Re:Putin Passes Law Requiring $3.8B Security Payments From V...
by bayesianhorse on Tuesday May 06, 2014 @11:11AM
(#7704925)
Well "boo, Putin" wouldn't be such a bad attitude. He is, after all, a former KGB officer who runs an authoritarian nation, where the mere notion of free press or due process is ridiculous.
The biggest mistake non-Russians seem to make with regards to interpreting the "West vs Putin" debate is, that they forget that western political systems are hugely more transparent and reliable.
Essentially this means that virtually any "misdeed" on the part of a western government will come out over time, whereas there will be no such evidence or a wider discussion over what Putin is doing.
Given the choice over the U.S. strong-arming payment processors in very few cases, and Putin strong arming them for whatever reasons he sees fit, I'll choose the U.S. any time...
Re:Putin Passes Law Requiring $3.8B Security Payments From V...
by pjc50 on Tuesday May 06, 2014 @11:26AM
(#7705030)
"boo, Putin" is certainly valid and correct, and I'm not asserting general moral equivalence. I'm just saying that actions which erode due process make it much harder to fight this kind of action.
Note that the US government is no stranger to strong-arming payment processors into refusing payment to businesses it deems undesirable, not always on a legal basis. For example, donations to wikileaks. The Russian position is that Putin insists on being the one strong-arming opponents. This is not an improvement.
(I wonder if this thread is going to be "yay, someone breaking the payments cartel and going after the banks" or "boo, Putin"?)