Right Thinking From The Left Coast
The Government is merely a servant -- merely a temporary servant; it cannot be its prerogative to determine what is right and what is wrong, and decide who is a patriot and who isn't. Its function is to obey orders, not originate them. - Mark Twain

More Thoughts on China
by Hal_10000

I’m sorry that my last few posts have been a little unclear.  I’ve been rushing things.  Hopefully, this one will clarify my thinking on the whole Olympics Thing.

I have two problems with the China protests.  The first is that I think the olympics are the wrong place to be grinding politlcal axes.  The Soviet Union was one of the most evil governments in history but the 1980 boycott was still stupid.  All it did was deprive athletes of the chance to compete while giving the Soviet Union tons of grist for the propaganda mill.  If we’d boycotted the 1936 games, it would have done nothing whatsoever to stop the Reich.  It might even have tamped down the recognition of what was going on (I’ve heard arguments on both sides).  The calls for boycott and protests are doubly stupid when it comes to China because the they will not see this as a political statement.  As Lee argues, they will see this as a massive insult to their nation.  So what is accomplished?  Nothing.

(That having been said, I still oppose the efforts of some governments to silence their athletes.)

My second problem is the whole Tibet thing.  Check out another comment from Lee’s China blog:

For every Tibetan temple destroyed during the Cultural Revolution, another 100 Confucius/Daoist/Buddhist temple were destroyed. For every TIbetan jailed for “subversion”, there have been 1000 Han Chinese for the same activities. For every Tibetan persecuted for religion, another 10,000 Han Chinese suffer the same fate.

China’s record on human and civil rights is universally terrible.  So why the focus on Tibet?  Because of their cute religious leader.  Because of the fixation many celebs have on Buddhism.  Because supporting Tibet is a leftist fashion statement.

Moreover, these cries are extremely hypocritical coming from the American Left.  These are the same people who stood around like lamp-posts for half a century, ignoring every evil thing the Soviet Union did.  When the Soviets starved two million Ukranians to death or rolled tanks into Czechoslovakia or oppressed the Balkans, many of the leftists ignored it.  They pretended the Gulag Archipelago didn’t exist.  They pretended Stalin was a good man.  They pretended Gorbachev saves us from the eeevil Ronald Reagan.  Where were the cries of “Free Lithuania!”?  They were only heard on the Right.  And we were called warmongers for it.

Most of the protesters are fine with oppression.  But throw in a religious leader (Tibet) or a celeb cause (Darfur) or a race issue (South Africa) and they fall all over themselves calling for boycotts and protests.  All while listening to their iPods made with African coltan and wearing shirts made in China.  It’s the Protest of the Week.  I see no reason to take it seriously.

My record of opposing evil governments is clear.  It’s the reason I initially supported the Iraq invasion. But I have always opposed boycotts and sanctions because I think they only empower the oppressive government.  I refuse to cede the high ground to a bunch of professional protesters gnashing their teeth over the latest pop cause.

Posted by Hal_10000 on 04/10/08 at 02:30 PM (Discuss this in the forums)

Comments


Posted by on 04/10/08 at 04:15 PM from Japan

A friend that just got back from China last week (she goes every Spring for a couple of months and speaks Chinese) said that at least some of the media in China are blaming the torch demonstrations on the CIA.

The CIA backed and armed the Tibetan Independence movement in the 50s and 60s - right up until Nixon went to China and promptly dumped the rebels in it.

Moreover, these cries are extremely hypocritical coming from the American Left.

Right wing groups have absolutely nothing to crow about on this front either - supporting a whole array of pretty much evil dictatorships from Pol Pot to the Samoza family.

This is what happens when you revert to the left-right meme to thump the political opposition - it becomes meaningless. Remember it’s the right here that are supporting political independence in Tibet - as a way of bashing China.

I don’t support a boycott of the Olympics - but don’t merge the two issues. The torch procession protests are a fabulous way for pretty much forgotten groups to get their voices heard. WHy begrudge that?

Sorry running out the door - wish I had time to make this a little more sensical…

Posted by Hal_10000 on 04/10/08 at 04:23 PM from United States

Right wing groups have absolutely nothing to crow about on this front either - supporting a whole array of pretty much evil dictatorships from Pol Pot to the Samoza family.

A fair point, although it should be remembered that many of the bad regimes were supported in the context of the Cold War. It was literally a choice of the lesser of two evils.  Also, Reagan turned away from that to some extent, putting pressure on governments in Chile, the Phillipines, South korea and El Salvador to democratize.

Posted by Aaron - Free Will on 04/10/08 at 05:02 PM from United States

Let’s say that we’re accepting moral equivalence as a premise.

The Chinese and the protestors are on the same plane, both equally right and both equally wrong.

So what failed here? Obviously, something did.

The International Olympic Committee is supposed to foster international brotherhood and encourage participating nations to behave honorably.

Instead, we have Chinese paramilitary goons getting into shoving matches with British cops. Now they’re talking about eliminating the torch relay in the future to avoid this kind of thing. That’s like gun control: The torch isn’t the problem.

Regardless of the moral standing of any of the people involved, Beijing was an error in judgment. Let’s place blame where it’s really, really due, because the IOC knew about Sudan and Tibet before it got ugly.

Posted by Thrill on 04/10/08 at 08:55 PM from United States

Right wing groups have absolutely nothing to crow about on this front either - supporting a whole array of pretty much evil dictatorships from Pol Pot to the Samoza family.

Stogy, you sorry bastard.  There is no way in hell you could have made that “sensical” in any amount of time.  Evil dictatorships?  Yes, the regimes that came after those two were so much better for their nations and our interest, right?  Assuming that two million dead Cambodians and a Communist nation in our sphere of influence were “better”.

Behold the twisted, leftist mind, ladies and gentlemen.

Posted by on 04/11/08 at 12:53 AM from Japan

Yes, the regimes that came after those two were so much better for their nations and our interest, right?

Yes, they were. Much, much better.

Assuming that two million dead Cambodians and a Communist nation in our sphere of influence were “better”

Um… I am not quite sure about how you’ve constructed this historically - it doesn’t make a lot of sense.

Posted by Thrill on 04/11/08 at 01:37 AM from United States

Alright, I’ll concede that I read “Pol Pot” as “Lon Nol”.  I figured it was the only possible way that what you said could make any sense whatsoever.  The Nixon Administration backed up this regime until the Democrats in Congress cut off all aid.  The Khmer Rouge took over almost immediately. 

At no time was support for Pol Pot a “right-wing” cause, you moron, seeing as how he was a Communist homicidal maniac.  What you were actually thinking of was the “Khmer People’s National Liberation Front” which received aid from the Reagan Administration.  This group was anti-Communist and pro-Western.

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Next entry: Why He Should Worry

Previous entry: Methods Defined

<< Back to main