An Olympic Boycott: would it have any effect at all?

[BoMac]

There have been calls to boycott the Olympics in recent days following the events in Tibet. There's been talk of heads of state and other officials boycotting the Opening Ceremonies, but the EU flatly rejected a full-scale boycott.

It's arguable what effect, if any, the 1980 and 1984 boycotts had on the host countries and I'm wondering if such an event would occur in 2008, would something positive come out of it? I doubt a boycott would ever happen, since many of the world's economies are intertwined with China's.

What do you guys think?

[A_Wanderer]

I refuse to watch the Olympic games

Because I find it so utterly frivilous.

[anitram]

It would be highly hypocritical to boycott them now. It isn't as if we were not always aware of their disrespect for human rights. But we are okay with it so long as we can go to Walmart to buy pencil cases for 49 cents.

[A_Wanderer]

Hey, this laptop is made in China, damn you Steve Jobs!

But my trusty stapler is made in Sweden

[martha]

Olympic boycotts are pointless and hypocritical.

[deep]

/\ could that be somebody that remembers 1980 and 1984


I do recall when Carter told those Soviets
if you don't leave Afghanistan by XYZ we will boycott Moscow 1980 Olympics

being a young lad that hated those Commies and loved the Afghan freedom fighters, I was all gung ho on that boycott.

well, guess what

it worked, the Soviets pulled right out of Afghanistan lickedy split.

Carter was re-elected
and the Communist behaved themselves everafter

[Irvine511]

Originally posted by A_Wanderer


Because I find it so utterly frivilous.

i find it the least frivilous of all sporting events.

which might not be saying much.

but damned if i don't love it that some sports other than baseball, basketball, and football get some coverage in this country.

U-S-A! U-S-A!

and all that.

[melon]

http://forum.interference.com/t185232.html

Originally posted by melon
I think we forget here that, to every nation in the world, China is not an official enemy, but, instead, a legal trading partner. Official boycotts against China are probably not in our economic interests currently, as we are too intertwined with them. In some cases, they have an upper hand too, in terms of being flush with cash and a heavy investor in certain cases.

So, sorry to say, our greed over a nation of cheap trinkets and even cheaper labor has made it very difficult for us to try and take the moral high road now.

[CTU2fan]

All it does is screw the athletes over. I could understand the Carter boycott as the USSR was an enemy; like it or not China is not as Melon says.

[Liesje]

Originally posted by CTU2fan
All it does is screw the athletes over.

That's how I feel too. Like others have said, it's pretty hypocritical to boycott based on the human rights thing when any other day we sit here doing nothing. It only hurts the athletes. I do NOT want a boycott for purely selfish reasons: Shawn Johnson from West Des Moines, Iowa has probably the BEST chance any American has ever had at taking the AA gold in women's gymnastics. Nastia Liukin is close behind her and will pick it up if Shawn makes one mistake. These kids train 8 hours a day, 6 days a week. They were training for the Olympics before they even knew where China is or what human rights means.

[U2democrat]

Originally posted by Irvine511




i find it the least frivilous of all sporting events.

which might not be saying much.

but damned if i don't love it that some sports other than baseball, basketball, and football get some coverage in this country.

U-S-A! U-S-A!

and all that.

Come on Irvine, be honest, you just love it because of this:




Kidding, any excuse to post something like that

Seriously though, I agree that at this point it would be hypocritical, and I love being exposed to sporting events that never get covered here.

[Irvine511]

that was Phelps the teen phenom of 2004.

this is Phelps the man of 2008:

[U2democrat]

*le sigh*

Think of the masterpiece Michaelangelo could make out of that one.

[martha]

Suddenly this thread need a five star rating.

[vaz02]

Didnt 'the torpedo' retire ?

[Irvine511]

Originally posted by vaz02
Didnt 'the torpedo' retire ?

the Thorpedo did, yes. though i'm told Aussies just call him Thorpie. or some, like Angela, don't bother to call him at all.

but he did indeed retired. cited burnout and all that.

and then Phelps broke his 200 fr record in Melbourne last March.

it was beautiful. it was art.

[Irvine511]

so, to maybe inject a little bit of politics, what do we make of this article:



[q]Phelps should focus on more than swimming in Beijing
By: Ian Robinson, Daily Sports Editor
Posted: 3/5/08
Correction appended

In essence, the Olympics are about two ideas: peace and moral principles.

The Chinese government violates both. It represses human rights and supports the genocide-enabling government in Sudan.

Some have advocated a boycott of this summer's Beijing Games, but that won't happen.

That doesn't mean the world should stand idly by as the host government continues its violation of the United Nation's Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Olympics are the perfect platform to pressure China to abide by international standards.

One group that can force the Chinese government to listen and raise awareness is the athletes.

And Michigan men's swimming and diving volunteer assistant coach Michael Phelps is one of the most powerful members of that group.

As he aims for eight gold medals this summer, Phelps could be the most dominant athlete in the world.

But his performance in the pool shouldn't define his Olympics. Whether or not he uses his prominent position to challenge the Chinese government should.

If a Chinese citizen tried speak out against his or her government, that person would get jailed. If they organized a rally, they would - well, we've all seen pictures of Tiananmen Square.

If Phelps does something, he'll be heard.

He would not only be remembered as a great athlete, but also, more importantly, as a great human being.

Phelps would be the ideal athlete to launch this movement. The media will cover his every move in China.

At the same time, it doesn't have to be Phelps. Whether he would be willing to take such a stand is unknown, since his media representative did not respond to a request for comment.

As much as people want to keep sports and society separate, they are inextricably linked.

Whether it be the Miracle on Ice or Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier in Major League Baseball, separating the two is impossible.

A couple weeks ago, the British Olympic Association essentially placed a gag order on its athletes. Under pressure, it has since rescinded that rule. The United States Olympic Committee said that it wouldn't restrict its athletes beyond the IOC's ban on "(any) kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda" in Olympic venues.

But what Phelps could advocate goes beyond national politics. It's about humanity - about giving a voice to people whose government doesn't give them one.

Steven Spielberg heard these calls for protest and responded. He was supposed to be a creative consultant for the Games' opening ceremonies but pulled out because China has given financial support to the Sudanese government.

Phelps won't pull out of the Games. He has too much on the line. But that shouldn't stop him from making a difference.

In Beijing, Phelps has the opportunity to establish his legacy, and it will have nothing to do with how many world records he sets.

How he protests is unimportant - what matters is that his message is clear. The most remembered athletes are the ones with conviction for a cause.

Jesse Owens's career wasn't defined by the four gold medals he won in 1936. He's remembered for defying Hitler's claims of Aryan supremacy at the Berlin Games.

Tommie Smith and John Carlos are most known for their Black Power protest on the podium in the 1968 Olympics, not the medals they won.

Phelps won't be defined by his medal count. We should care about whether he decides to defend people who don't have anyone to stand up for them.[/q]

[verte76]

Originally posted by deep
/\ could that be somebody that remembers 1980 and 1984


I do recall when Carter told those Soviets
if you don't leave Afghanistan by XYZ we will boycott Moscow 1980 Olympics

being a young lad that hated those Commies and loved the Afghan freedom fighters, I was all gung ho on that boycott.

well, guess what

it worked, the Soviets pulled right out of Afghanistan lickedy split.

Carter was re-elected
and the Communist behaved themselves everafter

Carter wasn't re-elected.

[verte76]

I don't want an Olympic boycott. It would piss me off dammit!

[vaz02]

Originally posted by Irvine511




the Thorpedo did, yes. though i'm told Aussies just call him Thorpie. or some, like Angela, don't bother to call him at all.

but he did indeed retired. cited burnout and all that.

and then Phelps broke his 200 fr record in Melbourne last March.

it was beautiful. it was art.

Ahh thanks for 30 second recap of modern swimming history