Who came up with the bright idea that holding the Olympics in China would improve its human rights performance? Worked a treat in 1936 and 1980, didn’t it?
It’s doubtful what the protests against the torch relay will achieve, but props to the protesters. The only way these things ever get sorted is through the courage and will never to give up, and to make your point at the point of maximum impact and leverage. Meanwhile, the “sport separate from politics” narrative is fracturing before our eyes. And it seems to be dogging the steps of our Dear Leader as he travels across the world (next stop – China…)
So my mother says: “.. and what is it that is China doing to Tibet?” – as we mowed her lawn. Whoever thought of the olympic torch protest relay is a genius. I’m usually down on protesting as it ends up being counter-productive – but this one seems to be working a treat.
At the very least, foreign governments will be able to say to China – see, we told you that you are doing wrong. You’ve brought this on yourselves.
The sight of Chinese and local cops running in phalanx around the torch-bearer is pathetic. (Pity the Beijing TV editors.)
The protesters are getting smarter – not just placards but fire extinguishers. I guess the Chinese have a back-up candle under maximum security.
This is an on-going debate within the China Studies world right now. This is what I wrote on one of the major China Studies mailing lists after following the coverage through some of yesterday:
Love the reporter’s description of the blue-suited People’s Liberation Army
thugstroops protectingChina’s reputationthe torchbearers. She calls them “dedicated Olympic Torch attendants”.Very interesting point, MH, and related to the perception that “the “sport separate from politics” narrative is fracturing before our eyes”, I dare say.
The torch goes to Paris, where it’s extinguished (aside from its “source” hidden inside the torch) pre-emptively, and then it went on a bus ride. Etc.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/07/ntorch707.xml
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/04/07/2210326.htm
Have the Olympics ever been free of politics?
The obvious step now seems to be also handing out gold, silver and bronze medals for best protest efforts.
And the special Jesse Owens medal for anyone who extinguishes the Olympic Torch on its final lap around the stadium.
So let’s go for it as a real global mashup…beyond just sport.
A sidenote. One of the most fantastic things I ever saw was at 2000 Sydney Olympics opening ceremony when the brand new country of East Timor entered the stadium. 100,000 people leaped to their feet and cheered as the smallest and newest Olympic team not marched but danced with sheer delight into the global arena. I can certainly handle that kinda Olympic politics.
I wonder if, in the modern UK policing environment, whoever used the fire extinguisher is going to get done with a serious terrorism-related charge. Bioweapons or something…
… also I might observe that recently we have been arguing about how PETA are too radical… outrageous tactics being counter-productive and all that…?
(I of course thought the protesters were doing a fine job).
Didn’t the South and North Korean teams march together for the first time at Sydney?
The first Olympics I was really aware of was Munich. Right up there for counter-productive political actions.
I thought the argument about PETA wasn’t about radicalism, SG, but about the symbolism chosen. But I do confess to not having read a lot of that thread.
“The obvious step now seems to be also handing out gold, silver and bronze medals for best protest efforts.”
these righteous dudes, won gold and bronze medals, and then protested, mexico 68:
http://www.puresportsart.com/warehouse/mexicocity68ii.htm
(& i think the silver was some australian bloke standing there along side them?)
“(& i think the silver was some australian bloke standing there along side them?)”
Peter Norman. I worked with him on a project about 10 years ago. He was a lovely bloke who thought his accidental moment in the spotlight at Mexico ‘68 was a bit of a hoot. He said the two Americans told him in advance that they were going to do the black power salute. Always the affable Aussie, Peter said “would you like me to do it too?”.
They said, no, it would sorta distract from the symbolism of the gesture if a cheerful white Australian joined in. So Peter said he just looked at his shoes while they did their thing. He didn’t go into much more detail beyond that but I sorta gathered he liked them as athletes and as people and if that’s what they felt they should do, then why not?
The decision to give the Olympics to China was so obviously going to be fraught with so many potential propaganda problems, you could almost be forgiven for thinking the decision was deliberately intended to create trouble for the Communists
I was amused to hear how the Chinese state-run media edited out scenes of protests from news-feeds of the Torch relay – this tactic being later supplanted with ranting editorials directed at the protesters instead.
By the way, as I am sure most of you will be aware, the first Torch relay was at the Berlin Olympics in 1936 – a bit of fascist brut neo-classicism in the Arno Brecker or Josef Thorak and Albert Speer mould, I guess.
It’s perhaps indicative that outside the Reichschancellery there were for a time two statues on the stoop leading into the front entrance – naked male figures, one holding aloft a sword, the other a torch. The first represented the armed forces, the second the Nazi party.
Might be time to drop the stupid Torch relay.
On a slightly off topic note, G. Henderson in the SMH a couple of weeks ago was trotting out his old chestnut about how the left embraced the murderer, Mao. Of course he neglected to mention Nixon’s visit. The intersting thing is that now it’s the Right that’s embracing the oppressive, totalitarian regime in Bejing. Lots of stuff about “n” millions lifted out of poverty etc. It appears that it’s OK to have an oppressive one party state that ignores the rule of law and maintains a strict, closed ruling elite if everyone’s got an iPhone.
Over at Thoughts on Freedom they’te talking about China emerging as a “procedural democracy”, whatever that is (aside from a weasel phrase).
cheers
Patrick.
About as meaningful as Putin’s notion of a “sovereign democracy”, I’d imagine.
But, yep, there’s a lot of irony in sections of the right cuddling up to the ChiComms.
God knows how it’s squared with all that “left ignores human rights in Iraq” nonsense but then consistency and reason aren’t exactly their strong suits.
Both regimes imploded within ten years after these events, having been eaten up by a disastrous war (DubDub2, Afghanistan). Hope this doesn’t augur same. Tibetan civil war?
He didn’t go into much more detail beyond that but I sorta gathered he liked them as athletes and as people and if that’s what they felt they should do, then why not?
And they liked him back; they were pall-bearers at his funeral.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Norman
says:
Oh, that old chestnut.
Roland Barthes, Michel Foucault, Claude Simon, Luigi Nono, Edgar Snow, the Ausralian communist Wilfred Burchett, stupid Brett Whitley and many other leftists openly expressed their admiration for Mao’s ‘Cultural Revolution’.
Noam Chomksy not only endorsed the moronic Leninist orthodoxy of Mao Tse Tung but even infamously attempted to defend Pol Pot, whom Mao greeted as a hero in 1975.
While Marcuse blathered on about the virtues of the “cultural revolution”, he continued to accept grant funding from the Ford Foundation, adding typical marxisant hypocrisy to their usual brief of simple minded stupidity at the theoretical level.
Nixon, as far as I am aware, never endorsed the “cultural revolution” or China’s domestic policies
Yep, and whatever the Australian left says now is of course *hypocrisy* because something Claude Simon and Luigi Nono said decades ago indicates the left’s *real* beliefs. Whoever they were…
And the left is forever branded with the shame and horror of Marcuse’s financial arrangements for the support of his research.
Really?
The conspicuous absence from the ‘pollution of the sacred vessel of teh Olympic Spirit’ meme is the vast amounts of money changing hands. eg. Coca Cola ‘gifting’ ~$25m to the Chinese state on top of its sponsorship fees in the millions of dollars. Sure, they’ve blown most of this money on a birdsnest and large stack of eviction notices, but the romanticism of Rob de Castella et al is truly gag worthy.
Fwiw, I second what Nabs said about positive Politics.
Mark asks:
…but what Nixon did decades ago is, of course, of contemporary relevance to Conservative criticism of China today.
Claude Simon was the 1958 Nobel laureate for literature, so I’m not surprised you haven’t heard of him.
Luigi Nono is, of course, the avante-garde composer and acolyte of Adorno, Horkheimer, Marcuse and other Frankfurt School marxo-blatherers.
Here’s a bet – by the time the Torch reaches Beijing, it will be absolute lore on political fringes that the USA “backed” and “armed” Mao Tse Tung – and American backing for the Kuo Ming Tang and Chiang Kai Check will never again be mentioned in latté society.
A small price to pay for the time honoured marxisant privelege of continually re-writing its own history in order to excuse its implaccable record of failure.
This is complete tripe. Why don’t you address yourself to what’s actually happening now rather than this risible attempt to rake over coals that in many instances never caught fire in the first place?
“Nixon, as far as I am aware, never endorsed the “cultural revolution” or China’s domestic policies”
No as I understand it his admiration ran on a much more personal level. Although I think it could be argued that Nixon’s enthusiasm for the opening to China allowed many on the Right to suddenly get over their animosity and turn a blind eye to Mao’s past “indiscretions”. Still I expect you are one of GH’s hard right left over warmed up cold war warriors.
cheers
Patrick.
It is also possible to find valuable insight in the work of figures whose other ideas you don’t share. Much as Eliot Ramsey seems to be replicating the critique of left-liberal intellectuals promoted by the likes of James Mcauley while (presumably) disagreeing with the idea that communism is literally the work of the Devil.
patrick says:
This is Communist China we’re talking about, isn’t it? Because I’m sure it was for a couple of decades there “OK to have an oppressive one party state that ignores the rule of law and maintains a strict, closed ruling elite” before Nixon visited the place so long as it was strictly Communist.
You know, like it’s just dandy if “to have an oppressive one party state that ignores the rule of law and maintains a strict, closed ruling elite” so long as it’s headed up by Fidel Castro. Or Ho Chi Minh.
China is for all intents and purposes one more failed Communist experiment degenerated into an outright Fascist statist centrist tyranny.
And the Left, which supporte it for decades, while perfectly entitled to criticise China is hardly in a position morally to criticise the west for not opposing China sufficiently.
I mean, do you think we’ve just entirely forgotten the last 90 years of Leftist support for regimes just like that of Mao Tse Tung, including China itself?
- Noam Chomsky, December 1967
http://www.chomsky.info/debates/19671215.htm
There you go. Maybe Nixon was so impressed by Chomsky’s account of Mao’s China, he just had to go and see for himself.
Who’s “we” Eliot? Do you see yourself as speaking on behalf of a defined group?
“And the Left, which supporte it for decades, while perfectly entitled to criticise China is hardly in a position morally to criticise the west for not opposing China sufficiently.”
And the material impact of this support by the “Left” was …? Be practical. ranting about the misguided opinions of historical figures is so much hot air when you fail to consider the boost that the visit of the (Rightist) leader of the free world at the time gave to the “failed Communist experiment”. These were not the words we heard from RN at the time, indeed he insisted the China was a “great nation”. Where you guys get it wrong is that you actually think that the opinions of the aforementioned French intellectuals and the like have some sort of impact on historical events. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Patrick, just grow up mate.
The transparently venal hypocrisy of Rightist world leaders is irrelevant. What we need to discuss is the blatherings of deluded academics. Who make of us all hypocrites. Or something.
Here’s another funny one from Chomsky in 1967 about Communist China:
http://www.chomsky.info/debates/19671215.htm
This is at the very height of the cultural revolution, mind you. Fawning all over Mao’s “just” and “livable” society.
This sort of guff was blurted out continually by imebeciles like Chomksy for years in a massive sustained effort to legitimise the remime internationally at the diplomatic level.
Chomsky “is the most frequently quoted person on the planet”, apprently. “The Einstein of linguistics, the Darwin of our age, the world’s leading intellectual, the anti-American extremist”, blah, blah.
http://www.chomsky.info/onchomsky/20031206.htm
Well, for a while there he was the wstern world’s chief propagandist dupe for not just mao but Pol Pot too.
Hmmm.
I think we might call a halt to Eliot’s Chomsky quote-a-thon, entertaining as it is. Because it has bugger all to do with the actions of the Chinese government, responses by Western governments, the situation in Tibet, the Olympics or the protests.
Important as Eliot no doubt finds it to turn every issue into a political point-scoring fest, some might prefer to take the Tibet situation and its ramifications seriously.
Mark says:
Hang on? Who brought up Nixon’s visit to China again? Hang on, here it is..
patrick says:
- at Apr 8th, 2008 at 9:52 am
…
http://www.smh.com.au/news/beijing2008/gosper-says-protesters-hate-china/2008/04/08/1207420368388.html
Laughable, isn’t it?
It will be interesting to see what happens when the Torch arrives in Canberra. Some Chinese friends of mine have already been organised into going to the capital by a Chinese cultural group they belong to, to make a show of support. I was surprised by how hostile they were to any talk of protest here. And these are not “blind patriotic robots” as many of the pro-China rentcrowds have been described.
No raking over old coals or point scoring with this thought as our leader wings his way to Bejing. Now he is a little tired, a trifle jet lagged but didn’t Hu Jing Bao offer a salute and a rather inscrutable Mandarin proverb. Minus his embassy interpreter, Kevin responds with something quixotic from Queensland about ‘being here to help’ and his hosts go into a huddle. The next we hear is that the four days in China have included a press free sightsee, then the fourth estate finds itself sidelined in Tokyo sans Rudd who has been ‘indisposed’.
Barely six months in office, a 73 percent rating … domestically … and now this. What an opportunity. Anything Kissinger can do..
That Kevin Gosper quote is exactly what you’d expect of the man who for a decade simply had to pick up the phone to get Nelson Mandela out of prison. Gosper’s never met a murderous regime he didn’t like.