So educate me: what has e.g. Canada and Australia done recently so that GOG (and the rest of the world) should boycott them, like they are now doing with Russia? Are their alleged actions in any shape or form comparable to Russia invading Ukraine because Putin doesn't want it to be a sovereign and democratic country, but a mere puppet state and subject to Russia, just like Belarus?

You can have whichever leader you want, as long as he doesn't bomb his neighbor country, shoot at nuclear reactors and threaten the world with nuclear conflict.

I can't say I liked Putin before that, but now I really hate him. I get that you might be stuck with him right now, but for the sake of our civilisation, the next guy really needs to do better. The bar is not high.

no, not at all. there was no "western cultural victory", which lead to the break up of USSR. if you think this is the case, you really need to learn some history.

Every store is doing that, on explicit request of the Ukrainian government.
https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/5/22963195/activision-blizzard-halts-new-game-sales-russia-ukraine-invasion

Stop trolling or go trolling on the other stores.

Canada's Prime Minister suspended civil liberties invoking an act meant to be utilized in times of dire emergencies like wartime invasion. He used this to aggressively attack and punish civilians for political wrongthink. You didn't see the news where people who had supported the COVID protests with cash donations had discovered the government froze their bank accounts and were incapable of paying bills, rent, purchasing food, et cetera? The Act specifically even stated that (I'm quoting) ‘No proceedings under the Emergencies Act and no civil proceedings lie against an entity for complying with this Order,' meaning that there was no legal culpability for any bank or law enforcement agency that targeted these civilians for the "crime" of donating money to a legal political cause.

There actually was condemnation on a global scale over this. Although no one would dare to boycott a founding NATO member like Canada.

As for Australia, I'm not entirely sure what he's referencing there. Probably the same, considering that Australia is only a hair behind Canada in suspended civil liberties over COVID. It could also be the three dozen Afghani civilians they were caught executing in bloodsport, the Aborginese genocide, etc. Australia's always up on some charge with the UN Human Rights Council so it's hard to keep track.

Actually, most Canadians did not support the truckers.

They took it upon themselves to speak for the rest of Canada and they did not (people elected the government, nobody elected the truckers).

They paralysed the capital in a manner that many of us found disturbing and they also vandalized the statue of Terry Fox and the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier (for which they were strongly condemned across Canada, you don't co-opt the legacy of Terry Fox).

"Most" feels like an overreach. Most polls put it at around 45-55 in favor against the truckers before the Emergencies Act. Obviously, during the suspension of civil liberties and the targeted harassment of civilians who were nowhere near the protest, that number shifted wildly. What was really telling though were the Canadians who approved of the government attacking those unaffiliated civilians. I think that was probably a real eye-opener for many Canadians. You always think that if your political leader attempts to grab power, turn the country into an authoritarian state and oppress its citizens that it'd be fought by every able bodied person. You never suspect a huge chunk will welcome and cheer on the persecution.

[EDIT]: Vandalism is a little strong too. They didn't tear the statue down or spraypaint it or anything. They gave him a Canadian flag to hold and a sign proclaiming freedom that they took down, leaving the statue unharmed. The people for the truckers felt it was an excellent homage to the great man, the people opposed felt it was sacrilege. For my part, I live in a country where political parties tear down statues, buildings, profane and destroy historical sites all the time. I guess to me I'm relatively numbed to the idea that posing a statue holding a flag instead of burning the flag and urinating on its ashes is so mundane as to not be offensive.

I grew up with Terry Fox's legacy. I can tell you in no uncertain terms it was disrespectful.

Again, you don't co-opt the legacy of Terry Fox. Terry is not some kind of mascot to convey whatever message you want to say. You speak for yourself. You don't use Terry Fox's statue.

How would you get rid of Putler then, and make Russia cease brutally invading neighbouring countries?

Business as usual, fill up their war coffers for the next invasion? Prove to the Russian people that Putler is right as the economy is doing OK?

Or penalise the country, ostracise them, bleed the war coffers and punish Putler for even thinking about invading another country? And in this way open the eyes of the populace to the utter harm the dictator is doing for his country?

I get it. Putler has now made it a criminal offense to even call the brutal invasion an invasion, on top of destroying the free press by illegalising its self-defined 'fake news' meaning all major news agencies have finally left Russia like the BBC, and only the state-propaganda machine is left. They are also targeting anyone saying anything against the invasion.

So I completely understand. You have no choice. We feel sorry for you.

But please don't insult our intelligence with these absurd justifications for slaughtering your neighbouring countrymen and women (and children). Whataboutism accusations are becoming a trope now, but if the shoe fits. And man, does it fit. "America man bad too, look middle-east, Russia invasion ok then." Who the hell believes this crap??

Each of us will do what we can, and GOG did what it could. I'm sure it feels bad, but at least you don't have to spout the government propaganda in our faces. Take it like a man, and own up to it, and try to open your eyes.

Agree to disagree. I can't imagine Terry Fox would've supported Trudeau locking out thousands of Canadians from receiving cancer treatments and surgeries when it was his life's work to battle cancer. I genuinely believe he'd have been proud to hold the Canadian flag that he publicly wore most of his life.

"You can have any leader you want as long as he doesn't get to do what my leaders can."

The issue is blatant hypocrisy, double standarts, and sheer pettiness.

I won't pretend to know what stance Terry Fox would have taken on the issue. All I'm gonna say is that his run was to promote cancer research, which hints at a strong support for modern medicine. I'll leave it at that. You can connect whatever dots you like from that statement.

Otherwise, I'm not gonna debate this endlessly with you. This is something you have to grow up with to really grasp it.

Again, Putin is setting the bar pretty low. I can't think of any Canadian Prime minister in my lifetime would have done what he's doing. Sorry.

If you can't acknowledge how your current leader could be greatly improved upon, I'm not sure how much further we can go on here.

Oh, no, it's even better and sadder than that.

Are you talking about Russia or Gog here...?

"Absolutelly provoked". Nice freudian slip there. No, virtue signalling is expressing passive, unthinking, overly emotional support for the Current Thing in order to garner praise and acknowledgment for your righteousness from those who feel the same. You've basically replaced Covid with Putin, masks with Ukrainian flags and The Unvaccinated with Russians, and think sending some rifles and gadgets for others to die with is anything more than a sociopathic, collective feel-good maneuver. Making this a left vs right issue is like charging tanks with cavalry. You're antiquated and behind the times, and only care about feeling vindicated in your political leanings. That's not even disgusting, it's just primitive.

To be clear, I don't have a stance on the war itself. I can see some solid reasoning on both sides.

From Russia's, Ukraine has served as a neutral buffer between them and aggressive NATO expansion for decades. With NATO announcing openly and hungrily their intention to fold a border state like Ukraine into their fold, that's got to be alarming for Russia. They've got their own modern Cuban Missile Crisis staring down the barrel at them. And it's not like the US hasn't subsidized over two and a half billion dollars of military outfitting alone to the Ukraine in the last few years. The country has aggressively expanded its military to unparalleled heights with constant foreign aid and the promise of joining the Russian-opposed NATO every day.

Contextualizing it, would be like if Canada announced that they were becoming a vassal state for China and started building a bunch of military bases along the US border and suddenly dumping massive amounts of money (much of it Chinese money) into their defense budget. We'd be uneasy and probably intervening too.

On the flip side, where the line is drawn and war becomes a necessity? I don't know where that litmus falls. When is anything short of an overt hostile act the correct time to order tens of thousands to their death and risk global war? What even constitutes that overt act? Nah, the whole web is more tangled than "Putin man bad, Ukraine man good" or "We just need to 'secure our borders' for peace!"

My issue is wholly with the uneven application of sanctions in this situation. GOG choosing fashionable and twitter-trending causes to attach themselves to and ignoring mass and gross human violations all across the world otherwise is hypocritical and should be beneath them. Businesses should be apolitical.

That alone says zounds about you.