To be honest, I am not surprised nor do I even disagree with the finding of the International Olympic Committee that a boycott of the Games in Beijing over the issue of Tibet is not worth pursuing.
The European officials, meeting in Slovenia, said such political events should not be linked to sport.
Patrick Hickey, the head of the European Olympic Committees, said boycotts “have never worked”.
He said: “Montreal 76, Moscow 1980, Los Angeles 1984 – the only people punished in a boycott are the athletes.”
That’s ok with me. The Olympics are a business, and they also are an umbrella for other worthy causes (notably, the Special Olympics, which are arguably the more authentic and honest display of sport). I don’t even have the luxury of critiquing the Chinese for their internet censorship of the events in Tibet, when our own government is engaged in similar blacklisting for reasons of “security”. So, singling out these Games for boycott makes no real sense and doesn’t achieve anything for the cause of freedom, and instead arguably sets that cause backwards.
However, I am not the IOC, and my personal protest harms no athletes. Therefore, I will personally be boycotting the Games, and will not watch even a single event.
{ 27 comments }
Isn’t the violence mainly Tibetans attacking Chinese businesses?
A large-scale boycott of the Chinese Olympics would most definitely damage more than the athletes (although it would damage them, for sure).
A large-scale – by which I mean something that is not cleraly orchestrated by their ideologica opponents as was the case with the boycott-trade-off between The Evil Empire and the Soviet Union in the 80’s – would damage Chinese prestige considerably.
They WANT top shine here, and being stood up would be very embarassing.
OK, just for the record. I can type. I’m just kind of rushed here…
Some days, some ppl are brain dead and need ideologic rehab.
But I suspect its more important that the NBA All-Stars again go to the Olympics to demonstrate world dominance. It’ll sure help the sale of Nike basketball shoes.
The Tibetans, gosh, who knows maybe they just want their country back and fewer of their lamas and buddhist nuns rounded up and killed.
The difference between past boycotts and this year is that china is the most passive-aggressive and image conscious nation on earth. It would almost be worth it to see the hurt on the faces of the Chinese leadership as the rest of the worl ignored their little whitewash. I still think punishing the athletes would be more unjust, however.
What is is with the Chinese? They are the Sally Field of nations, You like me, you really like me!
Aziz
So China blocking Youtube is equivalent to the US pulling domain names registered in the US that promote travel to Cuba?
Let’s reverse the situation:
The US government blocks the dissemination of Abu Grahib pictures on the Internet while China blocks Baidu links to travel agencies in Taiwan.
It’s only a problem if you buy into moral equivalent BS that permeates the Left.
Scott Kirwin’s last blog post..The ?Victimless? Crime
Scott, they are only different if you buy into the exceptionalist argument that permeates the Right. I think neither of us buy into anything of either sort on either side.
The US has a team of internet censors who are not accountable to anyone as they decide what sites to block on the basis of a nebulous definition of national security. China too. That the US has never (and will never) run over students in a public square with Tanks is not the issue; the fact that both countries see the internet as damage to route their censorship apparatus around is the issue.
The things being censored are not equal in any shape or form. But the fact of the censorship itself is indeed equal, and thus worthy of condemnation. without reservation. “We arent as bad as the Chinese” is a pathetic standard.
Aziz Poonawalla’s last blog post..freedom of religion in Qatar
Really? The example you give (foreign travel agency arranging trips to Cuba) has nothing to do with national security; it has to do with national law. It’s illegal for US companies and individuals to trade with Cuba, and some joyless bureaucrat has decided that he can get a bigger cubicle by starting to kill domain names.
But here’s the difference: The domain names were registered in the USA. If I wanted to I could find a travel agency right now that does junkets to Havana. In fact, here’s one right here.
I accessed that from my home in Delaware. I have no problem browsing the site; it’s not blocked. And maybe I’m not paranoid enough but I doubt that the Black Helicopters will be landing in my backyard and taking me away to Guantanamo anytime soon.
Geez… It’s not exceptionalism: it’s scale. You really aren’t going to argue that our situation here in the USA is the same as behind the Great Firewall of China, are you?
Scott Kirwin’s last blog post..The ?Victimless? Crime
Aziz
Crud I broke the 3 links rule and my post is in moderation. But just you wait! I’ll put you in your place yet you… you… guy who needs to be in place!!!
aiee – three links? I immediately retract my arguments! have mercy!
“that’s no moon…”
Aziz Poonawalla’s last blog post..freedom of religion in Qatar
The US athletic squad is bringing its own food and cooks, much to the disappointment of the Chinese. I hadn’t thought about the air quality issues, though.
So— any thoughts on how non-recordbreaking the outdoor events are going to be?
B. Durbin’s last blog post..Lights
>> Scott, they are only different if you buy into the exceptionalist argument that permeates the Right
This is not an argument; It’s a debate-cork.
They are “different” to the extent that they are…
…what’s the word I’m looking for here…
…help me out…
Oh yeah – DIFFERENT.
It is certainly possible that the average American has his internet access restricted as onerously as the average Chinese, but considering how many Americans have become celebrities by not only criticising their government, but literally calling it evil and the most destructive force on the planet EVER, it seems unlikely that that is the case. The American government is just absolutely terrible at getting Americans to stop criticizing it.
Sincerely,
Snippet
Chair,
Siblinghood of American Exceptionlists for Parity with China in Internet Access Restriction (SAEPCIAR)
Odd.
“It is certainly possible that the average American has his internet access restricted as onerously as the average Chinese”
hmm. Pretty sure I didnt say that.
“considering how many Americans have become celebrities by not only criticising their government, but literally calling it evil”
can’t think of any celebrities who owe their fame to calling the US evil. Unless you mean foreign celebs like Osama bin Laden?
“and the most destructive force on the planet EVER”
this doesnt ring a bell either.
” The American government is just absolutely terrible at getting Americans to stop criticizing it.”
well, true, and good thing that, though about half the american public seem to take great offense at even the tiniest criticism of same.
Aziz Poonawalla’s last blog post..freedom of religion in Qatar
ahahahahah
…Oh, you were serious?
Elisha Feger’s last blog post..Imperial Campaign Commentary: Session 2
yes. How about an example, Elisha? find me a celeb whose celebrity derives from calling the US evil.
I dont even think that you will find a celeb who has called the US evil, let alone one who owes their ceebrity to that fact.
Aziz Poonawalla’s last blog post..freedom of religion in Qatar
Michale Moore
Dave Justus’s last blog post..Obama’s Pastor
>> Snippet:
“It is certainly possible that the average American has his internet access restricted as onerously as the average Chineseâ€
>> Aziz:
hmm. Pretty sure I didnt say that.
>>> Snippet:
No, you said this:
“I don’t even have the luxury of critiquing the Chinese for their internet censorship of the events in Tibet, when our own government is engaged in similar blacklisting for reasons of “securityâ€.”
“…similar blackisting…”
Sorry, I confused “…similar blacklisting…” to imply that you were suggesting America was engaged in blacklisting similar to that of the Chinese.
My mistake.
My comment is still in moderation… “God bless Wordpress? No, God D**n Wordpress.”
Scott Kirwin’s last blog post..The ?Victimless? Crime
Snippet, “onerous as” is not the same as “similar”
our censorship is very, very similar to Chinese censorship. But it is not as onerous. You specifically imputed to me the contention that the *average* American experiences censorship *as onerous* as the *average* Chinese. All of that is your invention.
Aziz Poonawalla’s last blog post..freedom of religion in Qatar
Michael Moore called America evil? quote?
And that is why he is a celebrity? evidence?
Aziz Poonawalla’s last blog post..freedom of religion in Qatar
Aziz,
We’re playing word games.
Yes – ‘restriction’ is ‘restriction.’
I cannot deny that.
Every single aspect of American life is restricted at some point.
To say you cannot criticize China because America restricts this that or the other in a thecnically ’similar’ fashion obscures, rather than clarifies.
When you gound your child, your “restrict” his behavior.
When you jail a person for criticizing the government, you “restrict” his behavior in a similar way.
If the restrictions imposed by China and America are not comparably onerous, then why can you not – in good faith – criticize Chinese censorship? Why can’t you call the kettle black?
Malcolm X
Spike Lee
Noam Chomsky
Rosie O’Donnel
Sorry, blocking people from traveling to an embargoed country is not censorship. You can read, learn, and talk about Cuba all you want on the internet and the .gov doesn’t do a thing about it.
You just can’t go to websites to arrange travel there. That may be restrictive, but it’s not censorship.
Oh, and as for MM calling America evil, that was the entire point of ‘Fahrenheit 911′ and from the previews a very strong undercurrent of it in ‘Sicko’.
As for his celebrity, how many people would even remember him for ‘Bowling for Columbine’ unless you reminded them?
Well, I am not a fan of Moore, but neither do i believe your spin that everyone who adores him now does so because he thinks America is evil. But you’ve already got your opinion set in stone, don’t you? I’m sure you don’t actually need to watch Bowling for Columbine or Farenheit 9.11 or Sicko to know all about Michael Moore.
And I am not surprised you make excuses for the censorship apparatus that now exists in our nation, solely on teh technicalitieies of how it is used, rather than the very fact that it exists at all. Because we all know that once in place, restrictions on freedom dissipate over time and are never abused for uses beyond original intent by the all-benevolent government, right?
Aziz Poonawalla’s last blog post..freedom of religion in Qatar
“We’re” playing word games?
And did you just accuse me of not being sufficiently critical of the Chinese? OK, then.
Aziz Poonawalla’s last blog post..freedom of religion in Qatar
Well, I am not a fan of Moore, but neither do i believe your spin that everyone who adores him now does so because he thinks America is evil.
Not everyone, but those who do are certainly his main demographic.
And I am not surprised you make excuses for the censorship apparatus that now exists in our nation, solely on teh technicalitieies of how it is used, rather than the very fact that it exists at all. Because we all know that once in place, restrictions on freedom dissipate over time and are never abused for uses beyond original intent by the all-benevolent government, right?
Yep, damn those speed limits retricting our ability to travel. It won’t be long now before the cops start asking “Papers Please!” will it Aziz? After all, we wouldn’t want to make excuses for the infringment on the right to travel due to technicalilties of how it’s used, rather than that the mechanism of oppression exists at all.
OK. I’m falling behind in the whole work thing, and this will be dashed off too quickly…
What I am criticizing is the suggestion/claim/insinuation that Americans can’t criticize China, because we are…
…
?
Here it gets tricky.
…because we are “just as bad?”
Apparently, that is NOT what Aziz is saying, and is offended that I suggest so.
Apology extended, but then why can’t we criticize China, again?
Because, apparently, if you look hard enough, you can find some censorship in America, and it does not matter how much (little) or what the justification is. There is **some,** and it is **similar,** and – HERE’S THE RUB – if you disagree that all censorship is identical, then you are an American exceptionalist, because only an American exceptionalist “right winger” is so deluded.
This, as I said, is a position intended to STOP debate, not advance it.
Comments on this entry are closed.