Hacker News Reader

Comment by manucardoen | Hacker News Reader

Only about 18% of which is actually owned by Russia. The rest is money that happened to be in transit between private persons at an unfortunate time. Do we really think it's fair that a lady who happened to be selling her house at exactly the time the war started... should have that money donated to Ukraine's war effort?

View on HN

Re: "Only about 18% of which is actually owned by Russia." - extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Care to show some?

(I do not understand your example with the lady that sold her house when the conflict erupted. Lots of people sold their houses at that time and somehow their money is not being frozen....)

Between private Russians?

I believe you'll find a lot of Ukrainians found their entire towns suddenly "donated" to the war effort, not just a downpayment on a house.

War's hell, they can get bent.

The people holding the money are not at war.

That is complicated. And historically simply not true. Being subject/citizen of one country means that in case of war, your property is legitimate to be anything from damaged to seized by opposing parties in the war. The fact that we hadn't had any kind of real war in since WW2 means that no-one has that experience in recent history.

I'm aware that there have been significant amounts of armed conflict in the mean time, but the last conflict between states that ran similar to historic wars was the Korean war (which technically hasn't ended). Most wars the US was involved in where more similar to colonial expeditions (seizing local resources, defending local bases)

> That is complicated. And historically simply not true. Being subject/citizen of one country means that in case of war, your property is legitimate to be anything from damaged to seized by opposing parties in the war.

There are two sides in this war: Russia and Ukraine. Neither is holding the money.

We're talking about the money in Euroclear right? Why would a woman in Russia be receiving money through Euroclear when selling a house?

Whats your source on that?

Yes, the only people responsible for Russian leadership are the Russian people. The Russian people should pay to rebuild Ukraine.

> Do we really think it's fair that a lady who happened to be selling her house at exactly the time the war started... should have that money donated to Ukraine's war effort?

You know what's not fair? The lady's government invaded a sovereign nation, committed genocide while doing it, and continues to do so. If that lady lost her fortune from it, then she should be vocal about justice for all parties.

if we start holding all Americans liable for what American government did to other countries, it would be really bad for you

Yes, it would. Maybe doing so would cause American government to change their actions. Or maybe not.

America is a functioning democracy so individual Americans are much more responsible than individual Russians for the bullshit their respective countries do.

America is not a democracy in a strict sense, its a republic. To be precise, modern America is a plutocracy, not democracy.

But did America ever pay reparations for centuries of enslaving its own people? Where is the accountability?

> America is not a democracy in a strict sense, its a republic

Most republics are democracies. You seem to think "democracy" is equivalent to "direct democracy," but a direct democracy is only one type of democracy. A republic is another form of democracy.

America is certainly a democracy (for now; who knows what will happen in two years)

In the question of degree and comparison, the US (even in its present greatly degraded state) is far more a functioning democracy than Russia.

How deluded do you need to be to detach yourself from all the responsibility in your life that are complicated? If you are an American, the US government is YOUR government and it is YOUR problem. You might not be able to do much, but it does not shield you from your moral responsibility.

Russians are responsible for their government too! They just have way less they're able to do to steer it, but it still their government.

Your argument seems to violate ought implies can, which as far as I know is generally accepted as a valid moral principle.

She didn't choose that government, nor does she have any power to affect it, so how can she be responsible for it?

Absolutely, she shouls pay! Also EU should suspend(or tax 100%) pensions and all social benefits to sponsor the war! If that is not enough, confiscate private companies and private properties!

I was saying that for years, since the war started! People thought it is some kind of joke. But that was the only way to win!

So to pay for the war to stop a new Soviet Union, a bloc of countries that all fear their alliance will turn into a new Soviet Union, must become a new Soviet Union?

Might be a hard sell.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com