American Libertarians and Russian Propaganda Outlets: A Bizarre Love Story

Libertarians have never quite been taken seriously in American politics. Perhaps this is due to their sometimes overly-idealistic approaches to policy, and perhaps it is due to incidents like that time one of the party’s candidates for chairman began stripping on stage on national television during the Libertarian Party Convention. Another more complex reason that conservative and liberal intellectuals alike hold disdain for libertarian-minded politicians is related to their tendency to favor tyrannical and aggressive foreign powers in policy discussions for the sake of opposing American interventionism. It would be one thing if American libertarians opposed foreign governments which threaten the liberty of their citizens to the same degree that they oppose U.S involvement abroad; however, many of these politicians who routinely speak against the evils of large, tyrannical governments support one such government directly by making frequent appearances on its state-sponsored propaganda networks.

The relationship between American libertarians and Russian propaganda outlets is both unique and undeniable. RT, originally known as Russia Today, is Russia’s largest international English-speaking news network. It broadcasts 24 hours per day, seven days per week, in over 100 countries across five continents. RT was launched in 2005, marketed as an alternative news option, and has touted the Kremlin’s agenda since. RT’s American network has around eight million weekly viewers. Libertarians may have initially been drawn to the outlet because of its ability to spin narratives into an anti-Washington statement regardless of the topic, but many remain loyal viewers because of its consistently favorable coverage of American liberty-minded politicians. For example, RT received the first exclusive interview with Rand Paul after his 2010 Senate primary victory and focused heavily on Ron Paul’s grassroots campaign in 2012. Ron Paul is a frequent guest on the network, providing commentary about a wide range of policy issues. 2016 Libertarian presidential candidate, Gary Johnson, has received some of his most favorable coverage from RT (the network crowned him a “meme-god” in an article from August). In May, RT’s American network even hosted a debate for several of the Libertarian Party’s presidential candidates.

This week, I was able to talk to RT America’s lead US presidential campaign correspondent, Lindsay France, about the network’s relationship with American libertarians. Lindsay emphasizes the “creative and editorial freedom” she exercises at RT America. “I have total control of what I cover. I structure, book, write, and present all my segments.” I asked Lindsay about RT’s fondness for American libertarians and its simultaneous apathy towards Russian libertarians. “I’m a libertarian with a little ‘L,” she says. “I care about my country’s libertarian movement, and as a result, on my show I give American libertarians a platform. I haven’t focused on any libertarian movements abroad yet, because at this time what I care about is opening up the electoral process in this country — because I think it is great, and can be greater. I am free to do so here.”

Nikita Vladimirov, a writer at The Hill and the founder of the Global Prospective Group, recognizes the relationship as beneficial to both parties. “The link is entirely exclusive to a common perspective on foreign policy,” he tells me. “Since the Russian state-owned media frequently attacks the United States for its aggressive geopolitical strategies, the libertarian position of a limited American role in the world echoes that narrative… Libertarians, often starved by the lack of U.S. media coverage, are forced to appear on Russian-sponsored news outlets in order to spread their message to the media. Russian news channels, in turn, benefit from featuring libertarian politicians who laud their talking points about the evils of the American regime.”

This relationship is mutually-beneficial to American libertarians and to the Kremlin’s propaganda network, but is it beneficial to the message of liberty? Perhaps not. In fact, while most American libertarians view appearances on RT as an opportunity to spread their policies of free markets and free people to new audiences, the opposite effect is achieved domestically. Political spectators with even a basic understanding of international relations regard these appearances to be indicative of a fundamental discrepancy in libertarian political ideology. To appear on a foreign nation’s propaganda outlet (a nation that definitely doesn’t possess a squeaky-clean human rights record, at that,) is perceived as hypocrisy at its finest, doing significant damage to the credibility of liberty-minded politicians. While Ron Paul may be adored by his Russian audience, who Nikita describes to be a people that “has always heavily prioritized foreign policy over domestic policy,” it remains the case that Russians cannot vote in American elections (despite Putin’s ongoing attempts to ensure that Russia’s voice is heard in the U.S. presidential race).

If those who espouse the tenets of libertarian ideology wish to be regarded as a viable political option, it is apparent that they must reevaluate their entanglement with “alternative” propaganda networks like RT. Appearances on RT associate libertarian ideology with a country which embodies the very sort of tyrannical government that libertarians purport to oppose, compromising the integrity of the movement. Congressman Justin Amash tells me that it is “certainly possible to disagree strongly with Russia’s policies while exploring ways to improve relations,” and I agree. Where American libertarians ought to draw the line, however, is where they become Putin’s useful idiots, furthering the Kremlin’s agenda for the sake of media coverage.