Ideally Russians would understand that sanctions are a consequence of their government's murderous invasion and that they represent a mild inconvenience compared to the plight of Ukrainians--if a given Russian can't muster the courage to protest (yes, I understand protests are illegal, which makes those who do protest all the more commendable) then I hope he can muster the courage not to complain about sanctions (similarly I hope westerners can muster the courage not to complain about high gas prices and so on).
The threat of cutting off trade is an attempt to 'twist the arm' of a country. In this case its justified, cool. (Although some of them like banning Russian cat breeds, seem questionable)
But then why are posters above pretending that many countries, which signed up this IP regime under threat fo being cutoff from trade, didn't do that under duress?
Because most people reserve "duress" for a threat to one's rights. In the case of nations, these rights are generally territorial integrity (basically, the right not to be invaded or attacked) and political independence (the right to self-govern, including to choose with whom and under which terms a nation engages in trade or other treaties and alliances). While there are certainly powerful incentives for cooperation, it's incoherent to argue that exercising one's right to self-govern is coercive and thus out-of-bounds.
Thats a terrible analogie.
To argue that being cut off from the global economy is 'freedom of association' is like arguing that selling cocaine to children is 'just free market' and "honest business"
Countries are not people - if the rest of the world stops trading with UK, 60 milliom people starve. In some countries, people will freese to death without fuel. West imposed moderate sanctions on Russia, and economy is already collapsing.