March 25, 2008
THE HUMILIATION THEY'LL FEEL IS A GREAT WEAPON:
Boycott Beijing: The Olympics are the perfect place for a protest. (Anne Applebaum, March 24, 2008, Slate)
Look a bit closer, in fact, and none of those statements holds up.A boycott doesn't solve anything. Well, doesn't it? Some boycotts do help solve some things. The boycott of South African athletes from international competitions was probably the single most effective weapon the international community ever deployed against the apartheid state. ("They didn't mind about the business sanctions," a South African friend once told me, "but they minded—they really, really minded—about the cricket.") The boycott of the 1980 Moscow Olympics helped undermine Soviet propaganda about the invasion of Afghanistan and unify the Western world against it. I don't know for certain, but I'm guessing that from the Soviet perspective, the Soviet bloc boycott of the Los Angeles Olympics four years later was successful, too. Presumably, it was intended to solidify Soviet elite opposition to the United States in the Reagan years, and presumably, it helped.
The Olympics are a force for good. Not always! For those who don't remember, let me remind you that the 1936 Olympics, held in Nazi Germany, were an astonishing propaganda coup for Hitler. It's true that the star performance of Jesse Owens, the great black American track-and-field star, did shoot some holes in the Nazi theory of Aryan racial superiority. But Hitler still got what he wanted out of the games. With the help of American newspapers such as the New York Times, which opined that the games put Germany "back in the family of nations again," he convinced many Germans, and many foreigners, to accept Nazism as "normal." The Nuremburg laws were in force, German troops had marched into the Rhineland, Dachau was full of prisoners, but the world cheered athletes in Berlin. As a result, many people, both in and out of Germany, reckoned that everything was just fine, and Hitler could be tolerated a bit longer.
The Olympic Games are not the place for demonstrations. Aren't they? Actually, the Olympics seem an ideal place for demonstrations. Not only is the world's press there with cameras running, the modern Olympics were set up with a political purpose: to promote international peace by encouraging healthy competition between nations. Hence the emphasis on national teams instead of individual competitors; hence the opening and closing ceremonies—since copied by other sporting events—as well as the national flags and national anthems.
Actually, it was the failure of anyone to even notice the Soviet boycott of the LA Games that first showed what a spent force they were. Similarly, were the Chinese to hold a revenge boycott in 2012 no one would care. Posted by Orrin Judd at March 25, 2008 11:29 AM
Boycott the opening and the close ceremonies. Let them hold a party that no one show up.
Posted by: ic at March 25, 2008 12:58 PMBoycotting the opening ceremonies will let the ChiComs portray themselves as the aggrieved party being picked on by foreigners bent on "politicizing the Olympics." So we should take part, and have the US athletes hold huge "Free Tibet" signs as they march in. Force the ChiComs to do something stupid and hence take away any claims to being the "victim."
Posted by: b at March 25, 2008 1:26 PM