[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]

/townhall/ - Townhall

A place for civilized animals
Password (For file deletion.)

[Return][Go to bottom]


File: 1708451442023.png (565.09 KB, 1221x737, 111:67, Alexei-Navalny's-message-i….png) ImgOps Google

What's the argument to be made that it was ethically justified for the Russian government to arrest anti-corruption and anti-war activist Alexei Navalny?

What's the argument to be made that it was morally correct to have him killed?

I'm interested in stepping out of my subconscious desire to be in a personal bubble, one in which his killing is seen as obviously terrible, and see what the general populace of America and Europe think, to be honest, given the extremely positive views held of the Chinese state, the Russian state, and so on held by half or so of regular peoples out there as well as the widespread popularity of Chinese and Russian efforts to crush dissident activists.

I realize that there are a lot of online locations in which I can see random comments on Navalny, but I'd much rather take in the attitudes here than out on 4chan, Facebook, Reddit, et cetera since trying to communicate on those platforms is kind of like trying to pick up melted ice cream with a fork.


What's Russia's official take on it for now?
He was sick and nothing could be done?
Or it doesn't matter because there are some horrible secrets we found out about this guy, so really he deserved it?

Or both?
I do hear that Navalny's wife is already getting shut up.


As far as I can tell, the official government take as of right now is that (via Russia Today) he had a blood clot that interfered with his heart and lungs, which meant he died of natural causes unplanned by anybody.

More at: https://meduza.io/en/live/2024/02/16/alexey-navalny-is-dead


To be truly honest, though, I don't know if I actually want to hear from Europeans and Russians the argument of why this civil rights activist had to be murdered and why that was the ethical thing to do.

Yes, I'm biased since I'm an American in America who was born here looking oceans away, but from my personal moral perspective this feels like watching the German SS troopers machine-gunning cafes in Paris, France in the sense of like nakedly violent aggression done by thugs without a real reason.


I don't watch the news anymore or heard of this guy, but based on the situation as described, I would apply the following rules:

1. Killing is wrong.
2. Killing may be justified (as in, mostly (at least), I think - one may choose to justify it) but it is still wrong.
3. Justification is the worldly method of attempted atonement for wrong. Instead of seeking forgiveness (as in Western traditions) or Wisdom/Understanding (Eastern), justification is given in order to maintain one's position.
4. Justification may be given to either oneself or to others.
5. Justification does not make a wrong a right.


I don't imagine the average European will defend this.
Granted, aside from a group of pro Russian folks.

Now US Republicans, they probably think it was Russia's perogative to do.
Or I hear there's a call to not let Asange be the next Navalny for Americans.
Or Trump tweeting he's just like Navalny and the government is trying to murder him for speaking the truth.


These are solid points.

Yeah, I'd say that the average European wouldn't defend this assassination. It's more that it feels shocking that any European would. Let alone some small yet incredibly public faction of activists.

It seems almost like people marching in support of the seasonal flu or in support of car accidents plus bad breath in terms of "bad things are bad" as a clear moral rule being ignored.

[Return] [Go to top]
[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]