6 ms·

Here my two cents as someone that has visited, lived in, or good friends in authoritarian regimes such as East Germany, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Hong Kong: -

by FabHK 5y ago

Here my two cents as someone that has visited, lived in, or good friends in authoritarian regimes such as East Germany, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Hong Kong: - in a democracy, the population is responsible for what the government does. Conversely, the more authoritarian the regime, arguably the less culpable the population is. (Of course, people shouldn't have allowed an authoritarian figure to gain power... indeed. But frankly, those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.) - it is imperative to distinguish between the government and the people, in particular in very authoritarian regimes. Sometimes the population is behind their government, sometimes they aren't. - here, it seems to me that many Russians (and quite possibly the majority) are increasingly critical and sick of Putin, and, as far as I can tell, most are, like the rest of the world, against this war. - who suffers most from this war are ordinary Ukrainians, obviously. However, I venture to say, most ordinary Russians suffer, too. - thus, as far as possible, our sanctions should be laser focused at targeting Putin and his collaborators, the inner circle, government, and companies close to the government.

jollybean 5y ago
Those are good points, but I don't quite agree because there's a few things to add to the list: - Putin's popularity jumped up during the invasion to 69% - which is a lot. - Only 5% of Russians believe that Russia is responsible for the incursion, while 50% believe that the problem is NATO (I understand at least part of this is due to heavy propaganda) - While the choice for war is a bit ambiguous and probably errs one way or the other depending on how much propaganda buy in there is, the fact of the matter is that Russians will ultimately, proudly accept the annexation of Ukraine as their vassal state and buy into the notion of that broader destiny of Neo Russia that Putin is pushing for. The 'We Are One People' is enough to elicit the cultural chauvinism among the population so that while they may not support conflict, they will accept, and possibly promote the outcome without any regard for the self-determination of the Ukranians. (Obviously, this is due to a lot of propaganda and lack of real exposure to other information, but it is what it is.) - Chinese citizens are broadly happy to see the crackdowns in Hong Kong (i.e. "Why do those they believe they should have special rights, especially when they are attacking China!"), and fully accept the 'regional internment' of the Uyghurs, including re-education prisons for many specific individuals purely on the basis of their ethnicity. Similarly the eradication of Tibet as an entity. And of course, the possible invasion of Taiwan that we might see in the coming years. There is a degree of complicity among the population, at least for the nationalist claims, especially to the extent they look past the materiality of some of the violence etc. Second, is that the citizens probably need to be informed of the issue. While the sanctions might form a bit of a blip in the Ruble, it's not going to affect most people's lives particularly dramatically, it may just slow the economy down in largely imperceptible ways to the general population. Many will blame 'NATO' for their disinvitations to sporting events. It's dramatic for a Western-connected software developer who has the means to get a flight, and who cares about Ruble/USD exchange, but not likely for most of the plebes. Therefore - it might be a good idea to do 'populist sanctions' - like shutting down all the Starbucks, McDonald's, IKEAS, Netflix, Hollywood films, Nikes, NBA games, televised football of all kinds - all those things and more. I'd say include iPhones/Android but probably we want to maintain for them an outlet for information from the outside, and frankly to collect data if we need it. But we could dramatically reduce what's available in the App Stores, stop selling a bunch of variations and product lines etc. None of that is hugely material at all, it's not going to harm anyone frankly, it won't hugely affect the economy, but it's a 'really strong daily reminder' of the fact that 'they are excluded' from the system. No more 'nice lattes', because 'we don't like you right now'.
- 5e92cb50239222b 5y ago
  > While the sanctions might form a bit of a blip in the Ruble, it's not going to affect most people's lives particularly dramatically, it may just slow the economy down in largely imperceptible ways to the general population Every Russian economist I'm reading is in mourning (you can see it in their faces) and is promising a severe commodity deficiency and high prices on consumer goods in the near future. I think they expect something like the beginning of the 90s, but even more severe, close to zero outside help, and low chances for recovery. All of my Russian friends have been in panic since the 24th. I am too, honestly, I have already lost 25% of my income (which was not very high even before) for not doing anything wrong and just being close to Russia. (I support Ukraine and the Western response, but we'll be collateral damage nevertheless.)
  - jollybean 5y ago
    I don't doubt a cohort of educated young Russians has an inkling, but the population overall, not so much. It's the same everywhere though. A lot of people don't pay attention, are not literate.
jacktribe 5y ago
You highlight the difference well between a democracy and an authoritarian regime. However the suggestion you make at the end, that we should only sanction Putin & co., is exactly the type of measure that would work in a democratic regime but not in an authoritarian one. I can't think of a single case where a large authoritarian regime was handed off gently to a democratic one as a result of sanctions on the dictator.
- necovek 5y ago
  Can you think of a case where sanctions have produced the desired effect of the regime change? I live in Serbia which was under heavy sanctions in early 90s: those in power have only gotten richer and more powerful during the time. Only after economy started recovering in late 90s, and people could afford to worry about "freedom" instead of basic survival did people get enough democratic momentum to vote incumbents out (sprinkled with a bit of West-supported protests to avoid a possibly rigged second round with 47% votes for opposition to 32% for incumbents in the first round iirc). But sanctions did nothing to hurt those in power. They did plenty to hurt the rest of us.
  - O5vYtytb 5y ago
    I think the point is to make the populace angry enough that they assist in overthrowing the regime.
  - cloverich 5y ago
    I suspect They also weaken the general military capability given economy generates the tax to pay the military. Not a perfect system of course.
  - judge2020 5y ago
    In oppressive regimes, fewer resources need to be put into building infrastructure and improving the human condition of its citizens when more and more of the country's income is generated by harvesting natural resources or via other tasks that mostly require unskilled labor. Democracies only really build infrastructure because their citizens need it to focus on generating economic growth via their own skilled labor, which often can't be done without roads, stable electricity, clean drinking/industrial water, etc. In these situations, for republics like the United States, the best way to encourage the country to improve the standard of living for the citizens is via sanctions since it forces the country to sell these commodities at lower prices to a smaller group of potential buyers. If enough countries limit trade to where the country has to primarily rely on its own citizens for economic stability, they'd be further pressured into at least partially building schools and infrastructure and other things we/the United States believes should be a bare minimum for life.
gip 5y ago
I have no problem making life harder for Russians, having them cancel their holiday in Turkey, wait in line a bit, move to a new VPN. Maybe that will make some realize that something is wrong with their entire government and they need to revolt and change that fast. This after Aleppo and the rest. I think that the government of a country is a lagging metric of the value of its people.
- bananabiscuit 5y ago
  I guess all the Putin supporters outside of Russia are very lucky to not have to move their domains off namecheap!
- IG_Semmelweiss 5y ago
  then my value as a person living in the US is net negative to the world ? i say this as someone living in US borders and citizenship
- aeternum 5y ago
  Throughout most of history, and in pretty much every non-democratic country, people must die to change the government. You've seen what Putin does to dissidents and even to protestors. Most revolts require decades of fighting and huge numbers of lives lost. It's pretty evil to expect a populace to do that. In fact it is scarily similar to the ideas within early soviet governments, that mass death now is worthwhile and acceptable to allow for a promised utopia later.
- Svettie 5y ago
  I just don't think human psychology works this way. Your attitude is akin to a parent's with a child, "your actions have consequences, so do better". But Russia's parent in this analogy is Putin, and he will use such things to his advantage. Your approach might feel just, but the message will be completely lost. You will note how many Western governments over the past few days have been saying explicitly: "These sanctions are not meant at the Russian people, we see that they did not want this war". It doesn't seem like this is even true from polling, but it's calculated messaging, and it's important.
jablongo 5y ago
All the reporting from (non-kremlin) sources that I've seen say that Putin is quite popular with the average Russian: https://theconversation.com/putins-public-approval-is-soaring-during-the-russia-ukraine-crisis-but-its-unlikely-to-last-177302 https://theconversation.com/putins-public-approval-is-soarin....
- NicoJuicy 5y ago
  That's the sad thing about this. They don't know better, rural areas only have tv-propaganda. Additionally, that report is from 23/02. I believe that opinion should have shifted quite a lot already.
  - livinginfear 5y ago
    What an arrogant, ignorant comment. Do you seriously think that all those people living different lifestyles to you, who don't live in cities, and believe different things, do so only out of ignorance? If you're an wealthy, urbanite westerner, do you realise that in terms of your belief system, lifestyle, and values, you are such an astonishing minority? What would all those people make of your beliefs? "All he has is his Fox News/CNN propaganda, he doesn't know any better".
    - 5e92cb50239222b 5y ago
      TBH, from someone living among them (not Russia, but close), I can't say a single good thing about putler's supporters. This includes many of my own relatives. They have the same internet access we have, but prefer to eat up whatever TV is saying because it makes them comfortable. It's absolutely useless to argue with them or provide any facts, you'll just get nowhere. The propaganda proved to be remarkably effective. I was brainwashed by Kremlin propaganda and believed in their holy mission until I was about 18 or so. Then I got a proper permanent internet connection and started looking up information from alternative sources. I could not in good conscience support what's been going on in the region since at least 2008. Now we're basically fucked because of what's happening. Again, I am not from Russia, but our economy will be buried along with theirs because they're highly intertwined. And I'm pretty sure they'll invade us sooner or later.
andrepew 5y ago
Whoever is responsible/culpable doesn't matter. Sanctions aren't about punishing the population, they're about inciting a change. A happy population doesn't riot and revolt. You need a miserable population to get something like that to happen.
- necovek 5y ago
  Do you have any prior evidence that sanctions have led to protests/riots that have successfully overthrown a regime? Throughout history, revolutions only succeeded when there were enough privileged people on "their" side (eg. those with money, status...). I am not sure where the idea that sanctions work to this effect came from, but I have yet to see it: miserable population is scrambling to survive, not to fight ideological battles. As an example, Serbia, where I am from, has been under heavy sanctions in early 90s: you'd be buying car fuel in 1.5l bottles smuggled from neighbouring countries, inflation was so bad that the day after paycheck, I'd be getting half of my parents salary for pocket money... Economy started recovering in late 90s after sanctions were abolished, and regime change happened in year 2000.
  - dgoldstein0 5y ago
    > Throughout history, revolutions only succeeded when there were enough privileged people on "their" side (eg. those with money, status...). Counterpoint: what about the French revolution? You are absolutely right that it's easier to have revolts led by the privileged - the American revolution was one. I'm sure there were plenty of others. As for sanctions causing regime change, you may be right. But that's also not the goal here - the goal is to tank Russia's war effort and generally cause pain for him and his cronies. Of course plenty of people are probably hoping regime change will result but I doubt it'll be a direct consequence, if it happens at all.
    - necovek 5y ago
      > Counterpoint: what about the French revolution? https://learnodo-newtonic.com/french-revolution-leaders https://learnodo-newtonic.com/french-revolution-leaders seems to disagree: most, if not all, of them come from privileged backgrounds.
LadyCailin 5y ago
> arguably the less culpable the population is This may be, but it begs the question: who is most responsible, then? Certainly not the people outside of Russia, yes? If the Americans invaded Russia, for the sole purpose of arresting Putin, this would result in worldwide, humanity ending nuclear devastation, including in Russia. It simply must be the Russian people that hold the most culpability for holding Putin to account then. Is it fair? No, certainly not, but tell that to the Ukrainians being murdered by Russian people right now.
- Thorrez 5y ago
  Putin is responsible, and the higher-ups. But since Putin does have fairly high approval, the population is somewhat responsible too.
  - LadyCailin 5y ago
    Yes of course, but Putin isn’t going to hold himself to account, so the question is, who is next in line to hold him to account.
ogogmad 5y ago
From https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/02/28/world-war-iii-already-there-00012340 https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/02/28/world-war-... - targeted sanctions are not enough, because an autocratic leader can use his whole country as his bank account. Reynolds: I gather you think that sanctions leveled by the government are inadequate to address this much larger threat? Hill: Absolutely. Sanctions are not going to be enough. You need to have a major international response, where governments decide on their own accord that they can’t do business with Russia for a period of time until this is resolved. We need a temporary suspension of business activity with Russia. Just as we wouldn’t be having a full-blown diplomatic negotiation for anything but a ceasefire and withdrawal while Ukraine is still being actively invaded, so it’s the same thing with business. Right now you’re fueling the invasion of Ukraine. So what we need is a suspension of business activity with Russia until Moscow ceases hostilities and withdraws its troops. Reynolds: So ordinary companies… Hill: Ordinary companies should make a decision. This is the epitome of “ESG” that companies are saying is their priority right now — upholding standards of good Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance. Just like people didn’t want their money invested in South Africa during apartheid, do you really want to have your money invested in Russia during Russia’s brutal invasion and subjugation and carving up of Ukraine?
- antattack 5y ago
  It's more nuanced than that. One should do business with people who are against the regime. If you stop doing business with them - those people will have to do anything to survive including being more dependent on regime's assistance, developing dependency and loosing even more of their free agency. This is also why sanctions are targeted - you need a carrot and a stick.
dang 5y ago
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30507142 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30507142.

by FabHK 5y ago

jollybean 5y ago

Those are good points, but I don't quite agree because there's a few things to add to the list: - Putin's popularity jumped up during the invasion to 69% - which is a lot. - Only 5% of Russians believe that Russia is responsible for the incursion, while 50% believe that the problem is NATO (I understand at least part of this is due to heavy propaganda) - While the choice for war is a bit ambiguous and probably errs one way or the other depending on how much propaganda buy in there is, the fact of the matter is that Russians will ultimately, proudly accept the annexation of Ukraine as their vassal state and buy into the notion of that broader destiny of Neo Russia that Putin is pushing for. The 'We Are One People' is enough to elicit the cultural chauvinism among the population so that while they may not support conflict, they will accept, and possibly promote the outcome without any regard for the self-determination of the Ukranians. (Obviously, this is due to a lot of propaganda and lack of real exposure to other information, but it is what it is.) - Chinese citizens are broadly happy to see the crackdowns in Hong Kong (i.e. "Why do those they believe they should have special rights, especially when they are attacking China!"), and fully accept the 'regional internment' of the Uyghurs, including re-education prisons for many specific individuals purely on the basis of their ethnicity. Similarly the eradication of Tibet as an entity. And of course, the possible invasion of Taiwan that we might see in the coming years. There is a degree of complicity among the population, at least for the nationalist claims, especially to the extent they look past the materiality of some of the violence etc. Second, is that the citizens probably need to be informed of the issue. While the sanctions might form a bit of a blip in the Ruble, it's not going to affect most people's lives particularly dramatically, it may just slow the economy down in largely imperceptible ways to the general population. Many will blame 'NATO' for their disinvitations to sporting events. It's dramatic for a Western-connected software developer who has the means to get a flight, and who cares about Ruble/USD exchange, but not likely for most of the plebes. Therefore - it might be a good idea to do 'populist sanctions' - like shutting down all the Starbucks, McDonald's, IKEAS, Netflix, Hollywood films, Nikes, NBA games, televised football of all kinds - all those things and more. I'd say include iPhones/Android but probably we want to maintain for them an outlet for information from the outside, and frankly to collect data if we need it. But we could dramatically reduce what's available in the App Stores, stop selling a bunch of variations and product lines etc. None of that is hugely material at all, it's not going to harm anyone frankly, it won't hugely affect the economy, but it's a 'really strong daily reminder' of the fact that 'they are excluded' from the system. No more 'nice lattes', because 'we don't like you right now'.

5e92cb50239222b 5y ago
> While the sanctions might form a bit of a blip in the Ruble, it's not going to affect most people's lives particularly dramatically, it may just slow the economy down in largely imperceptible ways to the general population Every Russian economist I'm reading is in mourning (you can see it in their faces) and is promising a severe commodity deficiency and high prices on consumer goods in the near future. I think they expect something like the beginning of the 90s, but even more severe, close to zero outside help, and low chances for recovery. All of my Russian friends have been in panic since the 24th. I am too, honestly, I have already lost 25% of my income (which was not very high even before) for not doing anything wrong and just being close to Russia. (I support Ukraine and the Western response, but we'll be collateral damage nevertheless.)
- jollybean 5y ago
  I don't doubt a cohort of educated young Russians has an inkling, but the population overall, not so much. It's the same everywhere though. A lot of people don't pay attention, are not literate.

jacktribe 5y ago

You highlight the difference well between a democracy and an authoritarian regime. However the suggestion you make at the end, that we should only sanction Putin & co., is exactly the type of measure that would work in a democratic regime but not in an authoritarian one. I can't think of a single case where a large authoritarian regime was handed off gently to a democratic one as a result of sanctions on the dictator.

necovek 5y ago
Can you think of a case where sanctions have produced the desired effect of the regime change? I live in Serbia which was under heavy sanctions in early 90s: those in power have only gotten richer and more powerful during the time. Only after economy started recovering in late 90s, and people could afford to worry about "freedom" instead of basic survival did people get enough democratic momentum to vote incumbents out (sprinkled with a bit of West-supported protests to avoid a possibly rigged second round with 47% votes for opposition to 32% for incumbents in the first round iirc). But sanctions did nothing to hurt those in power. They did plenty to hurt the rest of us.
- O5vYtytb 5y ago
  I think the point is to make the populace angry enough that they assist in overthrowing the regime.
- cloverich 5y ago
  I suspect They also weaken the general military capability given economy generates the tax to pay the military. Not a perfect system of course.
- judge2020 5y ago
  In oppressive regimes, fewer resources need to be put into building infrastructure and improving the human condition of its citizens when more and more of the country's income is generated by harvesting natural resources or via other tasks that mostly require unskilled labor. Democracies only really build infrastructure because their citizens need it to focus on generating economic growth via their own skilled labor, which often can't be done without roads, stable electricity, clean drinking/industrial water, etc. In these situations, for republics like the United States, the best way to encourage the country to improve the standard of living for the citizens is via sanctions since it forces the country to sell these commodities at lower prices to a smaller group of potential buyers. If enough countries limit trade to where the country has to primarily rely on its own citizens for economic stability, they'd be further pressured into at least partially building schools and infrastructure and other things we/the United States believes should be a bare minimum for life.

gip 5y ago

I have no problem making life harder for Russians, having them cancel their holiday in Turkey, wait in line a bit, move to a new VPN. Maybe that will make some realize that something is wrong with their entire government and they need to revolt and change that fast. This after Aleppo and the rest. I think that the government of a country is a lagging metric of the value of its people.

bananabiscuit 5y ago
I guess all the Putin supporters outside of Russia are very lucky to not have to move their domains off namecheap!
IG_Semmelweiss 5y ago
then my value as a person living in the US is net negative to the world ? i say this as someone living in US borders and citizenship
aeternum 5y ago
Throughout most of history, and in pretty much every non-democratic country, people must die to change the government. You've seen what Putin does to dissidents and even to protestors. Most revolts require decades of fighting and huge numbers of lives lost. It's pretty evil to expect a populace to do that. In fact it is scarily similar to the ideas within early soviet governments, that mass death now is worthwhile and acceptable to allow for a promised utopia later.
Svettie 5y ago
I just don't think human psychology works this way. Your attitude is akin to a parent's with a child, "your actions have consequences, so do better". But Russia's parent in this analogy is Putin, and he will use such things to his advantage. Your approach might feel just, but the message will be completely lost. You will note how many Western governments over the past few days have been saying explicitly: "These sanctions are not meant at the Russian people, we see that they did not want this war". It doesn't seem like this is even true from polling, but it's calculated messaging, and it's important.

jablongo 5y ago

All the reporting from (non-kremlin) sources that I've seen say that Putin is quite popular with the average Russian: https://theconversation.com/putins-public-approval-is-soaring-during-the-russia-ukraine-crisis-but-its-unlikely-to-last-177302 https://theconversation.com/putins-public-approval-is-soarin....

NicoJuicy 5y ago
That's the sad thing about this. They don't know better, rural areas only have tv-propaganda. Additionally, that report is from 23/02. I believe that opinion should have shifted quite a lot already.
- livinginfear 5y ago
  What an arrogant, ignorant comment. Do you seriously think that all those people living different lifestyles to you, who don't live in cities, and believe different things, do so only out of ignorance? If you're an wealthy, urbanite westerner, do you realise that in terms of your belief system, lifestyle, and values, you are such an astonishing minority? What would all those people make of your beliefs? "All he has is his Fox News/CNN propaganda, he doesn't know any better".
  - 5e92cb50239222b 5y ago
    TBH, from someone living among them (not Russia, but close), I can't say a single good thing about putler's supporters. This includes many of my own relatives. They have the same internet access we have, but prefer to eat up whatever TV is saying because it makes them comfortable. It's absolutely useless to argue with them or provide any facts, you'll just get nowhere. The propaganda proved to be remarkably effective. I was brainwashed by Kremlin propaganda and believed in their holy mission until I was about 18 or so. Then I got a proper permanent internet connection and started looking up information from alternative sources. I could not in good conscience support what's been going on in the region since at least 2008. Now we're basically fucked because of what's happening. Again, I am not from Russia, but our economy will be buried along with theirs because they're highly intertwined. And I'm pretty sure they'll invade us sooner or later.

andrepew 5y ago

Whoever is responsible/culpable doesn't matter. Sanctions aren't about punishing the population, they're about inciting a change. A happy population doesn't riot and revolt. You need a miserable population to get something like that to happen.

necovek 5y ago
Do you have any prior evidence that sanctions have led to protests/riots that have successfully overthrown a regime? Throughout history, revolutions only succeeded when there were enough privileged people on "their" side (eg. those with money, status...). I am not sure where the idea that sanctions work to this effect came from, but I have yet to see it: miserable population is scrambling to survive, not to fight ideological battles. As an example, Serbia, where I am from, has been under heavy sanctions in early 90s: you'd be buying car fuel in 1.5l bottles smuggled from neighbouring countries, inflation was so bad that the day after paycheck, I'd be getting half of my parents salary for pocket money... Economy started recovering in late 90s after sanctions were abolished, and regime change happened in year 2000.
- dgoldstein0 5y ago
  > Throughout history, revolutions only succeeded when there were enough privileged people on "their" side (eg. those with money, status...). Counterpoint: what about the French revolution? You are absolutely right that it's easier to have revolts led by the privileged - the American revolution was one. I'm sure there were plenty of others. As for sanctions causing regime change, you may be right. But that's also not the goal here - the goal is to tank Russia's war effort and generally cause pain for him and his cronies. Of course plenty of people are probably hoping regime change will result but I doubt it'll be a direct consequence, if it happens at all.
  - necovek 5y ago
    > Counterpoint: what about the French revolution? https://learnodo-newtonic.com/french-revolution-leaders https://learnodo-newtonic.com/french-revolution-leaders seems to disagree: most, if not all, of them come from privileged backgrounds.

LadyCailin 5y ago

> arguably the less culpable the population is This may be, but it begs the question: who is most responsible, then? Certainly not the people outside of Russia, yes? If the Americans invaded Russia, for the sole purpose of arresting Putin, this would result in worldwide, humanity ending nuclear devastation, including in Russia. It simply must be the Russian people that hold the most culpability for holding Putin to account then. Is it fair? No, certainly not, but tell that to the Ukrainians being murdered by Russian people right now.

Thorrez 5y ago
Putin is responsible, and the higher-ups. But since Putin does have fairly high approval, the population is somewhat responsible too.
- LadyCailin 5y ago
  Yes of course, but Putin isn’t going to hold himself to account, so the question is, who is next in line to hold him to account.

ogogmad 5y ago

From https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/02/28/world-war-iii-already-there-00012340 https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/02/28/world-war-... - targeted sanctions are not enough, because an autocratic leader can use his whole country as his bank account. Reynolds: I gather you think that sanctions leveled by the government are inadequate to address this much larger threat? Hill: Absolutely. Sanctions are not going to be enough. You need to have a major international response, where governments decide on their own accord that they can’t do business with Russia for a period of time until this is resolved. We need a temporary suspension of business activity with Russia. Just as we wouldn’t be having a full-blown diplomatic negotiation for anything but a ceasefire and withdrawal while Ukraine is still being actively invaded, so it’s the same thing with business. Right now you’re fueling the invasion of Ukraine. So what we need is a suspension of business activity with Russia until Moscow ceases hostilities and withdraws its troops. Reynolds: So ordinary companies… Hill: Ordinary companies should make a decision. This is the epitome of “ESG” that companies are saying is their priority right now — upholding standards of good Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance. Just like people didn’t want their money invested in South Africa during apartheid, do you really want to have your money invested in Russia during Russia’s brutal invasion and subjugation and carving up of Ukraine?

antattack 5y ago
It's more nuanced than that. One should do business with people who are against the regime. If you stop doing business with them - those people will have to do anything to survive including being more dependent on regime's assistance, developing dependency and loosing even more of their free agency. This is also why sanctions are targeted - you need a carrot and a stick.

dang 5y ago

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30507142 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30507142.