> One could say that the same is true in the US, but I believe the degree matters.
I think the key misconception behind this argument is the idea that harmful governments is a binary flag, such that if you're subjected to one adding more makes no difference. In fact, different governments have different concerns. This means if you're subject to the US and Russia you're significantly more constrained than if you were just subject to one. As such, it makes sense to reduce exposure even if you obviously can't eliminate it.
(I also believe the US govt is much better than Russian, but I'm leaving that out because I my argument doesn't need it and I'm uninterested in that argument)
I think the key misconception behind this argument is the idea that harmful governments is a binary flag, such that if you're subjected to one adding more makes no difference. In fact, different governments have different concerns. This means if you're subject to the US and Russia you're significantly more constrained than if you were just subject to one. As such, it makes sense to reduce exposure even if you obviously can't eliminate it.
(I also believe the US govt is much better than Russian, but I'm leaving that out because I my argument doesn't need it and I'm uninterested in that argument)