Should the Olympics in Beijing be boycotted?

[upsidedownwalrus]

I recently saw a post on another forum stating that nobody should turn up for the Olympics. I say no, for these reasons:

1. No country is perfect. Australia's record with the Aborigines is an utter disgrace (indeed the case for Tibet being part of China is far greater than for the existence of Australia. Tibet and China's history have been intertwined for thousands of years, whites only turned up in Australia about 150 odd years ago) yet nobody suggested boycotting the Sydney Olympics because of that. Not to mention the anger over the iraq war.

2. Many innocent, normal Chinese citizens are very much kept in the dark. They have no real idea what is going on in Tibet. However, they want the Olympics to be a success. If it was boycotted, a hell of a lot of money and jobs would be lost, and there would be much anger at the west. There could even be a violent backlash against foreigners living in China. China could possibly end up closing itself off to the world again and going through its eternal cycle of 'nearly get there and then fuck it all up' once again. That shouldn't be allowed to happen at such a critical stage in its history when it is beginning to open up to the world for the first time in a very long time.

 

[Tank Girl]

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=226209&highlight=beijing+olympics

 

[El Jefe]

I don't buy the first reason: yes, the aboriginal issue is an appalling one and, much like the Native American genocide in the US, is still pretty recent. BUT it's not really a current problem in the same way (I know it is still a problem) so there's no point boycotting a state for something the current leaders didn't do - what pressure are you tryingto bring, and on whom?

The second is more tricky, and I see what you're saying about pushing China back into isolationism. I just don't think that would happen now - they need the trade too much. In fact, I suspect the only reason there isn't more talk of a boycott is also because WE need the trade too much. Has fuck all to do with the 'olympic spirit' and all that toss.

I think I do support a boycott, to be honest. China's not alone in trampling over human rights, but a) the other worst offenders aren't likely to get the Olympics any time soon and b) they are probably the worst, in simple volume terms.

Going to the Olympics is a tacit acceptance of how they behave, IMO

 

[CyberRose]

I was torn between the 1st and 3rd option. Went for boycott because it'll probably have a bigger effect on people's minds outside of China because international support for a cause is vital. Altho I think people will be concentrating on Tibet (because they're monks) and forget a little bit about Taiwan and that's dangerous ground because what happens there will have repercussions around the world...

 

[Lea]

I voted no because like OP said no country is perfect. If we started boycotting the Beijing Olympics for the occupation of Tibet then shouldnt we boycott the London Olympics in 2012 for the invasion of Iraq and so on...

 

[jonH]

I wont be competing, but wish all young athletes the very best of times in China this summer, they've been training 4 years and it could be their finest hour.

 

[El Jefe]

I voted no because like OP said no country is perfect. If we started boycotting the Beijing Olympics for the occupation of Tibet then shouldnt we boycott the London Olympics in 2012 for the invasion of Iraq and so on...

The occupation of Tibet isn't the whole story, you know..

 

[Lea]

The occupation of Tibet isn't the whole story, you know..

Yes, I know. It's just that Tibet is in the news at the moment. I know that people will bring up human rights issues etc. But if countries are going to boycott the Beijing Olympics then they should stop trade with China and the indivuals who go on and on about human rights issues in China should stop buying Chinese goods otherwise it would be hypocritical.

 

[CyberRose]

I voted no because like OP said no country is perfect. If we started boycotting the Beijing Olympics for the occupation of Tibet then shouldnt we boycott the London Olympics in 2012 for the invasion of Iraq and so on...

What?! There are no WMDs in Tibet!!!!

 

[JTG]

I'm gonna ignore the whole thing. The Olympic movement is an utter farce anyway.

 

[CharlieAddict]

What?! There are no WMDs in Tibet!!!!

it wasn't about WMDs in the end was it?
it was about liberating the oppressed people.

anyway, i voted 'no.'
cos there's a real buzz in China atm and most of the locals i've come across want it to do well.

and while the chinese government are at it, they should imprison and torture the bastards that created them Olympic Mascots. i hate every one of them.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

Surprised to see you say 'yes', JD.

 

[Jessiedog]

Before Beijing was awarded the games, I was against such a move - I saw it as a "reward" for Beijing's promise to "be good" and figured that said promise would, as has happened, be forgotten closer to the event.

We all know that China wants to use the games to portray herself as a modern, progressive nation; respectful of human rights, media freedom, etc. But she ain't!

I think the games should have been denied to China until the rights situation improved - and believe that this carrot would have helped precipitate greater movements in this area.

Awarding the games on the basis of future good behaviour (as happened - China was awarded the games after promising to free up on things in the run-up to the games,) was stupid - it hasn't happened!

I'm not bothered about the games - just another corporate sponsorship opportunity - but the fact is that the games are political (particularly in this instance given China's promises of "political" improvements,) and, in my view, are fair game for protests or a boycott.

I think that China needs a bloody nose at the moment to bring the leadership down a peg or two and I think that the games represents the best possible opportunity for this metaphorical wet-trout-slap-around-the-head.


Won't happen though - too much money involved.




Woof

 

[purves grundy]

Human rights are only one determinant of trade policies and foreign policy, and I'd be going for moral perfectionism if I said that human rights trumps every other factor when designing relations with other states. Countries should be a lot more careful with these policies, see where their money is going and who it principally benefits. I don't support a boycott of Burma or tourism to Burma, aware of the positives that careful trade and careful tourism can bring (emphasis on the 'careful', which unbridled capitalism can't be trusted to do.)

The reality is even worse though, and trade discussions rarely mention human rights at all. Mention them and perhaps you'll lose your contracts. This time, with participation voluntary and China so determined to make a success of it, the bargaining power is not with the abusers and I think this is too good an opportunity for activists, human rights groups, and decent politicians to miss, and they should exploit the Games to the full. A boycott is just one way of doing this, and I'd support any athelete or any country which did it. On balance, I reckon a boycott would do more good than harm for the populations of China, Tibet, Burma, Sudan etc. - a lot of people.

 

[Jessiedog]

As a money-driven, corporate event, the best strategy to "hit" the games would be to "hit them in the pocket".

My recommendation, would be to boycott the advertisements on television during the games. If the games' sponsors (and those paying hundreds of millions of dollars for TV advertisements for the duration,) were alerted to the fact that hundreds of millions (well, no harm in being optimistic,) of viewers would automatically be switching off/leaving the room/making a cuppa/etc. during the advertisements, it would have a real impact upon avertising rates and revenues and a hence a real impact on the games.

It would also keep the "boycott" in the media and the public eye and thus cause further embarrassment to Beijing.


Sorted!




Woof

 

[TomUS]

I thought the whole idea of the olympics is that they should be non-political. Just about every major country does something is could be boycotted for.

 

[Kaka Tim]

I thought the whole idea of the olympics is that they should be non-political. Just about every major country does something is could be boycotted for.

They cant possibly be non-political. Every Olympic games is a prestige event for the reigme that hosts them. From Bejing 2008 to the Berlin Olympics in 1936.

The 2008 Olympics are clearly being used as an opportunity for the chinese state to demonstrate to the world that they are a modern, progressive, 'peaceloving' country with a large and growing influence on the world.

The Olympic commitee and the sponsors and media circus and the whole bloated Olympic gravy train really does not give a flying fuck about human rights or oppresive occupations. Such things are an embarrassment that get in the way of the spectacle. Such people will plead that the games are 'non political' so as to brush such issues under the carpet.

China got the games beacause its a rappidly growing economy and emerging world power. Concenrs over Human rights abuses and foreign occupations count for very little in that context.

 

[david dissadent]

Individuals should boycott Olympic sponsors, athletes should refuse medals when won (OK that would not really happen but one or two of them doing so would speak louder than bombs especialy if the South African team all agreed to do so) hence they compete, get the glory deny the government its moment in the sun, but I dont think many western governments can boycott with a clean consiouse. There are much worse regimes out there like Saudi, Israel, Zimbabwe and Pakistan with virtualy no pressure on them sporting wise (from the west).

 

[frogwoman]

Exactly it should be the individual's decision NOT imposed by a government ...

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

Believe me I'd live in China a zillion times over rather than Pakistan. At least women don't get executed for being raped in China.

And nobody says we should boycott pakistan at cricket.

 

[CharlieAddict]

Believe me I'd live in China a zillion times over rather than Pakistan. At least women don't get executed for being raped in China.

And nobody says we should boycott pakistan at cricket.

if i had the money and the language skills - i'd live in china anyday over the UK even.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

Why would you 'need the money'? It's tons cheaper to live here, and if you can get an expat job over here you'd be absolutely laughing. We spend about 300 quid a month and live pretty well.

 

[CharlieAddict]

Why would you 'need the money'? It's tons cheaper to live here, and if you can get an expat job over here you'd be absolutely laughing. We spend about 300 quid a month and live pretty well.

this is something i'm looking into - but i lost my chance in obtaining a chinese visa thingy (parents are HK chinese) some years ago. HK no probs, china is different story now.

300 squid a month for a better standard of life?
now that is tempting...

can you speak mandarin?

 

[8ball]

I'm boycotting it purely because it's a stupid pointless waste of drugs.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

I'm boycotting it purely because it's a stupid pointless waste of drugs.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

this is something i'm looking into - but i lost my chance in obtaining a chinese visa thingy (parents are HK chinese) some years ago. HK no probs, china is different story now.

300 squid a month for a better standard of life?
now that is tempting...

can you speak mandarin?

I'll PM you

 

[8ball]

 

[fela fan]

I think I do support a boycott, to be honest. China's not alone in trampling over human rights, but a) the other worst offenders aren't likely to get the Olympics any time soon and b) they are probably the worst, in simple volume terms.

Going to the Olympics is a tacit acceptance of how they behave, IMO

No, china is not alone, and nor is it anywhere near the worst violator. If you want volume, then just you look left across the pond to the USA. They are greater human rights violators than probably the rest of the world added together.

Britain herself is probably a greater violator than china.

It is amazing how many people from america and britain do not comprehend how bad their governments are when it comes to human rights violations.

 

[rachamim18]

As I said n the other post/thread, I have mixed feelings toward an event like the Olympics but feel that such events can be manipulated by the Chinese.

I also feel that the Tibetans, who are the true indigenous people of the land of Tibet, might be losing their last great chance at emancipation if the event is allowed to take place as if nothing happened.

A final concern on top of it all is the Eminent Domain abuses that took place in the construction of the Olympic facilities. Whole neighbourhoods bulldozed with no legal recourse, nor an equitable settlement.

 

[fela fan]

I thought the whole idea of the olympics is that they should be non-political. Just about every major country does something is could be boycotted for.

It's totally wrong to let politics ruin everything in life. Huge human celebrations like the olympics, football world cups, music jamborees, are ways for people from all nations to enjoy life together, barriers down, friendship up. In other words a bit of positivity in the generally negative political world we have to face in our daily lives.

If there's a boycott, the losers will be the chinese government yes. But there will also be well over a billion losers who are looking forward to watching the event, and thousands of competitors who have trained like mad to perform there. To let the people who let politics dominate their lives ruin things with their selective 'compassion' for certain people is way wrong.

The dalai lama called for no boycott, and he's tibetan.

Any briton or american calling for a boycott is being hypocritical. Their countries have invaded two sovereign nations since china were awarded the games. They have smashed up the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, and smashed up the infrastructures making life miserable for the millions who were not slaughtered by american and british weapons.