Hence this entire act resembles an emotional response of a distraught individual that lashes out. Have a look at [1] for an interesting take on the matter.
They have a pretty clear carveout in their TOS where they get to decide a breach of Acceptable Use, and one of the AUP that says "Engages in or instigates actions that cause harm to Namecheap or other customers." which one could make an argument that providing means to an invading military force as an action that harms Namecheap. So please show something material that outlines they cannot discontinue service without massive legal implications. Not to say that TOS' are indisputable in court, but it's hard to imagine that a court in the West would consider this a material breach considering the situation. This seems much more like a concern troll than a legitimate issue.
And to frame it as virtue signaling after outlining when they are impacted directly seems really odd. Normally people are compelled to do something, even something dumb, when they face a large crisis. I don't think we usually consider that virtue signaling, and it seems like an unnecessary thing to bring into the conversation.
This isn't making a moral judgment on a group of people - this is a company not wanting to do business in a country. They aren't generalizing people at all - they do not want to do business with the Russia government, and have every right to do that