7 ms·
Are you saying that sovereign nations don't have the right to decide who they're willing to trade with? Because that's in essence what you're saying when you s
by FedRegister 12y ago
Are you saying that sovereign nations don't have the right to decide who they're willing to trade with? Because that's in essence what you're saying when you say economic sanctions should end.
- x1798DE 12y agoI'm saying I would prefer it if their governments didn't have the ability to limit who their citizens can trade with, yes.
- eropple 12y agoThey have that ability through the power vested in them by the citizens, to effectively project the force that the citizenry, as a whole, desires to project. If the citizenry cared, they can do something about that. (They don't, for a lot of reasons. And they're wrong, but they don't.)
- icebraining 12y agoBut if the citizenry, like you said, doesn't care, how can it be a force that the citizenry desires to project?
- eropple 12y agoThey don't care to stop it. Status quo wins.
- x1798DE 12y agoIf the government acted for the citizenry as a whole, then they wouldn't have to ban these transactions. At best, the government imposes the majority view on the minority. I think that in general this is more dangerous than helpful. Imagine that the government, with full support of 80% of all US citizens, banned doing business with anyone of Iranian descent, not just living in Iran. That's not feasible in the current climate, but it's certainly possible. I think I'd prefer it if such laws were fundamentally unenforceable.
- FedRegister 12y agoSo if country A is at war with country B then the government of A shouldn't be allowed to prevent company C from selling items which materially benefit and provide aid and comfort to country B?