X Close

Candace Owens and Andrew Tate: Russia’s new useful idiots

Candace Owens and husband George Farmer on a trip to Russia this week. Credit: Candace Owens/X

Candace Owens and husband George Farmer on a trip to Russia this week. Credit: Candace Owens/X

3 June 2026 - 4:00pm

The visits this week by Candace Owens and the Tate brothers to Moscow, showing the world what “they” don’t want you to know, have briefly set the internet ablaze. Not since Tucker Carlson had his mind blown by a trip to a grocery store have we seen such hard-hitting exposés of Western lies.

That’s one way to look at it, anyway. The other is that Owens, the Tates and Carlson are simply the most recent in a long line of useful idiots to visit Russia for a few days and do an authoritarian regime’s bidding by saying nice things about it.

The Russians are old hands at this game, of course, having pioneered the art of manipulating popular Western figures through hospitality a century ago. As Joseph Stalin discovered, it was incredibly simple. All you had to do to get famous novelists and thinkers to sing your praises was provide free tickets to the Bolshoi Theatre, arrange a banquet or two, take them on a tour of a model factory and flatter them relentlessly.

One of the most notorious examples of this was George Bernard Shaw, who was greeted by Stalin and enjoyed a fancy dinner in his honour on his birthday. Shaw later returned home denying the famine in Ukraine and Southern Russia while singing the praises of the “land of hope”. But there were many others. H.G. Wells met both Lenin and Stalin, and praised the USSR; Sidney and Beatrice Webb spent a few months in the country and upon their return published Soviet Communism: A New Civilization? (it wasn’t really a question). The Nobel Prize-winning author Romain Rolland received the honour of reviewing a parade from the tribune of Lenin’s mausoleum, while André Gide was invited to speak at Maxim Gorky’s funeral, although he later grew disillusioned and came to regret his original enthusiasm.

After Nikita Khrushchev denounced Stalin, the idiots shifted their focus to Red China, where Mao applied the same playbook. Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir’s visit in 1955 resulted in the latter’s book The Long March. André Malraux paid a visit and called Mao an “emperor of bronze”, while future French president François Mitterrand stopped by during the Great Leap Forward and denied there was a famine. After touring the country in the Seventies, Shirley MacLaine made a documentary and wrote a book echoing regime propaganda, including the claim that a physicist compelled to pick tomatoes found the experience just as rewarding as his scientific work.

When we look at the images Owens posted on her X feed, it is clear that in post-Soviet Russia modern celebrities follow much the same formula. The main thing that has changed is that, rather than visit a model factory, Owens toured some Orthodox churches and observed: “The Christian expression and heritage here is unmatched.”

It would be futile, of course, to point out the repression that, say, “unregistered Baptists” or Jehovah’s Witnesses face in Russia, or that even Vladimir Putin has shied away from inviting the Pope to Russia due to opposition from the Orthodox Church. And it would be futile to point out the many other things we know about Putin’s regime, because that’s not the point. The point is to get fresh content to add to the regular diet of tormenting a widow, fulminating about Israel and insisting that Brigitte Macron was born a man.

But if the benefit for Owens is clear, it’s less obvious what Putin’s regime gets from a few pro-Russia tweets from a podcaster. It’s a steep decline from George Bernard Shaw and Romain Rolland to Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens. Stalin got books and speeches and the praise of some of the leading intellectuals of his day; Putin gets a few social media posts from a handful of notorious bullshit artists. I’m almost embarrassed for him. Idiots they may be, but they are not very useful ones.


Daniel Kalder is an author based in Texas. Previously, he spent ten years living in the former Soviet bloc. His latest book, Dictator Literature, is published by Oneworld. He also writes on Substack: Thus Spake Daniel Kalder.

DanielKalder

China is threatening America in the AI race

Reports sugget Zhipu AI  has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

Reports sugget Zhipu AI has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

1 July 2026 - 10:18am

China is trying to catch up with America on artificial intelligence. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Zhipu AI — one of China’s six “AI tiger” LLMs — has released a new model that can rival leading US systems, including Anthropic’s Mythos, in cybersecurity tasks such as pinpointing security bugs. While this marks a milestone in China’s drive to catch up with Western AI capabilities, strong performance on a single benchmark does not mean it has taken the lead. Chinese models still lag behind their Western counterparts in broader capabilities, such as autonomous operation. Skepticism is therefore warranted before resorting to hysterical conclusions, but complacency about the geopolitical implications of China’s AI advances would be an even greater mistake.

On the infrastructure side, Chinese AI is still constrained by access to advanced chips, with American labs way ahead in computing capacity as well as investment. Analysis from earlier this year suggests that Chinese models are likely to be at least a few months behind those in the US. But they are still continuing to make progress, or that the geopolitical importance of AI will be decided only by whose LLM has ventured deeper into the technological frontier. The practical applications of AI, countries’ to capture foreign markets, and the application of AI into the real economy will matter just as much.

Here, China may hold an advantage. As with its dominance across many critical supply chains, Beijing may not need to produce the most advanced AI systems — only those that are affordable and widely deployable. In doing so, it could consolidate global influence by supplying functional, low-cost AI at scale.

Beijing seems to be pursuing exactly that path, developing an AI “open-source” strategy that offers affordable, widely available AI models for companies and individuals to use and modify as they wish. The production of the DeepSeek AI model, which matched the performance of Silicon Valley tools such as ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost for users, created goodwill among Chinese models with developers.

The four most popular models on OpenRouter, an AI hardware platform for developers, are now all Chinese. The goal for China is not only to win the frontier-model race, but to make its systems the default layer of AI adoption across industries and global markets. For most economies, the choice is increasingly between an affordable tool they can deploy now and a more robust one that may be out of reach.

And while the countries adopting Chinese models may be exposed to political pressure and cyber threats from Beijing, safer and more capable alternatives matter little if they are unaffordable. American AI companies are already under pressure to monetize products whose operating costs are rising. If Chinese open-source models become the cheap default for startups, universities, governments and businesses across the developing world, then America’s AI lead will be eroded from below.

Perhaps more concerning for America in the long run is how AI can give Chinese manufacturing even more strength, through the ongoing integration of AI as a general-purpose technology. China’s new Five-Year Plan mentioned AI more than 50 times and includes an “AI+” action plan aimed at spreading AI across the economy.

Beijing has been pioneering automation of its critical infrastructure for years, with promising recent results in increasing warplane production capacity. In that regard, China’s open-model strategy and manufacturing dominance will reinforce each other. Cheap, adaptable models accelerate deployment across the real economy while those deployments generate real-world data and use cases that can feed back into further model improvement.

The United States should not dismiss the importance of its lead in the AI race. That lead worries Beijing, not least because a more automated Chinese economy would also become more vulnerable to AI-generated cyber threats. But nor should Washington assume that China cannot catch up with American capabilities over time.

This AI competition represents part of a broader struggle over tech supply chains and geopolitical influence. Decisions over whether to adopt US or Chinese models could produce a more fragmented global reality, with different regions relying on different cloud providers, chips and security structures. The result will likely be a global economy which is divided into competing spheres, rather than one which produces a single winner.


Miquel Vila is a political and geopolitical risk consultant focusing on industrial strategy, critical infrastructure and global supply chains.

miquelvilam