I recently had the displeasure of reading an article published in The Independent criticizing Bernie Sanders. It is total nonsense. That said, there is a certain utility in this article – it lays out a number of arguments that people frequently use to critique the Senator. I, personally, have a rather extensive list of policy disagreements with Sanders, but those are merely policy. Many people attempt to attack his character by associating him with various regimes, a tactic utilized throughout this article.

So today, I will be discussing the ways in which people lie about Bernie Sanders. I will be using this article as a way to explore frequent critiques made, and explain why they are wrong. I will primarily focus on Bernie’s alleged support for Venezuela & the Soviet Union, as those are the two most frequently utilized lines of attack. Rather than debunk every single example, I hope to explain the general methodology of how people smear Sanders through the omission of important facts.

The biggest takeaway here should not be some enflamed support for this particular candidate, but rather, the adoption of a more critical analysis of people’s arguments.

Actually, He Can Condemn Maduro!

The author of The Independent article, Nicholas Clairmont, alleges very early on that Sanders has been unable to condemn the regime in Venezuela. The exact quote is as follows:

“Somehow, it seems, he still can’t bring himself to quite side with the yanqui imperialists over a socialist dictator who starves and kills his people.”

This is a blatant lie. Sanders has, on numerous occasions, condemned the government in Venezuela under both Chavez & Maduro. In 2015, he attacked the late dictator of Venezuela Hugo Chavez as a “dead communist dictator.” In 2018, he co-sponsored a resolution condemning the Venezuelan government’s “repressive and undemocratic actions.” In 2019, he posted a series of twitter comments criticizing the regime’s “violent crackdown on Venezuelan civil society” and “the use of violence against unarmed protesters and the suppression of dissent.” Sanders even has the honor of being dunked on by communist rags like Left Voice, who accuse him of “legitimizing regime change” in Venezuela. How dare he have the audacity to condemn an authoritarian regime!

And briefly, to touch on something else: you’ve likely seen an exert from an article where Sanders allegedly cites Venezuela as an example of a country where people can “live out the American Dream.” Sanders did not say that, full stop. You may feel free to immediately dismiss anybody who attributes the following quote to Sanders:

“These days, the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina, where incomes are actually more equal today than they are in the land of Horatio Alger. Who’s the banana republic now?”

Nicholas Clairmont did not make this assertion. Many of his claims are incorrect or misleading, but his article is free from this very blatant lie. However, various right-wing media outlets and personalities have incorrectly this (very easily falsifiable) assertion, ranging from the Daily Wire to the National Review to people as entrenched in Republican politics as Ronna McDaniel, the current chair of the RNC.

Now, the question is: where is this quote from? The quote is a single sentence at the very end of an article titled Closing the Gaps: Disparities that Threaten America, a rather scathing critique of income inequality and racial disparities in the modern United States. The article was written by somebody on the Valley News Editorial Board. The article was posted on the Senator’s “must read” section on his website, due to the previously referenced critique of American inequity. The candidate later rejected the singular reference to Venezuela, emphasizing that he commended the article’s analysis of inequality if not its lack of understanding of the failed state.

What’s Up With Bernie & the USSR?

Clairmont continues to make similar allegations throughout the article, with the goal being to portray Sanders as somebody who cuddles up to authoritarian regimes. For example, he says:

“In another (report), we find him praising the Soviet system in its decrepit late-80s state. (…) How much of a political liability will stories like this, including links to him sitting shirtless with his Soviet hosts and drunkenly singing folk tunes, be?”

Now, the particular event being referenced is the infamous “honeymoon” Sanders took to the Soviet Union in 1988, briefly referenced elsewhere in Mr. Clairmont’s article. This is frequent point brought up by the anti-Sanders crowd, further attempting to smear him as a communist sympathizer. This is, and I use this phrase carefully, journalistic malpractice.

Here is the actual story. In 1988, Bernie Sanders, as mayor of Burlington, traveled to Burlington’s sister city of Yaroslavl on an official diplomatic mission, alongside ten other city officials. This was jokingly referred to as his “honeymoon”, as it took place the day after him and his wife had married. The aim of the Sister City’s program was (and is) to promote international cooperation throughout the world by through citizen-to-citizen cultural exchanges. Many mayors established sister-city relationships with places in the USSR, and each of them made diplomatic trips to the country to do so.

It is incredibly important to note that all of this occurred at the tail end of the Cold War, as the Soviet Union, under the leadership of Mikhail Gorbachev, began rebuilding relations with the United Sates and moving towards a more transparent and democratic government. The President of the United States & Cold War crusader himself, Ronald Reagan, had made his own trip to Moscow not long before.

Over the course of the trip, he discussed the economic and political differences between the two countries with various city officials and citizens. He criticized aspects of our country’s policy, and pointed to where we do things right. He acknowledged that the Soviet’s system succeeded in certain areas, such as keeping the cost of housing and healthcare low. He also criticized the comparably low quality of their service. He even compared the Soviet’s incursion into Afghanistan to our siege of Vietnam, acknowledging the horrific imperialism carried out by both governments during the war. He concluded the trip by enjoying festivities with his hosts, singing an American folk song in a sauna.

Sanders traveled to a country that we had adversarial relations with, as the threat of nuclear war was fading, but still present. He went to a regime where people were indoctrinated to hate Americans, in a time where their government was attempting to open up to the world. He presented a fairly balanced critique (and praise) of both countries, and expressed his desire to build relationships with people, because a nation is far more than it’s government. He shared our culture, and experienced their culture as well. He made friends in a country where few of those could be found.

This is what a president should do.