3 ms·
I'd suggest that no one has to ask if PandaDoc's leadership is acting recklessly by speaking. Because the alternative is complicity. It is absolutely dangerous
by mattdeboard 6y ago
I'd suggest that no one has to ask if PandaDoc's leadership is acting recklessly by speaking. Because the alternative is complicity. It is absolutely dangerous to speak, though, you're right about that. The danger exists regardless of whether their leadership speaks. The difference is timing.
Yes, it is dangerous. But the party making it unsafe is the fascists. Outrage should be directed there.
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/martin-niemoeller-first-they-came-for-the-socialists https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/martin-nie...
- alehul 6y ago> It is absolutely dangerous to speak Dangerous for who, though? It was the founders who were supposedly acting against the Belarusian government, and the employees who are paying the price. The founders are safe in San Francisco. My outrage is certainly directed at Lukashenko, but the commenter above us may have a point about whether it was responsible to be acting against a dictator while your employees are subject to his government. It's a tough situation.
- mattdeboard 6y agoDangerous for the workers still in Belarus. And yes, it is tough. It's a very difficult & complicated situation that I am thankful I don't have to experience.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- sassypotato 6y agoWhat fascists?
- hippich 6y ago"authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, as well as strong regimentation of society and of the economy" Pretty much spot on except "ultranationalism". The amount of nationalism varies from time to time depending on the current needs. When dictator needs to get something out of Russia, he would either claim nationalism, or goes other way, depending on circumstances.