36 ms·

We are not talking about convicting them in a court of law. It's perfectly fine to refuse to deal with Russian companies because every ruble they pay in taxes g

We are not talking about convicting them in a court of law. It's perfectly fine to refuse to deal with Russian companies because every ruble they pay in taxes goes to support the war. When the whole society (and yes, regular people too) are in favor of waging a war of their neighbor, refusing to deal with their companies should and must become the default way of action.

ivan_gammel 1y ago
Maybe you should read this then: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_punishment https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_punishment Just like with BDS in case of Israel, this principle is incompatible with Western values. If you apply collective punishment to Russia, how are you different from them?
- libertine 1y ago
  > The punished group may often have no direct association with the perpetrator other than living in the same area and can not be assumed to exercise control over the perpetrator's actions. Here, the point that's raised is: isn't there any collective responsibility for a group of people that support and re-elect a political leader with 87% of votes, who was, and promised to continue engaging in a war of genocide? Notice that I'm being cynical here, referencing the 87% vote count. While it might be a theatrical display, the regime likes to preach about the legitimacy of Democracy (especially how Ukraine is conducting its democracy), and Russians accepted these results - so even if it's not actually 87%, it's still high. Also, let's not forget that a lot of the invading force is composed of individuals with entrepreneurial ambitions; they're contractors, not conscripts, meaning people who sign up to get well paid to go to Ukraine and kill as many Ukrainians as possible, just because they're Ukrainians. The latest estimates of +950.000 Russian casualties point that it's not just a few people willing to do this, but a lot. So the question that I want to ask you is, at what point does collective responsibility apply? Two points to clarify: - This is an honest question, because I don't know the answer to it, but I just don't think that "there should never be collective responsibility" is a good answer. - Collective responsibility =/= perpetual collective responsibility =/= collective punishment;
  - ivan_gammel 1y ago
    >So the question that I want to ask you is, at what point does collective responsibility apply? There’s no such point. This is the main reason why Russia is still not under full trade embargo and Russian citizens can still get visas. Justice is a fundamental human right, so sanctions always target individuals after some due process and may be repealed in court.
    - libertine 1y ago
      > There’s no such point. Well, I disagree; the people of a nation contributing to and supporting genocide are responsible in part. > This is the main reason why Russia is still not under full trade embargo and Russian citizens can still get visas. I don't think those are the main reasons: - Embargo would have a global economic impact and would have to be militarily enforced; Also, it wouldn't be enforced everywhere as Russia has borders with countries that aren't sanctioning them. - As far as I know, Russian citizens can't get Visas everywhere; several European countries have banned all sorts of visas for Russian citizens. In fact, there's a case to be made that Russians are being collectively held accountable, for example: - Sanctions; - Seizing of Russian State assets (they don't belong to Putin or the regime, these assets actually belong to Russians); - Visa bans;
      - ivan_gammel 1y ago
        >Well, I disagree; the people of a nation contributing to and supporting genocide are responsible in part. Why exactly do you think human right for justice doesn’t apply here? Do you include in this group everyone, even those who were not able to or actively tried to stop it? What is their responsibility exactly? If not, how do you make the distinction? Then what country are you talking about? Russia is not committing genocide in Ukraine, so it must be Israel and Gaza? But even in that case, with dramatically higher number of civilian casualties and people having more agency in state matters how exactly do you want to hold every Israeli citizen responsible? >In fact, there's a case to be made that Russians are being collectively held accountable, for example: - Sanctions; I don’t understand this part. “To make a case” means to present arguments. You don’t present arguments for sanctions with saying “sanctions”.
- regnull 1y ago
  Again, they are not being punished in a court of law. Being incorporated in Cyprus, they (sadly) enjoy all the rights and privileges of being a Western company. I, as an individual, can refuse to do business with any company I please, on the basis of my beliefs and moral convictions (and on the basis of the likelihood of them being complicit in something I oppose to). If you prefer one brand of ice cream over the other, is this a collective punishment of the other company (looking at you, Ben & Jerry)?
  - ivan_gammel 1y ago
    Sure thing you and everyone can. This is why I call it “cancel culture”, not violation of human rights. It describes boycott on ideological grounds and without dialogue and consideration of alternative possibilities and nuances quite well.

ivan_gammel 1y ago

Maybe you should read this then: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_punishment https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_punishment Just like with BDS in case of Israel, this principle is incompatible with Western values. If you apply collective punishment to Russia, how are you different from them?

libertine 1y ago
> The punished group may often have no direct association with the perpetrator other than living in the same area and can not be assumed to exercise control over the perpetrator's actions. Here, the point that's raised is: isn't there any collective responsibility for a group of people that support and re-elect a political leader with 87% of votes, who was, and promised to continue engaging in a war of genocide? Notice that I'm being cynical here, referencing the 87% vote count. While it might be a theatrical display, the regime likes to preach about the legitimacy of Democracy (especially how Ukraine is conducting its democracy), and Russians accepted these results - so even if it's not actually 87%, it's still high. Also, let's not forget that a lot of the invading force is composed of individuals with entrepreneurial ambitions; they're contractors, not conscripts, meaning people who sign up to get well paid to go to Ukraine and kill as many Ukrainians as possible, just because they're Ukrainians. The latest estimates of +950.000 Russian casualties point that it's not just a few people willing to do this, but a lot. So the question that I want to ask you is, at what point does collective responsibility apply? Two points to clarify: - This is an honest question, because I don't know the answer to it, but I just don't think that "there should never be collective responsibility" is a good answer. - Collective responsibility =/= perpetual collective responsibility =/= collective punishment;
- ivan_gammel 1y ago
  >So the question that I want to ask you is, at what point does collective responsibility apply? There’s no such point. This is the main reason why Russia is still not under full trade embargo and Russian citizens can still get visas. Justice is a fundamental human right, so sanctions always target individuals after some due process and may be repealed in court.
  - libertine 1y ago
    > There’s no such point. Well, I disagree; the people of a nation contributing to and supporting genocide are responsible in part. > This is the main reason why Russia is still not under full trade embargo and Russian citizens can still get visas. I don't think those are the main reasons: - Embargo would have a global economic impact and would have to be militarily enforced; Also, it wouldn't be enforced everywhere as Russia has borders with countries that aren't sanctioning them. - As far as I know, Russian citizens can't get Visas everywhere; several European countries have banned all sorts of visas for Russian citizens. In fact, there's a case to be made that Russians are being collectively held accountable, for example: - Sanctions; - Seizing of Russian State assets (they don't belong to Putin or the regime, these assets actually belong to Russians); - Visa bans;
    - ivan_gammel 1y ago
      >Well, I disagree; the people of a nation contributing to and supporting genocide are responsible in part. Why exactly do you think human right for justice doesn’t apply here? Do you include in this group everyone, even those who were not able to or actively tried to stop it? What is their responsibility exactly? If not, how do you make the distinction? Then what country are you talking about? Russia is not committing genocide in Ukraine, so it must be Israel and Gaza? But even in that case, with dramatically higher number of civilian casualties and people having more agency in state matters how exactly do you want to hold every Israeli citizen responsible? >In fact, there's a case to be made that Russians are being collectively held accountable, for example: - Sanctions; I don’t understand this part. “To make a case” means to present arguments. You don’t present arguments for sanctions with saying “sanctions”.
regnull 1y ago
Again, they are not being punished in a court of law. Being incorporated in Cyprus, they (sadly) enjoy all the rights and privileges of being a Western company. I, as an individual, can refuse to do business with any company I please, on the basis of my beliefs and moral convictions (and on the basis of the likelihood of them being complicit in something I oppose to). If you prefer one brand of ice cream over the other, is this a collective punishment of the other company (looking at you, Ben & Jerry)?
- ivan_gammel 1y ago
  Sure thing you and everyone can. This is why I call it “cancel culture”, not violation of human rights. It describes boycott on ideological grounds and without dialogue and consideration of alternative possibilities and nuances quite well.