4 ms·

Its because oligarch has a very specific meaning; someone who has a large share of a market and there are only a few other competitors. Oligarchs exist in east

Its because oligarch has a very specific meaning; someone who has a large share of a market and there are only a few other competitors. Oligarchs exist in eastern europe due to how industry was broken away from the state when the state released control over it. Selling off access to the industry ultimately resulted in a small number of powerful players in control. There is no problem with NYT or other media outlets calling them exactly what they are.

dmix 7y ago
It's basically modified form of communist centralized control of the economy and closer to feudalism than it is American style crony capitalism and regulatory capture. Although I can see how someone could mistake the two, the former is far more obvious form of corruption, while the latter is wrapped in language like 'saving local x industries against foreign competition' or well intentioned liberal equalization that always somehow ends up benefiting the politically well connected over the wider society, trading one problem for worse ones.
- asjw 7y ago
  USA is a worse oligarchy than USSR ever was. https://mronline.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/US-Territory-Divided.png https://mronline.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/US-Territory...
QuesnayJr 7y ago
Your first sentence is the definition of "oligopoly", not "oligarchy". Oligarchy is when you have a large share of political power not marker power (though they can go together).
repolfx 7y ago
The NYT appears to be going after Eastern European politicians here, which is surely deliberate as they tend to be conservative and against immigration, so the ideological enemies of the New York set. But it seems they got distracted along the way by the shocking discovery that the EU is opaque and corrupt. The most interesting thing about this story isn't that some Hungarian academic thinks he got fired for criticising the government (i.e. his employer) but rather, that the New York Times' Brussels correspondent has never previously investigated the EU itself.

dmix 7y ago

It's basically modified form of communist centralized control of the economy and closer to feudalism than it is American style crony capitalism and regulatory capture. Although I can see how someone could mistake the two, the former is far more obvious form of corruption, while the latter is wrapped in language like 'saving local x industries against foreign competition' or well intentioned liberal equalization that always somehow ends up benefiting the politically well connected over the wider society, trading one problem for worse ones.

asjw 7y ago
USA is a worse oligarchy than USSR ever was. https://mronline.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/US-Territory-Divided.png https://mronline.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/US-Territory...

QuesnayJr 7y ago

Your first sentence is the definition of "oligopoly", not "oligarchy". Oligarchy is when you have a large share of political power not marker power (though they can go together).

repolfx 7y ago

The NYT appears to be going after Eastern European politicians here, which is surely deliberate as they tend to be conservative and against immigration, so the ideological enemies of the New York set. But it seems they got distracted along the way by the shocking discovery that the EU is opaque and corrupt. The most interesting thing about this story isn't that some Hungarian academic thinks he got fired for criticising the government (i.e. his employer) but rather, that the New York Times' Brussels correspondent has never previously investigated the EU itself.