
Mikhail Gorbachev’s Pizza Hut Thanksgiving Ad - smacktoward
https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/11/28/mikhail-gorbachev-pizza-hut-ad-thanksgiving-miracle/
======
lucideer
Recently watched Werner Herzog's Meeting Gorbachev; it's an oddly fawning
portrait, but still very interesting and insightful (and ultimately quite sad,
much like this article).

------
chopete
>> “We always wanted the hero of the ad to eat the pizza,” Helbing said.

>> Gorbachev held firm. “‘As the ex-leader, I just would not,’” Helbing
recalled Gorbachev saying.

It is not clear why he wouldn't do that.

~~~
xwdv
Many world leaders or people of prominence are wary of eating anything on
camera. The President of the United States is not allowed to be filmed eating
on camera unless approved by the secret service.

~~~
lawlorino
Not trying to sound pernickity here but do you have a source on that? I find
minor details like that really interesting and I couldn't think of good
reasons why except PR, and if that was the only reason why would it be up to
the secret service to decide? I tried Googling but couldn't find much.

~~~
ceejayoz
There's no way the Secret Service could enforce that rule. Freedom of the
press applies - the best they can do is avoid having the President eat in
public.

Politicians looking goofy eating (eating pizza/hot dogs with a fork is a
pretty common gaffe) has a long history.
[https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/apr/19/photo-p...](https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/apr/19/photo-
politicians-fear-of-them-eating-cameron-miliband-bacon-sandwich-hot-dog)

~~~
larnmar
The funny part is that Obama smoked through most of his presidency and no
photos ever emerged.

~~~
wardbradt
How do you know this?

~~~
wutbrodo
I saw it quite a few times in reputable publications. I'm the last person to
have a high opinion of the press's honesty, but multiple orgs lying about it
would be a bizarre and easily-defeated conspiracy.

------
gs7
The ad:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9lvzzH0STw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9lvzzH0STw)

~~~
RyJones
Longer version: [https://youtu.be/fgm14D1jHUw](https://youtu.be/fgm14D1jHUw)

~~~
IntelMiner
Pizza Hut coopting the fall of the Soviet Union in an ad makes my skin kind of
crawl

"Yeah we destabilized the politics and economy of a nation, but hey, we got
pizza!"

------
gorbachev
I approve this ad.

------
jhfdbkofdcho
Wow, I forgot what eat in pizza huts used to be like.

------
stanski
It's bizarre to me how many people idealize Stalin; scary really. But it might
just be a case of lack of education. I have no idea how Russian history books
generally describe that period in their history.

~~~
rudiv
It's bizarre to me that the British idealize Churchill. I wouldn't judge an
Englishman for doing so, though, mostly because I can imagine that if I were
in their stead I would be conflicted.

~~~
SapporoChris
Interesting, I had always heard him as being praised. A quick glance at
Wikipedia shows some of the controversy.

"Widely considered one of the 20th century's most significant figures,
Churchill remains popular in the UK and Western world, where he is seen as a
victorious wartime leader who played an important role in defending Europe's
liberal democracy from the spread of fascism. Also praised as a social
reformer and writer, among his many awards was the Nobel Prize in Literature.
Conversely, his imperialist views and comments on race, as well as his
sanctioning of human rights abuses in the suppression of anti-imperialist
movements seeking independence from the British Empire, have generated
considerable controversy."

I guess it's always important to look outside your current 'bubble' and see
what others think.

~~~
vidarh
The sections on the Bengal famine gives a stronger indication of why he's so
divisive.

------
aazaa
The article links to another article that offers this quote from Gorbachev's
recent book:

> “When Vladimir Putin became president, he inherited chaos. ... I can’t
> imagine how one could act under the ‘textbook of democracy’ in these
> conditions to find a way out of an almost catastrophic situation. ... The
> president of the country had no other choice but to take decisive actions.
> Some of his actions were interpreted as authoritarian and part of society
> was critical toward them. … If the aim of authority is to create conditions
> for developing a strong modern democracy, then I’m ready to support the
> president even if I disagree with some of his individual actions and
> decisions.”

[https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/10/29/the-biggest-
takeaw...](https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/10/29/the-biggest-takeaways-
from-former-soviet-leader-gorbachevs-new-book-a67955)

Has there been a single example in which a strongman government peacefully
gave way to "strong modern democracy?"

If anything it seems that strongman governments beget strongman governments.
Eventually, something slips and all hell breaks loose. At that point the only
way out is to find a leader willing to take decisive actions. And so on.

One of the biggest problems with the peaceful transition idea seems to be
corruption. The strongman necessarily breeds corruption because his form of
government is incompatible with rule of law. So even if the top-level
institutions undergo a superficial makeover, the underlying rot of corruption
persists, forever standing in the way. Frustration with the whole reform
experiment builds until some event causes popular frustration to boil over,
ushering in the return of the strongman.

~~~
spchampion2
> Has there been a single example in which a strongman government peacefully
> gave way to "strong modern democracy?"

Spain -
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_transition_to_democr...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_transition_to_democracy)

Czechoslovakia -
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velvet_Revolution](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velvet_Revolution)

There are others.

~~~
aazaa
Of the two, the case of Spain seems more in line with strongman government
transition. In that case, King Juan Carlos I appears to have played a pivotal
role in ending an attempted coup and ushering in the transition.

