In the domain of Mixed Martial Arts there's a discussion over whether to permit Russian nationals to have fights, even though the majority of Russian nationals in MMA are from colonized ethnic groups who live in the southern Russian republics, e.g. Chechnya, Dagestan, etc. Amateur wrestling would be completely fucked if it were to conceive and follow through on such a ban given the hegemony in amateur wrestling these southern Russian republics hold there, particularly Dagestan.

>Chechnya

Even if the invasion had never happened boycotting Chechnya would have been acceptable given their previous actions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chechnya#LGBT_rights

Sure, but that's independent of the current conversation while not being wrong in its own context.

Agreed - I can't believe how quickly the "mainstream" had adopted a hatred basically of a whole people based on the actions of an autocratic leader that does not represent them, and where speaking out would almost certainly have very bad consequences. We should be doing everything we can to stop Putin from waging war, but casual hatred of a group is not helpful or appropriate, even if it's the obvious extension of all the online mob behavior we've seen in recent years.

This grandmaster's twitter is much more representative as to what the typical Russian citizen thinks about the conflict:

https://twitter.com/SergeyKaryakin

I do not believe this can be classified as hatred.

That is true. Hatred by itself is inactive.

As a Muslim.. I can lmao

I don’t know why you’re being downvoted. What you say is correct and ethical, in my view. Putin and the Russian government are to blame, not random Russian citizens.

I believe the goal of sanctions like this is to make the people mad at their leaders. So you sanction Russian citizens in the hope it'll help motivate them to create change. Not sure it could work with Russia, but maybe?

I don't understand how anyone thinks this can work when the one opposition leader has been poisoned and put in jail.

“Do everything we can, but not this, this is too harsh.”

Can you not see how this statement must be true at some point?

> an autocratic leader that does not represent them

They did elect him (with 76.69% of the vote).

This is incorrect. Electoral rating of Putin (as of 2021) is around 30%. The central election committee will just declare the results that Putin wants.

People in the West who live in (relatively) democratic countries just go around saying "Russians elected him" without actually understanding what living under an autocratic rule is like. Putin never won a free and fair election. He persecuted his opponents, denied them access to media (and as of today, there's no independent media left) installed dummy ones that play into his hand and falsified the elections.

It's like seeing hunger in a 3rd world country and saying "why don't they just learn how to program and get an actual job?"

The electoral rating of someone outside an election is hardly relevant, it only matters on election day. On that day (in 2018) the result was (according to [1]), 77% (56M) in favour of Putin. The second candidate got 11.9% (8.6M). No doubt this guy is a narcissistic deranged dwarf, but are you suggesting he faked 48M votes?

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Russian_presidential_elec...

Why do you think he didn't fake 48M votes?

That would be an astonishing feat, just logistically. Do you have evidence of fraud on that scale?

Ummm, yes. There’s Shpilkin’s famous research (dont know if available in English) suggesting that about 30% of latest Duma election ballots were fake.

And what people also don’t understand is that they falsify on all levels. First, they persecute their opponents and deny them access to media. If they think an opponent has a chance and isn’t sufficiently toothless, they just don’t register them. Then they cast fake ballots during actual voting. There are reports of fraud during counting: police is known to remove independent observers from the room. If the results at this point are not satisfactory enough, they rewrite the numbers in counting protocols. And even if that’s not sufficient (like in Lukashenko’s case), they can just declare any result they want and beat/jail anyone who disagrees.

I think western commentators on Russian elections/popular opinions just can’t wrap their heads around how corrupt the system is.

Most people in Russia aren’t pro-Putin. They’re indifferent, don’t think about these things much and mind their own business.

This is also a failure of the news media, to not more clearly explain to people what Putin is doing and that the election results he declares, is a joke.

End result, some people here for real believing that the people in Russia supports Putin.

It's depressing that the newspapers let themselves be used by him as a tool for manipulation

It's also annoying, I think, that the newspapers keep calling him the "president".

Please don't argue in the flamewar style on HN. We don't want this site to go down in flames. This gets more important, not less, when the world is on fire.

"Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Yea what is the solution when the west throws sanctions but keeps buying Russian oil and gas? Basically bankrolling this invasion.

Like others have said the solution to this crisis might be “drill baby drill” but that’s unfortunately more toxic or an argument than a country getting bombed to the ground. I guess we can stomach the war but not domestic oil and gas production.

I would definitely support stop buying Russian gas as well. I encourage folks to call their reps as I will. (for those in the states)

I don't mind wearing extra t-shirts indoors, or even a jacket or winter cap. (Seriously, in case anyone wonders)

Good for the environment and world safety

The solution is obviously to punish those causing the harm directly, no?

Obviously much easier said than done. Also not sure why you’re mentioning America here - the article is about Norway

> The solution is obviously to punish those causing the harm directly, no?

You mean direct war against Russia? That would certainly also cause collateral damage on innocents.

Fighting the people directly who are holding the guns will do less “collateral damage” than uniform discrimination of all Russians.

I’m not a fan of violence in general, though. Ideally they’d find another way without killing anyone.

> Fighting the people directly who are holding the guns will do less “collateral damage” than uniform discrimination of all Russians.

Nato forces directly attacking Russian military in Ukraine would be the start of a third world war. The collateral damage of a direct war between Nato and Russia would be unfathomable.

> Fighting the people directly who are holding the guns will do less “collateral damage” than uniform discrimination of all Russians.

Nuclear war between NATO and Russia would cause less collateral damage than Russian people not getting to play chess tournaments for an indefinite period of time?

I disagree.

What is the principle you're applying which results in punishing uninvolved, opposed people?

This is completely, totally wrong. There's no "discrimination" here - Grischuk is a Russian citizen, which is why he's being kicked out of the tournament, along with the other Russian citizens mentioned - their ethnicity is a non-factor.

The only relevant issue is the question as to whether all Russian citizens (regardless of ethnicity) should be banned from these kinds of events (more generally: have sanctions and sanction-adjacent actions taken against them), or just those who have directly contributed to the invasion (Putin, his military advisors, some Russian oligarchs maybe?) - which is a good topic for discussion. Claiming "discrimination", on the other hand, is factually incorrect, blatant emotional manipulation & unnecessary flamewar-bait, and does not belong on HN.

Your comment is the one that’s blatantly wrong - no one mentioned discrimination on the basis of ethnicity other than you.

Discriminating on nationality is still discrimination.

Discriminating based on nationality is only "discrimination" in the sense that you're differentiating between two groups of people, and treating them differently. It's not bad - unlike discriminating based on race. GP clearly meant "discrimination" in the discriminating-against-a-protected-class use of a term, which discrimination based on nationality is not.

>Grischuk is a Russian citizen, which is why he's being kicked out of the tournament

I assume Giri for example still has citizenship - I wonder if he will be banned despite not representing Russia.