Olympic activism

[Azarkon]

Oh, China has those "shows" all the time. Each year it celebrates cultural diversity, minority group days, etc. But at the end of the day, good feelings only get you so far. Underneath, it's all about territorial rights, and England, if it's not careful, will have to deal with this soon enough.

[Sand]

My main beef with China is its total disregard for basic human rights. If people want to protest an action of the government, and do so without causing property damage or hurting others then they should be allow to do so. You don't bring in armed soldiers and tanks to attack unarmed civilians.

[Gorgon]

For us the era of revolutions is long gone. In China they are still afraid of the ghost of it.

 

A demonstration in the west doesn't bring with it any sense of a fundamental threat to the system.

Edited April 18, 2008 by Gorgon

[mkreku]

My main beef with China is its total disregard for basic human rights.

Says the guy who can't type **** or even **** because the word is "harmful" (according to some unknown entity) to someone. Do you feel free? Don't fool yourself.

[Gorgon]

I'll take the hegemony of political correctness over the hegemony of totalitarian regimes any day, philosophically I think we should de mystify **** though.

[Humodour]

There is a rather strange dynamic going on in this if you think about it. The Chinese reaction to western criticism reinforces its sense of national identity, while for the west the example of a totalitarian regime reinforces our conception of the value of democracy. Both are defined by their opposites and everybody wins.

 

You're right really. Seeing how all the Chinese nationals react to criticism of China reminds me of somebody out of 1984. It scares me.

[Moatilliatta]

I've only skimmed the thread so this might have already been touched upon, but am I the only one who is troubled by the Olympic torch relay, considering that it was introduced by nazi Germany as a means to promote Nazi ideology?

 

If anyone can be accused of politicising the Olympics it surely has to be China.

[Gorth]

If anyone can be accused of politicising the Olympics it surely has to be China.

I have no idea how old you are, but it sounds like you weren't following the olympics back when the US and the USSR took turns boycotting each other

[Moatilliatta]

I was talking about the present and not about the past. More specifically about the question whether politics should be brought into the olympics in 2008.

 

I also forgot to mention that the reason that they are bringing politics into the olympics is the route that they want through Tibet and, originally, through Taiwan as well.

 

I do realize that the Olympics have been politicised before.

[Humodour]

China took a questionable route indeed. Considering their past actions towards India (and current ones - check out those recently installed missile batteries pointing directly at India), asking them to defend the torch for China was rather condescending. Still, they did so without spite, so well done to India (I guess).

 

Don't think India is unconcerned about the Tibet issue, either. Ignoring the Tibetan residents of India, Tibet was meant to be an area of neutrality between China and India; a buffer zone. The troop build-up in Tibet is anything but, and it's not the first time China has used it to invade India.

Edited April 20, 2008 by Krezack

[Moatilliatta]

Don't think India is unconcerned about the Tibet issue, either. Ignoring the Tibetan residents of India, Tibet was meant to be an area of neutrality between China and India; a buffer zone. The troop build-up in Tibet is anything but, and it's not the first time China has used it to invade India.

I'm just sad that noone is taking visible steps towards letting China know that it is behaving like a spoiled child. If a child is behaving badly, then you correct that behaviour in the early years before it has a chance of becoming too much a part of it.

[Humodour]

How?

 

The more the West pushes, the more the people of China become patriotic and defend their government, regardless of whether or not the West is right. It's a common phenomenon for authoritarian regimes to use wars to unite the people and so shift focus away from their corruption and tyranny. China vs Tibet & the West is just one such 'war', and it seems to be working spectacularly to unite the Chinese people in blind nationalism. =/

[Azarkon]

Maybe, just maybe, treating China like a "child" of any sort is part of the problem? Surely the best way you get people to listen to you is by patronizing them, by acting like you know best and they, being young and inferior, should simply submit to your greater wisdom?

 

Clearly this is going to work for a culture where respect - epitomized by the elaborate social etiquette between children and parents, adults and elders, men and women, friends and foes, etc. - is central to social conduct.

 

Want China to listen? Start treating it like an actual world power, as opposed to something that the West can "guide" towards its "acceptance" in the "international" community. The Chinese don't want to be accepted. They want to be respected. If it takes hard power for them to be respected, that's precisely what they'll do, and so far, there's been no indication whatsoever that the West cares about anything else. One look at the dynamics of US politics on the world stage tells you that "international approval" is a paper sheep. How many people protested the War in Iraq? Would you believe me if I threw out a number like, oh, 10 million?

 

Did it matter to the US leadership? Not one bit. In fact, now that the situation in Iraq is stabilizing, everybody's pretty much forgotten how against the war they were in the beginning. Give McCain eight more years, and he'll have the war remembered as one of the great triumphs of US foreign policy. You think you're going to convince the Chinese anything about Tibet, when this is how you conduct foreign policy? Why shouldn't the Chinese believe that they, too, should ignore international opinion, given how easily it is brushed aside by results? Give the Chinese ten more years, and they'll have Tibet in the bag, too.

 

Would the world have forgotten Tibet, then? Probably. The truth is, **** Cheney's right when he answered, "So?" to the accusation that the Bush administration is going against public opinion. Public opinion doesn't matter. It's changed all too easily by results. And that's what the Chinese leadership is banking on - results. War can be justified by victory. Repression can be justified by stability. Torture can be justified by security. Slavery can be justified by wealth. Murder can be justified by the greater good.

 

In a world where invading a foreign country can still be justified by political rhetoric, the Chinese aren't going to have qualms about keeping ahold of territory they invaded fifty years ago. They believe - rightly so - that the West is more concerned about curbing Chinese power than it is about actual moral conduct because in the end, that's the real reason you're seeing all this hue and cry from Western politicians regarding China's suppression of a riot, and not regarding far worse things happening elsewhere in the world (*hint* Africa).

Edited April 21, 2008 by Azarkon