Protestors are massing in San Francisco (Yahoo) after the Olympic torch was disrupted and had to be extinguished five times, before finally being carried by bus, in Paris. (NPR) I think this is great! China had promised to improve human rights in preparation for the Olympics, but instead has been cracking down on dissidents, harrassing and jailing them. (Herald) And of course there's the crackdown in Tibet.
If the governments of the world won't stand up for international human rights the people need to, and this is happening.
China and some others claim that this is politicizing the Olympics, but I think that holding them in a one party dictatorship is already politicizing them. What do other Gatherites think?
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 19
Im already boycotting them. i disagreed with giving the olympics to china in the first place.
Wow, it turns out that the govenrments of the world are much more about money and just pay lip service to human rights. The people appearently feel a bit differently.
I think it is great if individuals refuse to go to China as spectators, if government officials refuse to participate. I will applaud any athlete that chooses to stay away as a matter of his own conscience.
It would be a mistake for the government to take action that would prohibit athletes from attending and competing. They have worked too hard for too long to be denied an opportunity that for many will only come along once.
We have large American corporations supporting - like Coke and General Electric and even Nike.....Possibly the consumer that is wanting to protest is some way - will consider buying other products....
I agree with those who say that China has recently shown "international disrespect" and I agree with those who say that the USA has recently shown "international disrespect" as well.
Those nations ruthlessly and selfishly exploiting other nations or the people of other nations should expect contempt from those wishing to promote international respect and collaboration.
We are a democracy. It's true that too many people were disenfranchised in the last few elections by being thrown off the rolls, living in neighborhoods where there weren't enough election machines, etc. Still if a large enough majority had voted we could have thrown out the architects of the war in 2004, and we did change congress (albeit not enough) in 2006. China simply is not comparable.
We have tremendous free speech, as much or more as any country in the world, and access to information (if we choose to use it). A conversation such as this could never take place on the Internet in China.
There was at least minimal international support for using force against Iraq through a UN resolution (of course Bush and company rushed into war before a 2nd resolution could be voted on, which they would have lost). And Iraq has had some relatively legitimate elections since the invasion.
Not really, the money to be made is in treatment. If I offer you a cure I get to charge you once. If I offer you a treatment, I get to charge you every day for the rest of your life.
Alas, many have found it necessary to use this forum as a means to support propaganda, protest and other political agendae. We, as a nation, are not without blame, having boycotted the 1980 summer olympics in protest of the USSR invasion and occupation of Afghanastan.
Now I hear that San Francisco altered the route of the Torch to avoid confrontation with protesters. This was wrong on many levels. It interfered with those who like to celebrate the spirit of the Olympics and wanted to witness the passing. It also was a cowardly way of dealing with a potential protest -- effectively denying U.S. citizens their right to assembly and speech.
But this is San Francisco, right? I thought this was a hotbed of civil liberties. I can only come to the conclusion that some people don't like to take the sh*t with the sugar.
And who was that civil libertarian who felt it necessary to bring politics to the 1980 Olympics?
One day, a scorpion looked around at the mountain where he lived and decided that he wanted a change. So he set out on a journey through the forests and hills. He climbed over rocks and under vines and kept going until he reached a river.
The river was wide and swift, and the scorpion stopped to reconsider the situation. He couldn't see any way across. So he ran upriver and then checked downriver, all the while thinking that he might have to turn back.
Suddenly, he saw a frog sitting in the rushes by the bank of the stream on the other side of the river. He decided to ask the frog for help getting across the stream.
"Hellooo Mr. Frog!" called the scorpion across the water, "Would you be so kind as to give me a ride on your back across the river?"
"Well now, Mr. Scorpion! How do I know that if I try to help you, you wont try to kill me?" asked the frog hesitantly.
"Because," the scorpion replied, "If I try to kill you, then I would die too, for you see I cannot swim!"
Now this seemed to make sense to the frog. But he asked. "What about when I get close to the bank? You could still try to kill me and get back to the shore!"
"This is true," agreed the scorpion, "But then I wouldn't be able to get to the other side of the river!"
"Alright then...how do I know you wont just wait till we get to the other side and THEN kill me?" said the frog.
"Ahh...," crooned the scorpion, "Because you see, once you've taken me to the other side of this river, I will be so grateful for your help, that it would hardly be fair to reward you with death, now would it?!"
So the frog agreed to take the scorpion across the river. He swam over to the bank and settled himself near the mud to pick up his passenger. The scorpion crawled onto the frog's back, his sharp claws prickling into the frog's soft hide, and the frog slid into the river. The muddy water swirled around them, but the frog stayed near the surface so the scorpion would not drown. He kicked strongly through the first half of the stream, his flippers paddling wildly against the current.
Halfway across the river, the frog suddenly felt a sharp sting in his back and, out of the corner of his eye, saw the scorpion remove his stinger from the frog's back. A deadening numbness began to creep into his limbs.
"You fool!" croaked the frog, "Now we shall both die! Why on earth did you do that?"
The scorpion shrugged, and did a little jig on the drownings frog's back.
"I could not help myself. It is my nature."
Then they both sank into the muddy waters of the swiftly flowing river.
I Protests can energize activists as well as political and marketing campaigns. Agitation/protest movements have a natural lifespan. They bring in eyes to a given topic and the outfit that can capitalize best on the attention benefits the most.
When a movement threatens to self-perpetuate, it is time to shut it down
I almost forgot to add that the dynamic of the professionalization and commercialization of the Olympics is central to the argument that commercial/political interests are central to decision-making process.
The myth of the amateur Olympian and the unwillingness to see the games for what it is only furthers those interests.
Is it our mythology blinds us to injustice? Our fear? Or, does our virtues, way of life make and contribution to the world make protest unnecessary?
Is acceptance of evil the cost of progress or are we free to influence the course of progress?