IAP Political Forum

When China was chosen as the venue for the Olympics they agreed to drastically improve their human rights record. I'm sure you are all aware that they have not done so: the Chinese still do not enjoy basic rights like free-speech (never mind democracy etc.) and have supported the Darfur genocide.

So clearly the Olympics should not be held there. It is not too late to make a stand on this issue.

I made a stand many years ago when I decided not to watch the Olympics.

I'm with you on this, IamMe.

I agree with your moral argument. Not sure how the practicalities work though. How do you make a stand on it? It is too late now to switch the venue and legally impossible to do anyway. If we don't watch it, we are penalising the athletes who are innocent.

Doe sport and politics mix?

Not disagreeing with your point, just asking the question.

De javu-it's 1936 all over again!

OswaldTheOsprey

(http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p123/OswaldTheOsprey/AIAP7/berlin36olympics.jpg)
Berlin Sunday, August 9, 1936

I don't disagree with athletes going if it's going to happen anyway.  A few might even use their chance to embarrass the Chinese or Sudanese governments.  Our responsibility is to leave sponsors(No Coke, McDonald's, etc.) in the cold and to urge action by those political leaders who can change things. 

Sports and politics certainly mix if a regime uses a major event like the Olympics to legitimize themselves. Those who oppose China's policies weren't the first to politicize it.  We can't sit by an allow it to go on unremarked upon.  I think that free nations should have boycotted it, but we lack leaders of courage on our Olympic committees and as our heads of state.

The best example of sporting boycotts affecting government policy was the long period where all cricket teams boycotted South Africa because of apartheid.

The thing that annoys me sometimes about sporting boycotts though, is that governments are all to quick to encourage athletes to boycott sporting events out of moral duty in making a stand against the relevant government concerned. But many times they still continue trading with them and carrying on normal international business with them. The hyprocrisy stinks when that happens.

I don't think China should be considered an upcoming superpower if they can't even treat their own people decently.

On the contrary they may well become one, though certainly not one what is likely to be a force for freedom.  That is why free trade agreements ought to require certain nonnegotiable minimum standards for labor rights.  As it is we're subsidizing the rise of a likely future foe.

I agree.  As I said it's incumbent upon our leaders, sporting or otherwise, to act with moral courage.

Well one option would be for the Olympic Committee to cancel the games altogether. Another would be for countries to withdraw their athletes.

If you agree with me, go here and sign as many petitions as you can.

http://www.google.ie/search?q=petition+2008+Olympics&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a

I agree, but unfortunately economic necessity dictates that we must trade with China. However, we are under no obligation to play sport with them.

On what terms is it necessary?  Is it a sin to have a poorer standard of living in the short term by refusing to support a nation which oppresses its own with the aid of many of this country's elites?  Personally I'd rather be a few thousand a year poorer than to have the blood of oppression on the hands of many in my own land.  I'm fine with trading, but not on their race to the bottom terms.

I agree, or I would if it didn't mean that more people would be forced to live in poverty.

The status quo already means that, but it's OK with many in America because those people live a long way away from here in an alien culture from our own while we get flat screen TVs.

Some of these atheletes late teens early twenties have trained for this their entire lives....this is their time to shine....to boycott means waiting 8 years  and they will be out of their prime.......children should not suffer the crimes of the parent......



What crime against humanity had Germany committed at this time?

Greivances against China are well documented.

The nature of the German government was know at the time. Concentration camps already existed.

OswaldTheOsprey

-no Jews were being sent to any of the concentration camps unless they were political dissidents, trade union organizers, asocials, vagrants, criminals, or race mixers and homosexuals who had broken the law.

-Nazi Germany was the envy of the Western world. From the depths of the Great Depression in 1932, Hitler had achieved an "economic miracle" in Germany in less than three years. As yet, there was no sign of Nazi aggression, nor any attempt at world domination by Germany.

-Gertrude Stein, the famous Jewish writer who was a mentor to Ernest Hemingway, even suggested in 1937 that Hitler should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

-The ordinary Germans were satisfied with their lives and had no reason to fear the concentration camps or the Gestapo.

-Hitler was a hero to the 127 million ethnic Germans throughout Europe, whom he wanted to unite into the Greater German Empire, a dream that had been discussed in his native Austria for over 50 years

-In 1936, Hitler was more loved and admired than all the other world leaders put together. He was also the only world leader who was actively helping the Zionists with their plan to reclaim Palestine as their country.

-The rest of the world, particularly Americans, ignored these early warnings; at that time America was a segregated country with institutionalized racism, and there were many restricted neighborhoods where Jews were not allowed to buy a home. American universities had quotas for Jewish students and numerous clubs and organizations did not allow Jews as members.

-In August 1936, the Olympic games were being held in Berlin, and the Nazis had removed all the bums, winos and male prostitutes from the streets, sending them to Dachau or Sachsenhausen for six months of rehabilitation. Then in a concession to the liberals in America, Great Britain and France, who were threatening to boycott the games, the anti-Semitic signs and slogans on the city streets were temporarily removed and the anti-Jewish newspapers were taken off the stands.

-Charles Lindbergh, who was America's greatest hero after flying solo to Europe, was the special guest of Hitler at the Olympics and sat beside him at the games. Lindbergh had by then moved to England in an effort to get away from the rampant crime in America. He was so impressed with Germany's right-wing Utopia that, by 1938, he was making plans to move there and Hitler's chief architect, Albert Speer, had been commissioned to design a house for him.

-Kristallnacht marked the end of Hitler's popularity and the Western world's admiration for Germany

http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Sachsenhausen/introduction.html

OK and a lot of people admired Stalin also during that period. Many American journalists, including Dorothy Thompson and Westbrook Pegler, had written extensively on Nazi terror and were banned. Malcom Muggeridge had bravely exposed Stalin's horrific man-induced famine in the Ukraine in 1932. Not everyone was either craven and stupid during that era.

OswaldTheOsprey

Well, this movement seems to be gaining momentum as of late and I see a post like this on every forum I go to.

I don't know how I feel. Part of me agrees with Patton - I mean, these guys have been training and training and training... some with adverse social and physical repercussions - like lost relationships and injuries. Part of me thinks they deserve this moment.

Someone I knew had an oppurtunity to be in the 2008 Olympics for shooting. He went to high school with me and was friends with my best friend (personally, I didn't care for him much). It would have been neat to A) see someone I know and B) see someone from Delaware in the Summer Olympics. In the end, though, it was simply impossible for him to travel as much as was going to have to.

But the other part of me sees what China does and their almost calous view toward human life...

So I have to admit, I'm torn. I'll just do whatever the news tells me to do.

I hope you don't mean that the way I think you do.

Maybe we should boycott the 2012 Olympics for Britains role in the Iraq War.  For their allowal of torture flights landing on British soil, for interning people without trial. 

meh...I prolly watch 'em both.

Without people like me, who would Coca-Cola and Nike advertise to?

I respectfully submit that the US-led boycott of the 1980 Moscow games was a waste of time.  It had no effect on anything except to ruin a perfectly good Olympic competition.

Likewise, the Soviet-led boycott of the 1984 LA games was equally useless.  It had no effect on anything except to ruin a perfectly good olympic competition.

I see no reason to consider the 2008 Bejing games to be any different.  Boycotts of the olympics are a waste of time - political grandstanding of the worst kind.

If people want to send a message to China, that's fine - try boycotting Chinese made products - put your money where your mouth is and stop demanding that olympic athletes make the sacrifice on your behalf.

Olympic boycotts are the cost-free, risk-free way to protest (only the athletes have to pay the price).

I have no respect for cost-free, risk-free symbolic gestures.

Well since it has come to it let it continue, in my opinion it the IOC shouldn't have given China the option of hosting the games. It goes against its own Charter:
Olympism is a philosophy of life, exalting and combining in a balanced whole the qualities of
body, will and mind. Blending sport with culture and education, Olympism seeks to create a
way of life based on the joy of effort, the educational value of good example and respect for
universal fundamental ethical principles.

Source: Olympic Charters: http://multimedia.olympic.org/pdf/en_report_122.pdf (http://multimedia.olympic.org/pdf/en_report_122.pdf)

And the promises by China for improvements of human rights actually made things worse, so the attempt to improve human dignity has also been rather... well discusable.

Amnesty International: http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/report/what-human-rights-legacy-beijing-olympics-20080401 (http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/report/what-human-rights-legacy-beijing-olympics-20080401)

 I'm against a boycott, Athletes should indeed not suffer for political reasons.

I apologise for linking to several sites, I just reread the rules regarding this. The only reason why I linked them was to enfore my claim instead of just saying something without proof.
Won't happen again.

Ontopic:
The Olympic Committe goes against their own manifest
It is stated in the Roster that:

Olympism is a philosophy of life, exalting and combining in a balanced whole the qualities of
body, will and mind. Blending sport with culture and education, Olympism seeks to create a
way of life based on the joy of effort, the educational value of good example and respect for
universal fundamental ethical principles.

So in my opinion the OIC shouldn't have given the PRC the right to organise the upcomming games.
Since this is now to late I find that boycotts are unneeded because atlethes should not be victims to politics.

Well, if they really abided by those standards, NO government would be able to hold the Olympic games... though, of the major nations, China's disregard for human life and personal rights is among the more agregious...

I guess this just gives the world a chance to really see what's going on. I'll be honest, up till now I though Tibet was treated like a sovereign nation. People think of Taiwan first...

Speaking of Taiwan, isn't it strange how they haven't seized the oppurtunity?

What is odd about wanting to avoid WW3?  Seems rather rational to me.

It is long-standing US policy that any Chinese military move against Taiwan is an act of war against the USA.  China isn't stupid.

Btw, the Chinese haven't quite perfected their plans for taking out the US Carriers.  You won't see a move on Taiwan until they do.

I know China wouldn't move against Taiwan and that's not what I meant. I meant action by Taiwan, like, say, developing their military?

Why bother?  Taiwan couldn't build a military large enough to deter China and the very act of doing so will only just antagonize China and increase the likelihood of a Chinese military operation against Taiwan.

And you think anyone will intervene on behalf of Tibet? I could make the same claim that this run for soverignty is just a waste too.

China won't budge and no one will move against them... so "why bother"?

No. There is virtually zero probability of any nation standing up for Tibet with anything other than a few stern words.

As I said, the US-led boycott of the Moscow games in 1980 was a waste of time and effort as was the Russian-led boycott of the 1984 LA games. 

These Olympic boycotts are useless for politics and only hurt the athletes.

Okay.

Indeed.  As I noted above, the pro-Tibet protesters do not appear to have 'political protest' as their primary goal - the goal appears to be one of disruption.

I have been confusing that what business are there to do with you , in terms of China's human rights record?
I rack my brain and can not get to the bottom of this f..king question.

To intervene into others internal affairs will doom to a backfire on your face! Will you ever learn a lesson from the US?

Intervention has in some cases lead to rather positive results. Not all intervention are done trough military means, and some military interventions actuall payed off.

Personally the detterent of Nukes from China will probably ensure no military intervention takes place. If you want to put pressure on China you have 2 options, massive worldwide supported economic boycot (which will probably be impossible looking at China's current economic might). Or offer/give them something and ask something in return, I read an entire paper regarding the ineffectiveness of economic boycots on China.

Just a quick counter to the idea that the olympics are apolitical: