Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Norway Chess cancels Alexander Grischuk

marginalrevolution.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 263 posts

Re: Norway Chess cancels Alexander Grischuk

#211

Post by awillen »

throwaway5752 wrote: post #206
awillen wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is banning someone who has actively spoken against the war . If you're a Russian doing that, you're exposing yourself to danger in the name of doing the right thing. This isn't someone who was caught up in broader sanctions, like the innocent Russians whose life savings are being demolished. That's terrible, but in the broader context it is understandable and necessary. This is someone being specifically tar…

I was against the war in Iraq 20 years ago. I am still ashamed of it, and as an American I bear some shared culpability for it. I would have understood bans and boycotts and would have been at peace even if I were personally impacted. It would have been immeasurably less than what the hundreds of thousands of innocent, dead Iraqis suffered. I think Tyler Cowen is more concerned about this than Grischuk. I wonder why.

You're totally ignoring my point, though - bans and boycotts make sense. I fully agreed with that. Targeting you, specifically, even if you protested against the war, does not. You're pointing out the immense suffering of the Ukrainians, which I think everyone here agrees with, but then you're using it to avoid the question of why their suffering makes it appropriate to punish someone whose actions (speaking out against the war) are beneficial to them.

Also, it's not reasonable to compare the culpability of an American, who lives in a democracy and can choose to spend their time and effort protesting the country's leadership and trying to oust it in the next election, to someone living in a dictatorship who cannot reasonably do those things.

Re: Norway Chess cancels Alexander Grischuk

#212

Post by throwaway5752 »

HeyZuess wrote: post #208
throwaway5752 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like I said - you can ban none, some, or all Russian participants. That is just simple logic. If you ban some participants, you harm the integrity of the competition by subjective criteria. If you ban none, you are failing to impose a cost for Russian war crimes. It's an awful situation for everyone involved and the best situation would be for an immediate cessation of hostilities and military withdrawal so the ban c…

> Like I said - you can ban none, some, or all Russian participants. I can understand sanctions, they specifically target the country. I can understand sanctions against individuals who are supporting Putin like the oligarchs. I can understand cutting financial, business ties as they specifically target the country. It starts to get difficult based on the criteria of nationality, there are a variety of reasons to ban…

I found https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/03/world/europe/chess-russia... much more though thoughtful than Cowen.

Clearly, Tyler Cowen has his reasons for framing this issue in an inflammatory way. I suspect he didn't seek out any 44 open letter signatories for their feelings.

I simply see no way of keeping out Karjakin in an equitable way. I am tired of repeating myself about how I hate this situation, but the victims are not Russian grandmasters, they are Ukrainian children. Some people are trying very hard to move the focus off of this (I don't believe you are, and I appreciate your conclusion.. I agree there are no right answers).

Re: Norway Chess cancels Alexander Grischuk

#213

Post by [deleted] »

inkyoto wrote: post #209
throwaway5752 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be confused about the moral weight of being temporarily banned in gaming and sports tournaments to unprovoked invasion and warfare. They aren't equivalent. Your questions are just absurd slippery slope fallacies that I won't give the dignity of answering, and you should be a little embarrassed about using that technique in a good faith discussion. Which article in the UN link that you sent would categoriz…

You do realise that Grischuk is a Ukranian surname, don't you? As well as the fact that Grischuk's first wife was Ukranian and his current wife is of the half-Russian, half-Ukranian descent?

[deleted]

Re: Norway Chess cancels Alexander Grischuk

#214

Post by throwaway5752 »

inkyoto wrote: post #209
throwaway5752 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be confused about the moral weight of being temporarily banned in gaming and sports tournaments to unprovoked invasion and warfare. They aren't equivalent. Your questions are just absurd slippery slope fallacies that I won't give the dignity of answering, and you should be a little embarrassed about using that technique in a good faith discussion. Which article in the UN link that you sent would categoriz…

You do realise that Grischuk is a Ukranian surname, don't you? As well as the fact that Grischuk's first wife was Ukranian and his current wife is of the half-Russian, half-Ukranian descent?

And he's also vocally against the conflict, which matters much more to me than his ancestry. His moral character in this regard is extremely admirable. Many people in Russia have Ukrainian surnames for obvious reasons of proximity, which is why so many Russians are against this invasion.

Re: Norway Chess cancels Alexander Grischuk

#215

Post by ALittleLight »

somenameforme wrote: post #60

This is getting really stupid. Anytime there is some major event we always work to try to ensure that people appreciate there is a difference between the people of a country and the bad actors of a country - even when those bad actors are the government. But now because it's our favorite geopolitical enemy, everything goes out the window. Imagine if the victims of our wars (or their partners) were more influential an…

I don't understand the people who object to these tactics. It would simply be a good thing if Americans were reviled for waging wars of aggression on other states. That would mean fewer people in the US would support wars and there would be fewer wars. That would be good. It's at least worth a shot.

Adam Smith wrote - "In great empires the people who live in the capital, and in the provinces remote from the scene of action, feel, many of them, scarce any inconvenience from the war; but enjoy, at their ease, the amusement of reading in the newspapers the exploits of their own fleets and armies. To them this amusement compensates the small difference between the taxes which they pay on account of the war, and those which they had been accustomed to pay in time of peace. They are commonly dissatisfied with the return of peace, which puts an end to their amusement, and to a thousand visionary hopes of conquest and national glory from a longer continuance of the war."

In other words, war is kind of fun and exciting for a populace that doesn't feel harm from it. I remember watching stories of the invasion of Iraq, and it seemed a lot like that to me. The media and the country generally enjoying the exploits of our armies.

Well, we can balance that enjoyment by a dissatisfaction of denying other pleasures to the population. No more chess, international sports, travel, etc. The complaint here should not be that this is being done to Russia, it should be. You're justified to complain that America was not made a pariah, but that's a different kind of complaint.

Re: Norway Chess cancels Alexander Grischuk

#216

Post by brimble »

adenozine wrote: post #189
brimble wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone in Russia is going to be hurting from this. Most of them don't really deserve it, but you can't bring an entire economy to its knees without harming everyone . It'd be kinda weird to single out chess masters to save from the pain, while a grandma on a fixed income is facing shortages and watching her already-meager buying power drop by the day, the low-level staff at various businesses are put on half-time o…

I didn’t single them out; I highlighted this instance in my reply. I agree with you, and i sympathize for all working folk, everywhere, always, and forever. I was only meaning to point out that people who play chess for a living are technically working folk too, that’s all. The people of Russia must seize their nation back somehow, whether by means of diplomacy or other means, if necessary.

> I didn’t single them out; I highlighted this instance in my reply.

Sorry, you're right. My reading wasn't as good as it could have been.

Re: Norway Chess cancels Alexander Grischuk

#217

Post by inkyoto »

throwaway5752 wrote: post #214
inkyoto wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do realise that Grischuk is a Ukranian surname, don't you? As well as the fact that Grischuk's first wife was Ukranian and his current wife is of the half-Russian, half-Ukranian descent?

And he's also vocally against the conflict, which matters much more to me than his ancestry. His moral character in this regard is extremely admirable. Many people in Russia have Ukrainian surnames for obvious reasons of proximity, which is why so many Russians are against this invasion.

I don't know anything about his personal circumstances, but it is not inconceivable that he, or his spouse, or both have relatives in Ukraine who are potentially being shelled at this very moment or hiding it out, and that Grischuk and his relatives are in a great distress right now.

Re: Norway Chess cancels Alexander Grischuk

#218

Post by slg »

ncann wrote: post #205
slg wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is questionable morally to only comment on this situation in a way designed to personally benefit you.

It's bad when you word it like that, but change it to "in a way designed to prevent you and your loved ones from great harm" and suddenly it's very understandable.

Then simply don't comment if that is the fear.

Re: Norway Chess cancels Alexander Grischuk

#219

Post by thway0987 »

throwaway5752 wrote: post #212
HeyZuess wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Like I said - you can ban none, some, or all Russian participants. I can understand sanctions, they specifically target the country. I can understand sanctions against individuals who are supporting Putin like the oligarchs. I can understand cutting financial, business ties as they specifically target the country. It starts to get difficult based on the criteria of nationality, there are a variety of reasons to ban…

I found https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/03/world/europe/chess-russia... much more though thoughtful than Cowen. Clearly, Tyler Cowen has his reasons for framing this issue in an inflammatory way. I suspect he didn't seek out any 44 open letter signatories for their feelings. I simply see no way of keeping out Karjakin in an equitable way. I am tired of repeating myself about how I hate this situation, but the victims…

> I am tired of repeating myself about how I hate this situation, but the victims are not Russian grandmasters, they are Ukrainian children.

Nobody in this thread has denied that Ukrainian children are victims, and nobody has disagreed that there should be a reaction.

What people are questioning is who should be targeted by this reaction, and with what actions. Your stance, as I read it, is everyone who is Russian, because there is no other way. Even with that, people didn't argue against, at least when it comes to economic sanctions. But bans that do not affect the war criminals, but only common people (aka, civilians)? That does feel petty and unnecessary. And to be clear, unlike others in the thread I don't suggest selecting people based on their opinion -- it feels too antithetic to our democratic ideals (so that it is clear, I personally despise these opinions).

Forgive me for changing the focus a bit, but since you bring up the plight of children, it is likely that Russian children will also suffer from the consequences of economic sanctions. Some will grow up in poverty because of this mess, some will die indirectly, from the effects of poverty. I don't really have a solution to that (right now the efforts should go to stop the war in Ukraine), and that doesn't mean that sanctions can be avoided, but I do think that they are also victims.

Re: Norway Chess cancels Alexander Grischuk

#220

Post by throwaway5752 »

inkyoto wrote: post #217
throwaway5752 wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And he's also vocally against the conflict, which matters much more to me than his ancestry. His moral character in this regard is extremely admirable. Many people in Russia have Ukrainian surnames for obvious reasons of proximity, which is why so many Russians are against this invasion.

I don't know anything about his personal circumstances, but it is not inconceivable that he, or his spouse, or both have relatives in Ukraine who are potentially being shelled at this very moment or hiding it out, and that Grischuk and his relatives are in a great distress right now.

My heart sincerely goes out to him. I suspect this weighs on him much more than other circumstances. I think any individual passionate about morality and chess can follow https://twitter.com/Kasparov63 and learn how someone deeply impacted by this situation feels about it.
Post reply on HN