law, requiring telecom companies to store user data and give security services access to monitor online activity. The government primarily uses this surveillance to target dissent, censor opposition, and suppress political movements. Activists, journalists, and critics of the regime are under constant watch, and the government leverages this surveillance to maintain power and silence opposing voices.
In the U.S., surveillance programs like PRISM and other mass data collection efforts were exposed by Edward Snowden in 2013, revealing that agencies like the NSA monitor phone records, internet activity, and communications. This surveillance is often justified as a necessary measure for national security and counterterrorism efforts. While there is some legal oversight and public debate in the U.S., privacy advocates argue that the system overreaches and infringes on citizens’ civil liberties.
The critical difference is that, in Russia, surveillance serves the autocratic goal of maintaining control over the population, suppressing dissent, and limiting freedoms. In the U.S., though there is surveillance, democratic institutions provide a level of transparency, public debate, and legal challenges, albeit imperfectly. Both systems have been criticized, but Russia’s use of surveillance is more openly linked to state oppression, while in the U.S., it’s framed as a national security issue.
Public distrust of institutions
Public distrust of institutions is significant in both Russia and the U.S., but the numbers reveal different scales and causes. In Russia, surveys show that around 60% of Russians express distrust in their government. Largely due to entrenched corruption, lack of transparency, and the autocratic nature of the political system. Many citizens believe that the ruling elite serves only itself. And the state’s control over media exacerbates the feeling of powerlessness among the public. This distrust extends to other institutions, including law enforcement and the judiciary.
In contrast, in the U.S., about 33% of Americans say they trust the federal government to do what is right. The trust levels fluctuate depending on political affiliation and party control. Distrust has deepened due to political polarization, corporate influence over politics, and scandals like the handling of the 2008 financial crisis and the recent COVID-19 pandemic response. Misinformation and political rhetoric further fuel skepticism toward institutions like Congress, the media, and the healthcare system.
In both countries, this erosion of trust has severe consequences. Concerning Russia this is apathy and resignation, with citizens feeling unable to influence political decisions. As far as the U.S., growing distrust has widened political divisions, decreased civic engagement, and increased social unrest. Despite the differences in political systems, the shared consequence is a weakening of the relationship between the public and their governing institutions.
Media control and propaganda
Media control and propaganda function differently in Russia and the U.S., reflecting their political systems. In Russia, the state exerts tight control over major media outlets. The government or state-affiliated companies own most of the television networks, which are the primary source of news for the population. Channels like Russia-1 and RT often serve as platforms for government-approved narratives. Independent media faces censorship, harassment, or shutdown, while journalists critical of the regime risk imprisonment or worse. The government uses propaganda to shape public opinion. This often pushes nationalist and anti-Western messages, especially regarding foreign policy and domestic politics.
In the U.S., media control is more indirect. Large corporations own the majority of media outlets, which can influence coverage based on corporate or political interests. While the press is generally free, partisan bias in outlets like Fox News or MSNBC shapes public opinion along political lines. Media fragmentation allows for the spread of misinformation, particularly through social media platforms. Political campaigns and interest groups use advertising and selective reporting to steer narratives. However, unlike in Russia, dissenting voices and independent journalism are protected by law though economic pressures and political polarization limit the diversity of perspectives in mainstream media.
In both countries, media plays a significant role in influencing public perception, but while Russia employs direct government control, the U.S. deals with more subtle corporate and ideological influences.
Conclusion: How are the US and Russia similar
If you ask someone whether they would prefer to live in the U.S. or Russia, most people would choose the U.S. While it has greater economic inequality, the difference lies in factors like GDP and average salaries.
Both countries are plagued by unchecked, savage-like capitalism with little social safety net.
Russia and the U.S. are also similar in terms of wealthy politicians, expanded clientelism, extra-judicial killings, wars, genocides, human experiments, and massive human rights breaches.
Both countries have practical experience in conducting torture.
Gross corruption is much higher in Russia than in the U.S., but it still costs an unimaginable amount of money for Americans.
Mass media connected to the establishment constantly brainwash the respective populations.
Russia conducts surveillance through authoritarian practices, while the U.S. is slowly moving in that direction.
While the U.S. is the lesser evil, it undeniably shares many similarities with Russia, despite the latter’s claims of being fundamentally different.
Leave a Reply