Comment by fsociety999
5 years ago
Why don’t you cut off United States citizens while you are at it? The regime that has probably done more damage and caused more instability to the world than any other country. The U.S. uses the entire world as their playground couping any Government that disagrees with them or refuses to bend to their demands and bombing their citizens and civilians. What about the atrocities and war crimes committed in Iraq and Afghanistan? Syria? Libya? Yemen? Etc.
Just because it is covered up or whitewashed by the media in the U.S. does not mean it is not happening.
Blaming the citizens of a country for the actions of their Government is absolutely atrocious behavior. I used to have all my domains on Namecheap. I have since moved them, but now I will make sure I never use your service ever again and will never recommend you to anyone else either.
Also the argument that tax money is supporting the regime is ridiculous. If citizens could CHOOSE how their tax money was spent it would be one thing, but in the U.S. our tax money has literally gone to providing weapons and training to terrorist organizations.
Again, this doesn’t EXCUSE the actions of the Russian government, but taking their people hostage to use as leverage is disgusting and despicable.
I'm guessing they don't cut off the United States because the United States isn't invading and bombing the cities where they operate and have employees.
A lot of people are making assumptions about this being a purely PR "woke" move of some kind, ignoring this: https://www.namecheap.com/careers/ukraine
Seems pretty personal to me. If I or my people were actively being bombed by an invading force, I'd take it personally, too. And then I'd take action about it.
To me, Russian behaviour is identical to the Turkish invasion of 1974, the subsequent occupation of Northern Cyprus until this very day, and the installation of a puppet government.
I sympathise with Namecheap's CEO, and had I been anything more than a grad student, I'd have done similar.
Is definitely a personal move.
Go on their website, they operate in 4 countries.
US: 40 people
Portugal: 70 people
Ukraine: 1700 people
India: 70 people
Classic American company delocalizing everything and now crying because all the engineering is based in Ukraine.
You put all the eggs in one basket and now you complain that they broke? Ukraine is in a conflict with Russia not from yesterday, it has been years from the Crimea case.
The CEO of this company never had a thought about de-risking his over reliance on Ukrainian talent to run his company? Or was just too cheap to keep the location there and pocket the difference in added value created by these talents?
7 replies →
When the day comes when US tanks cross over into Canada to annex it under a false pretext, running over passenger vehicles; when the US tells its soldiers they are going on a military exercise only to have them shoot at their neighbor; when the US tells the world "if you get involved we'll nuke you"; when the US jails its anti-war protestors for as much as carrying a sign... then perhaps your comparison will be valid. Until then you're just deflecting.
When you already mentioned false pretexes - how's going on with finding WMD in Iraq? Any seccess yet?
Is shooting at neighbor worse than shooting at people half over the world (or they don't count because of wrong skin color)?
WMDs or not, Saddam Hussein's Iraq did not in any way resemble Canada or Ukraine.
The problem with this kind of whatabboutism is that the US invades places run by morally reprehensible people. To keep the comparison with Ukraine going, you've either got to convince us that Saddam Hussein was a nice guy, or Zelenskyy is a butcher. Everyone knows that's bullshit.
6 replies →
It's becoming increasingly apparent that the only thing that matters at all is power. Sadly, the USA is responsible for establishing this paradigm, although pointing this out is taboo whataboutism. Now, we're returning to a world as it's always been: apes compelling other apes with their sticks.
2 replies →
The morality of any military action, can and has been endlessly debated (as it should) because it's non-binary, it's a spectrum. That does not change the fact that these two superpowers could not be further apart in how they go about spreading their influence around the world.
Through oversimplification you can argue that anything is the same as its opposite.
1 reply →
I think the world has changed in the past twenty years, and I think if the U.S. engages in future foreign wars, maybe they will have to suffer similar consequences from non U.S. companies. I hope so, and I say that as a U.S. citizen.
I for one like this. If you are a shitty citizen in our increasing global world, one positive benefit of globalization is the many ways that that global world can now bite you in the ass.
There is no excuse for wars of aggression. And in the past people would throw their hands up and say "well what can I do?" Well we are all connected now, so increasingly there is something you can do.
The world is not changing and the next US invasion will also have zero consequences and lot of justification to placate the sense of morality of the population.
> The world is not changing
You may have blinked and missed it, but it just did. The US has weaponized global finance to an unprecedented level. Russian loans denominated in FX will all default. The stock market is cratering as soon as they are brave enough to open it back up. The ruble is going to be worth less than it was an hour ago. The Great Russian Experiment is underway.
2 replies →
> Why don’t you cut off United States citizens while you are at it?
Just because they don't cut off the American government, especially Texas, from services, doesn't mean that they can't stand against Russia. This is a blatant false dichotomy. In addition, I 100% blame every tax-payer of Texas for the human rights violations going on there, even those who would call themselves liberals.
Vote with your wallets. Leave.
Please kindly check your whataboutism at the door. It's not HN-caliber discussion.
OP's comment is not whataboutism. It's simply pointing out that this is not the principled stand it is masquerading as. If this action was strictly about countries waging unprovoked wars heavily laden with war crimes, the US would be on the chopping block from NC's perspective. That we were not (nor ever will be) is a testament to the fact that the US is too lucrative a market for them to lose and that this is not principled whatsoever.
Attacking a position solely because it is inconsistent is the definition of whataboutism. (And perfect consistency is the enemy of improving short-term outcomes.)
7 replies →
You and others use "whataboutism" like it's some sort of checkmate. The point is, many Americans are very eager to police everyone based on their "principles", everyone else except themselves and their allies that is.
The topic of discussion is not whether or not the Russian invasion of Ukraine is bad. If it was, your argument would be applicable.
This topic is analogous to "selective enforcement" from police. If a policeman typically jails blacks but gives whites a warning for the same crime, this is bad, and should be acknowledged as such. Same here.
You're comparing a civil-rights violation to a business inconvenience. Namecheap and others like them owe nobody anything except by contract, and they're going to refund (to the extent possible) those they won't do business with anymore.
4 replies →
Whataboutism usually follows some kind of hypocrisy.
The act of pointing out whataboutism are usually done so the hypocritical side can take refuge and refute any discussion. This often happen because hypocrisy is real - otherwise it would be easy to refute the equivalence instead.
As I've said elsewhere, pointing out hypocrisy usually gets you nowhere in an argument. It's seen by many as a vain attempt to show how smart you are, as opposed to participating in a substantive discussion of the issue at hand.
7 replies →
Ah, yes. "What about whataboutism!?"
Calling out whataboutism is just a way to avoid explaining your inconsistent views. Often times people who call out whataboutism haven't really thought out their position.
No, I’m calling it out because it cheapens our discourse. We can, and should, have more substantive conversations here.
2 replies →
>"It's not HN-caliber"
Are you suggesting that the hypocrisy is?
For all the problems with the US's actions in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (not to mention the run-up to them and their aftermaths), there's an enormous gulf between that and any equivalency to Russia invading Ukraine.
Iraq was a nation that had invaded and annexed a neighboring country, a scorched earth retreat, committed domestic human rights abuses, had attempted to acquire various WMDs in the recent past, and had perpetrated chemical weapon attacks. Afghanistan was knowingly sheltering a group that repeatedly targeted and killed Americans worldwide, culminating in the deadliest attack on civilians in world history.
Again, that's not to say war was the best option on the table, nor no blood on the hands of the US in the end... but not a single one of these justifications for war applies to Russia invading Ukraine.
As another commenter said, the morality of military force is a spectrum of grays, not black and white – but just because criticism can be found in every case doesn't mean every one is equally unjustified or amoral.
> Why don’t you cut off United States citizens while you are at it? The regime that has probably done more damage and caused more instability to the world than any other country.
Is this true? My understanding was that (despite the current conflict), the world has been experiencing a rather unique period of relative peace under US hegemony compared to the past. This is obviously true when looking at timescales since the late 19th/early 20th centuries [https://oneearthfuture.org/opinion-insights/world-getting-mo...]. Clearly the world has been significantly less violent since WW2, which is the time that the US became a superpower.
Datapoints on prior eras are significantly less robust, but the US wasn't a leader at those points anyway. We do know that wars were widespread and brutal, despite having much less advanced weaponry, and we know that life expectancies are far longer today than in the past.
> Again, this doesn’t EXCUSE the actions of the Russian government, but taking their people hostage to use as leverage is disgusting and despicable.
This is how economic sanctions work. What's the alternative? Do nothing? Economic sanctions place pressure on the politicians in the aggressive nation to stop their aggression. The alternatives are to do nothing (morally unfathomable) or to fight them (in which case Russians will die, and if Putin's threats are believed, maybe we all die).
I find it concerning and perplexing that so many hackers are seemingly more concerned about Russia's economy than Ukrainian lives. Every day the conflict goes on, Ukrainians die (and if you're so concerned about economy - their economy is getting destroyed too!). Logically, anything that moves us towards ending the conflict peacefully and quickly reduces lives lost and will spare all involved from further economic retribution.
Additionally, this is personal for Namecheap. Imagine being bombed by a country and having strangers tell you that you have to keep providing services to members the country that is killing your friends, family, or even you! You must continue serving the country that is bombing your home! It is truly absurd.