Thanks to the internet, everyone with access to the web can be as politically engaged as they want. Passionate about anti-pollution efforts? A Google search reveals millions of resources for action. Wondering where the political fault lines of abortion are? You’ll find thousands of articles by pro-life and pro-choice organizations and individuals outlining their beliefs. Curious about how the riding of Regina-Lewvan voted in recent Canadian federal elections? You’ll stumble on election-atlas.ca and the Canadian Election Database, among other sources. Any kind of information the politically-minded could ever want is now more accesiable than ever before, and those whose engagement includes spreading their beliefs have the greatest tools ever for political proselytization in the form of social media.
For the Western body politic, Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine is currently the issue. It’s a misnomer to call the war the first-ever social media war – thousands of Arabs and Kurds have astutely documented the crimes of Assad’s regime, of Jihadist rebels and ISIS, and of the Turkish occupiers during the Syrian Civil War on social media. Nevertheless, every single military undertaking of the Ukrainian war is at your fingertips. Fighting in Kyiv’s suburbs in the opening days of Russia’s escalation was live streamed on YouTube, videos of captured Russian soldiers have gone viral on Twitter, and even the radiation levels of the massive nuclear reactor near Zaporizhzhia are online.
Though most of the Western (and global) public are united in opposing Russia’s war, there isn’t much we can do. Of course, donating money to the Ukrainians is an excellent endeavour, and at least here in Canada, the federal government should be unequivocal in welcoming refugees fleeing devastated Ukraine along with funding and arming the Ukrainians in their struggle. But as far as “big,” decisive actions to punish Russian aggression go, the only options on the table are financial. Advocating for a no-fly zone or further intervention is a dead end because that would mean a willingness to shoot down Russian planes; an act of war. As I wrote last month, the public’s engagement with key issues like the war in Ukraine is good, but for those like myself who wish to affect change, there is frustratingly little that can be done. Changing your profile picture on Instagram to the Ukrainian flag has no material bearing on the state of the war.
Because of frustrations with how powerless almost everyone is to adequately respond to the war, in the months since Russia escalated their war in Ukraine, a number of what I’m labelling cultural sanctions have been undertaken in the West in response. These include an Italian University suspending a course on Russian literary giant Fyodor Dostoevsky, the disappearance of Vodka from Albertan liquor store shelves, Russia’s removal from the next Eurovision contest, FIFA banning the Russian team from competing in qualification matches for this year’s upcoming World Cup in Qatar, UEFA suspending Russian clubs from play, pausing the release of the new Batman movie in Russia, the ban of Russian cats competing in any International Cat Federation contests, Netflix’s cancellation of the production of a Russian-language show, and the restaurant that claims to have invented poutine announced they are temporarily retiring the name “poutine” – Putin’s name in French is spelt as Poutine because “Putin” in French is pronounced in the same way as the French word for “whore.” Of course, there are cases like cancellation of the Russian showcase at the Venice Biennale Pavilion this year, some of this is the choice of the artists, who felt it disrespectful to continue when bombs are being dropped on Ukrainians. Point is that due to the powerlessness we have against the war, a broad swathe of cultural sanctions have been implemented against Russia.
Tangentially, beware reports of Disney pulling Anastasia from Disney+ in protest of Russia’s escalation against Ukraine – Disney pulled the movie off the platform for licensing reasons, not because we’re “cancelling” Russia. The people whose brains have been fried by online culture wars pounced on the out-of-context headline, desperate to project their hatred of cancel culture onto an actually significant issue.
The problem with the label of these actions as cultural sanctions, as I have done, is that the term doesn’t get at the differences between many of these sanctions. Some of them deal with sports, some deal with the arts, some deal with food. Some of them are just – no sports team representing Russia should be allowed to compete in international competitions – but other sanctions are unjust – individual Russian tennis players should not be banned from competing at Wimbledon, for example. The point of punishing Russia for their war is to make it clear that in the 21st century, wars of aggression are abnormal, and a country that engages in such aggression will not be treated like a normal country. Therefore, companies should not profit from Russia nor continue to support the Russian economy during these times. Punishing individual Russians, when you can clearly distinguish between an individual and their country, is at best ineffectual, and at worst xenophobia. Unfortunately, ordinary Russians will have to suffer from the effects of Western economic sanctions, but actions like banning Russian cats and renaming poutine is so obviously asininely xenophobic that they come across as intentionally targeting Russians rather than Russia. Russia is a victim of its own actions, not because of hatred of Russians.
Perhaps the most significant act of cultural protest against Russia has been the suspension of non-humanitarian Schengen Visas for Russian citizens by European countries, something which is deeply unsettling. Targeting oligarchic investors from Russia who have golden passports is reasonable, but the brain drain is something the West can and should utilize against Russia. Russia is a country of over a hundred million, including many brilliant, talented, and educated people who oppose the war. The US has the correct approach; instead of curtailing Russian immigration to the west, the States are trying to attract Russian exiles, depriving the Russian economy of precious talent. Without people from key computer and defence industries, Russia will be devoid of the talent powering their present imperialism, and Western countries will be richer with them. Western countries ought to make escaping from Putinist Russia easier, not more difficult, so we can squeeze Russia’s capacity to wage war.
More than two months into Russia’s escalation, it appears the Kremlin has succeeded in mobilizing Russian society in favour of the war. Whether they will be able to mobilize it for total war now their renewed offensive in Donbas has largely fizzled remains to be seen, but at least for now, most Russians support the war. Nevertheless, the reality painted by RT and other Russian state propaganda passed off as news differs greatly from the truth. Most Russians may support the war, but this support is based on lies, thus making it still Putin’s war, first and foremost. We must accept that Russians support the war but we must also be clear in the West that we oppose the Russian regime, not Russians and Russian culture. Even if we feel powerless to stop Russia’s war, resorting to xenophobia does nothing except empower Russian anti-Western rhetoric. Don’t give them that ammunition.