Tibet, Beijing and Olympic Sponsors: To Boycott or Not

I have been working in Shanghai as an ad man since 1998. I have also been privileged to enjoy a courtside seat as China gears up its infrastructure and emotions for the Beijing 2008 Olympics. I am also a "official" torch bearer, slated to carry the Olympic flame 200 meters sometime this summer, somewhere in the Middle Kingdom hinterland. Until recently, the Chinese have been eagerly anticipating their epic coming out party. Pollution? Not to worry, locals say. The government will ensure "blue skies" by shutting down factories. Traffic? Again, no problem. One thing the bureaucrats know how to do, they say, is manage logistics.

The Rumbles of "Policitization"

Now, however, the specter of Tibet, international opprobrium and potential boycotts, both political and commercial, has created an undercurrent of anxiety. As yet, no one is predicting anything dramatic -- for example, a major country forbidding its athletes to participate in the Games. However, the recent stridency of Big Brother propaganda accusing Western media of anti-China bias -- it's reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution brainwashing -- suggest that tension is mounting and the masses are being prepared for a less-than-glorious bow on the world stage.

As a American raised with an unshakable belief in the righteousness of Western values and institutions -- the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; universal human rights; bottom-up representative democracy; and efficient capital markets -- I instinctively empathize with the impulses of the protesters. However, as someone who has lived in China for almost a decade, sometimes frustrated by the lack of a fully developed civil society but often inspired by the ambition and heart of the Chinese nation and people, I believe that both governments and corporate sponsors should -- no, must -- continue to support the Games. True, Westerners have a responsibility to express their displeasure, even anger, regarding the PRC's frequent failure to live up to its responsibilities as a member of the international community of nations. However, these grievances should be productively channeled and expressed with a full appreciation of China's fundamentally different world view.

The Chinese World View: Cyclical Determinism

What is that world view? The Chinese want to be modern; they want to be "international." But they are not becoming, and do not want to become, "Western." Unlike Americans and Europeans, the Chinese are morally relativistic (but not amoral or immoral). They believe in fate and maintain a cyclical view of both the cosmos and human events. In the Chinese universe, an intricate structure where everything is connected and yin morphs inexorably into yang and then back again, the only constant is change. Therefore, if there is any moral absolute, it's the near-sacred belief in the supremacy of stability and order. (Mao remains a hero, despite awareness of his "mistakes" because he unified the nation after 100-plus years of foreign domination.) In this context, the Tibetan imperative has, in Chinese eyes, little to do with human rights or respect for indigenous culture. Rather, the recent protests by the monks represent a threat to "unity," the most important bulwark against the disintegration of the motherland and chaos across the country.

Moral relativists are also pragmatists. China is blessed with an expansive, albeit ethnocentric, world view and a supremely realistic appreciation of its strengths and weaknesses relative to other nations. The Chinese government and people also boast a unique ability to absorb the influences from other countries and apply them in a domestic context, one with both challenges (a huge population; a lack of systemic checks and balances; widespread poverty in the countryside) and opportunities (a gigantic production base; an ambitious population; a consumer class with critical mass; "faith" in the wisdom of the central, but not local, government). The Chinese know they need to integrate themselves with the rest of the world and do so in a manner that does not unsettle a stable geopolitical order, one which made the country's gains of the past three decades possible. But they will insist on doing so in a manner that: a) suits China's distinct circumstances, b) reflects China's status as a equal partner vis-à-vis the West.

Why Beijing 2008 Resonates

A hot-headed "boycott agenda" - either of the Games themselves or the all-important opening ceremony -- by American and European activists and politicians would be, to say the least, unfriendly and, most certainly, counter-productive. It is impossible to overstate the importance of the games, to not only to apparatchiks but also the Chinese people. The country's emotional investment the Olympics is about more than modern China's debut on the world stage. It is more than an acknowledgment of the nation's rightful place as a budding superpower, soon shoulder to shoulder with the United States. It is even more than a confirmation of a new "glorious" era, the end of the eclipse that has enveloped China since the Opium War. The rise of an Olympics-worthy China validates the Middle Kingdom's entire worldview and confirms, in no particular order, the ebb and flow of history, the cyclical essence of yin and yang, as well as a renewed Mandate of Heaven. Beijing 2008 represents a vindication of Han culture.

In atheist China, the Games are collective spiritual balm.

On a personal level, individual identities are smothered, burdened by layers of suppressed expression. Chinese ego repression ensures that individual identities are linked to national pride. All strands of Chinese culture -- Confucianism, Legalism, and Daoism -- deemphasize the individual. Yet both Confucianism and Deng Xiao Ping's "to get rich is glorious" mandate put a premium on (state-endorsed) achievement. The vast majority of Chinese, particularly younger and wealthier ones, are caught between two mutually-exclusive goals: standing out and fitting in. Chinese ambition is restrained by convention. In this context, Brand China -- i.e., nationalism -- is seized en masse as the ultimate identity surrogate. Therefore, the Olympics reflect not only the nation's potential but also "my own greatness."

The Harsh Winds of Rejection

Therefore, a successful Olympics -- i.e., positive PR in both media and political circles, void of humiliation and lost face -- would yield a confident China, one less inclined to stir up trouble abroad and more likely to grasp the fruits of political and economic integration. And a successful Olympics would ensure that is haunted by fewer demons with no cause to lash out with its back is against the wall. On the other hand, if the PRC sees the world as lined up against it, the Middle Kingdom will not emerge from its self-protective cocoon. It will not look up and out; instead, it will, claws extended, shield itself from indignity or worse. And the consequences of such a defensive, self-protective crouch would make the suppression of Tibetan monks look like a walk in the park.

Everything from continued adherence to WTO regulations and constructive collaboration with North Korea to commercial reform and openness to human rights dialogue would take a huge leap backwards. And that would benefit no one, least of all the Tibetans, a people who have only recently begun to emerge from crushing poverty.

The Corporate Sponsorship Question

Corporate sponsors have nothing to be ashamed of and should maintain their support. Indeed, most should be proud of their efforts to develop holistic strategies which benefit both the bottom line and the development of China and its people.

Johnson & Johnson's "Golden Touch, Golden Mom" elegantly fuses universal mother love with a distinctly Chinese premium on "winning." But it has done more than produce a couple lovely television ads to push product. Its corporate responsibility efforts, from sponsoring neo-natal care units to supplying medical equipment to backward villages helps make Chinese children healthier, better able to contribute to society. UPS is contributing its logistic management expertise to ensure smooth operations during the games. Both Adidas and Nike are, through sponsorship of the Games and athletes, respectively, are promoting a sporting culture driven by ground-level participation and joyful release, not the edicts of a totalitarian behemoth. And TOP-sponsor Lenovo is spreading the fruits of information technology throughout the countryside as it conducts the Olympic Torch Run, with the nation cheering along the entire route.

Of course, corporate sponsors -- and government leaders -- must defend themselves against simplistic (yet understandable) accusations of using Beijing to sell product at the expense of human rights and international fair play. They should: a) leverage back channels to convey legitimate Western concerns rather than publicly humiliate a nation in which lost face is equated with diminished status and limited negotiating flexibility; b) promote dialogue with the Dalai Lama, a generous but strategically-challenged leader who does not, in fact, to promote Tibetan independence but, rather, cultural autonomy; c) Initiate PR campaigns that anticipate the concerns well-intentioned protesters, highlighting the business community's role in nudging China to evolve into a modern, responsible state; d) remind the world of the progress that China has, in fact, made in: forging a more (albeit still far from satisfactory) rule-based society, implementing corporate governance reform, lifting millions out of poverty and dramatically raising life expectancy. Meritocratic "corporate diplomacy" has driven much of this and, by the way, represents the freest form of self-expression, both in the workplace and through advertising.

Real Progress, Whether We Want to Admit it or Not

It's worth noting that China's young generation, at least those kissed by the winds of economic reform, is the most hopeful on the planet. Even amongst Western critics, that should count for something. Optimism is underpinned by faith that their strong central government will protect the nation from instability and lubricate the gears of progress. Whether we want to believe it or not, there is no push for bottom-up representative democracy in China. Yes, the middle class wants its economic interests promoted; they want to know that property rights are protected. Yes, the masses hope an independent judiciary will emerge to check the power of corrupt local bureaucrats. But the vast majority of Chinese supports the government; thirty years of centrally-orchestrated economic progress has yielded real return. And personal liberties have expanded dramatically; there are 200 million netizens who express opinions relatively freely, as long as the third rail of organized dissent is not touched.

No, the standards are not the same as our own. No, their cultural orientation is not "individualistic." And they have a long road ahead of them, rife with challenge, frustration and disappointment. But the Chinese are making progress in their way and by their own standards. In the meantime, their ambition, audacity and scale of their miracle continue to impress anyone who visits the Middle Kingdom - Americans, in particular.

A culturally tone-deaf boycott of Beijing 2008 would do more than slight the Communist party. It would reject the aspirations of 1.3 billion Chinese souls. And that could destabilize the 21st century.

Comments

[LeonBNJ]

With millions of factory jobs in the world lost to China in the last decade as well as lowering the pay of remaining workers, the huge recalls of unsafe products, the huge trade deficits and so on, you are going to get a reaction. Those reacting will use the issues of Tibet, Dufar and so on as leverage to get their point across to the PRC government that is ruining their lives. The various forms of boycotts toward the PRC and it's corporate sponsors proposed at the huge world stage the Olympics offer are a part of that leverage many feel is despritely needed and a perfect place for them.
Most people don't care about them losing face or being insulted, they believe that too many political leaders are putting corporate interests over the masses interests. As we get closer to the Olympics, I believe that these issues will gain greater traction and cause considerable and active protests against the PRC.

[Steamboater]

Although I agreee with the sentiment in your post, most of us don't "use" the issue of Darfar and Tibet, Burma and North Korea; we care and care honestly and passionately about China's jackboot over these countries.

[MagisterLudi]

Jackboot? You mean Nike shoe.

[WilliePilgrim]

Well, an advertising professional working in China AND an official torch bearer...h­ow much "salt of the good earth" can we get? Well, you're a brave man for presenting your side of the story, ludicrous on the face of it as it might be.
Anyhow...I can only say I really hope the Chinese have a very successfull Olympic celebratio­n...and that they do it all alone, and without any international support of visitation, because that way more of the 1.3 Billion people you are so concerned about will be able to get seats to the events and then actually be within handshaking distance to their rulers...I almost said representatives,but then, that would imply they were elected in a representational system, which I perhaps should tell you, since you're so in tuned with them you might not have heard, they aren't.
No hard feelings..­.OK? It does seem like they are living in interesting times.

[BeNice]

Is this guy for real?

He used "a" instead of "an" in front of a vowel-fronted word three times in this article.

Seems like an adman would know proper grammer.

[FearlessFreep]

Your specialty is grammar rather than spelling.

[S1m0n]

You've GOT to be kidding. China's games bid has never been anything but political. It's a great big, national coming-out party on the world stage. China means to shout, WE'RE HERE AND WE MATTER!

Any athlete who thinks their--or the world's--presence in Beijing isn't going to be represented by China's leaders as an endorsement of, and an addition to the prestige of, the Chinese government's petty-genocide policies in Tibet and Darfur is lying to themselves and to us.

If they go, China WILL tell its subjects and the world that their presence in Beijing means they endorse the Chinese government. If that's not the message they send, there's only one way to unsend it: don't go

All the IOC fatcats and hangers-on are lying through their teeth to be crying crocodile-tears at the terrible way that the Olympics is being 'politicized'. It has never been unpolitical.

[redjacket]

Oh man, in the spirit of full disclosure do you want to disclose how much you are being paid by the Chinese (and the American Olympic Sponsors) to peddle this party line?

A spiritual ban? Chinese Souls?

Take a look at this post on Silliman's blog this week - of a Chinese Military Officer's Boot on top of a Bleeding Buddhist Monk's head and tell me about Chinese soul and the Olympics as spirituality.

http://ronsilliman.blogspot.com/2008/03/woesers-tibetan-blog-analysis-of-woeser.html

Oh wait . . . maybe you are one of the many who view great wealth as a balm for your lack of spirituality?

Well, hopefully most of the people in the free world haven't sold out - at least to this extent.

[Jonahson]

That guy or police or whatever, is trying to see whether the monk is dead by turning him over with his feet. By the way it is good to see the face or uniform of the guy who is doing this. Some of the pictures used in the Tibetan crack down were actually of Nepalese police manhandling protestors. There was even one used by HuffPo showing police manhandling protestors, they were actually Nepalese police!

[newshawk14]

I thought the boycott, of the Moscow games, for the invasion of Afghanistan, was a bad idea. I
think boycotting the Bejing games would also be a bad idea. I've long considered what
China has been doing in Tibet appalling, but I've always felt the proper vehicle for castigating
them is the United Nations, supplying the Tibetans with weapons, and using tools like most
favored nation trading status to make them realize that there are costs.

[Cautious]

HuffPost's Pick

The Dalai Lama has said he will resign as temporal leader of the Tibetan people if the violence continues. Besides being an amazing person and a Nobel Peace Prize winner, he is an astute and pragmatic politician, very much like Gahndi. While he was still able to live in Tibet and before his meeting with Chairman Mao, he thought that socialism in the abstract was not a bad idea- that is, until he understood Mao's approach to the situation. He was a teenager at the time.

The Dalai Lama is only asking for cultural and religious autonomy, not complete independence. It's true that the Chinese were brutal when they invaded and occupied, and some of that is still going on today, but the Chinese have also had to rebuild a lot and allow more ethnic and religious expression for the tourist trade, which is something they had not considered when they occupied Tibet in the first place.

There actually was a CIA-backed resistance during the early years of the occupation, but the bottom line is that the Dalai Lama is an advocate of nonviolence.

The pendulum will swing back, the Tibetans will gain cultural and religious autonomy, and they will benefit from their association with China's economy. It's often said that the Dalai Lama had begun as far back as the previous incarnation to recognize the problem with China and the need for modernization in Tibet because of the economic situation.

[S1m0n]

".. very much like Gahndi.."

It's gotta be said that Gandhi was either very fortunate or very wise in his choice of oppressors. His tactics would not have been nearly as successful if the Nazis rather than the british held India, for instance, and would suffer the same fate under the chinese.

[newshawk14]

I was a little sketchy in my original reply, I very much appreciate Tibetan Buddhism,
and other than the loss of life, deeply regret the loss of a profound contribution to
the world's spirituality. Helping them, as we did the Afghanis against the Russians,
very much depends on their own world view., and is not to be imposed from the
outside. I still think, that there is much we can do morally (It's tough after the Bush
administration,) to help the Tibetans, and long time observers of China are aware
of just how aggressive a nation they can be. The quote is not exact, but it was no
less than Ho Chi Min of Viet Nam, that said, "Better to eat five years of French
shit, than a thousand years of Chinese misrule."

[marko77]

"The pendulum will swing back, the Tibetans will gain cultural and religious autonomy, and they will benefit from their association with China's economy. It's often said that the Dalai Lama had begun as far back as the previous incarnation to recognize the problem with China and the need for modernization in Tibet because of the economic situation.­" by Cautious

Cautious, please!!! You say the Tibetans will "benefit from their association with China's economy." Right!! Here is the US we have lost millions of good paying jobs; our children are playing with toxic Chinese toys; and thousands of pets have been poisoned by toxic Chinese pet food. Besides that, Chinese products are second rate compared to what used to be produced in the US. I know this would not be happening if all the American businesses hadn't sold out to build factories in China and employ cheap Chinese labor. It's a shame, really. Greed sucks.

[Jonahson]

I happened to watch a brief documentary released from the Chinese side on its english channel CCTV9 as I was curious to know what was going on there since little informaton were coming out from our press other then from the exiled pro Democracy group. We had bad experience with the information provided by the Chalabi group about Iraq in fact some of the WMD spin were from them.

What I saw stunt me. The mob were violent. They burnt and destroyed shops they perceived as belonging to chinese. They stoned and manhandled passer bys some were even knifed. They destroyed scooters while a group even overtuned a police vehicle. There were a few monks running and throwing stones. The mob burnt a school and failed in their attempt to burnt a primary school because the gate was locked in time. There were students in the school at that time. Most of the shops burnt were chinese owned but there was a Tibetian family of four who owned a motor bike shop and was hiding upstair were trapped and burnt to dead. Another chinese owned shop was burnt along with four workers some of them were Tibetians. They also torched two fire engines that came to the rescue. There was a group of out numbered riot police being chase and stoned one of the police suffered head injury. The place is now back to normal. They reported 13 deaths during the early stage of rioting.

[Jonahson]

continue .......
The Chinese didn't expect trouble that was why so few riot police were present. Probably some of the rioters were shot when reinforcement arrived. Many bulidings were burnt as can be clearly seen by aerial pictures of the place. Perhaps when tourist is allowed in again we can check it out ourselves.
Those people whose bussinesses including two rows of stalls selling vegetables were affected got really pissed off by the riot.
It didn't resemble the peaceful protest I imagined, it was more like a mob rioting.

[Amalek]

The Tibetans deserve respect for their culture, which the Chinese long ago realized had also become in their best interest. They have encourage enough Han to move their (not an easy task since the altitude is so high (14,000 feet) most people get altitude sickness) that they could make a sound case against independence.

What the Tibetans do not have the right to do is to use violence to attempt to embarrass China. There is no way they can win independence through violence. Nor should they win the sympathy of others. They are such hypocritical Buddhists - how can a non-violent religion use violence to make its case? They are no more Buddhists than the pro-war evangelicals are Christians.

The author correctly understands that peace and harmony are crucial values in China. They must be in a society with 1.4 billion people. The Chinese people are rightfully outraged at this attack on civilization. The Dalai Lama should stand up for what he believes and support the Chinese government in restoring order, while extending the right of the Tibetans to retain their culture and rediscover their religion.

[Rule Of Law]

Yes, and I heard those nasty Tibetans have weapons of mass destruction hidden up there in the snow, too. Scary...

[Jonahson]

If you want to comment on current affairs of foreign countries it will do everybody good to check on both sides of the coin before giving judgement . Let's not jump into the band wagon and hype about things from what we read in our papers only.
I remember before the invasion of Iraq many people went along with Bush, most papers hype about it. We did not get out of our shell to check for the truth from other sources nor did we believe Saddam when he said Iraq has no WMD. We even ridiculed Hans Blix for telling the truth.
We are partly to be blamed for the debacle in Iraq (unless if you are one of those who think Bush is right) because we did not check or accept the truth from other sources. The majority is not always right, the majority can be mislead. I choose to look at both sides of the coin so that I can stand on my own judement and won't get played out again by liars in the future and live with a clear conscience . If there is any lesson to learn from all those unnecessry suffering we caused in Iraq is to find out the truth as much as we can. Otherwise we will again make the same mistake and be manipulated to start another bloody, senseless war. By the way people who cannot carry on a sensible discussion without calling other people names are usually people witout much

[batguano]

IF China wants to avoid any "humiliation and lost face" they can end their killing and lock-down of Tibetans and open dialogue with the Dalai Lama. They can immediately offer to really help end the horror in Darfur! They can begin to crack down on the underground trade in endangered Tigers, Rhinos, ivory, and any number of other endangered species used for either "medicine" or food.

The "hot-headed boycott agenda" you speak of is a frustration born of long criticism of Chinese policy with little meaningful change or even an ignoring of pleas for change.

If China wishes to avoid the "humiliation and lost face" they might feel from disruption or boycott of the games, they know full well what steps they might take to alleviate that possibility.

I suspect they probably will remain "culturally tone deaf" to the cries and pleadings of the world and instead of trying to open dialogue to criticism, will just hunker down.

Our silence is NOT for sale!

[MagisterLudi]

Oh, paying attention to the West really helped China through out centuries.­..NOT!

Especially to those in U.S. incapable of finding Beijing on the map, but feel duly qualified to offer their pompous advice based on one or two blog posts they skimmed...­Ridiculous­....

[batguano]

This apology for Chinese actions, or inaction, in the world, is transparent in its self-serving view. The invasion, oppression, occupation and colonization of Tibet, the "business" beijing does with Sudan that leads to their blocking an end to the genocide in Darfur, condoning illegal trade in numerous endangered species, both domestic and imported, oppression and imprisonment of political critics, selling organs and entire bodies of executed "criminals", the wholesale poisoning their own and the environment of others for "progress" all justly deserve criticism. Are these examples of "China's fundamentally different world view"? Like the eating of domestic dogs and cats? Should we be silent in criticism of these glaring cases of hubris and violent repression for political expedience or just excuse them as "cultural differences"? Or are the corporations and their profits you defend the preferred vehicle to "gently" prod China to change without "offending" their sensibilities? NOTHING China is and has been doing in regard to their occupation of Tibet or the recent demonstrations has been gentle!

[marignymitch]

A boycott is bad for business. Man, that's a red, white and blue idea. Thanks for the tip. I'm changing my support to the Chinese because it's the American thing to do. After all, I want to do the right thing. To hell with Tibet.

[Fez]

I'll accept your analysis of Chinese culture becuase you live there and seem to know what you are talking about. Except for the main point here: Tibet was never part of China. Never. When the Chinese invaded Tibet in 1959 (and in the 1930s under the 13th Dalai Lama, when they were routed by the Tibetan "Army"), they acted like any other imperialist nation. The so-called balance they are seeking was upset by the Chinese, not the Tibetans. Now, the Tibetans are acting like any other opressed group and taking to the streets. Anyone who cares about human rights should support the citizens of Tibet. The Chinese created this mess and they will have to resolve it by granting some form of autonomy to Tibet. I don't think that the Olympics should be boycotted but I do believe that the Olympic torch should be protested everywhere it appears to show the Chinese that they are thugs and bullies in a league with George W. Bush, Joseph Stalin and other criminals.

[emerywood]

" Tibet was never part of China " just as North America was never part of Europe. North America belonged to the American Indians, not Europeans. Is that what you are saying ?

[Steamboater]

The difference of course is that you don't see the Native American beat down physically by the government and you certainly don't see Native Americans on the warpath. Lastly, Native Americans are some of the most right -wing citizens and extremely patriotic; they have rights. Period. Tibetans have no rights they can call their own and hardly think of themselves aas Chinese or part of China. You need to think about that before making snap judgements about what this government did, and what we did was wrong; I agree.

[Steamboater]

If the vast majority of Chinese support the government then they deserve what they get. Tibetans however are NOT Chinese.
" ... in Chinese eyes, little to do with human rights or respect for indigenous culture. Rather, the recent protests by the monks represent a threat to "unity,". The same could be said of any reprehensible dictatorship, either the Nazis or the old Soviet Union which is leaning strong toward rising again but under the lie of democracy.
Diplomacy has been going on a long time although Bush and company have not made human rights a priority with China. China losing face demands that no one protest, no one boycott and for everyone to just shut up. A boycott of the Olympics is the right thing to do. Games are just that. What the Chinese are doing to Tibet, Darfur and Burma and aiding and abetting in North Korea are not games; they're brutal and deathly. It's about time those who played games gave a shit.

[scepticalobserver]

An eloquent and logical dissertation on why the world should turn a blind eye towards the abuses of the Chinese government. Favored nation status did nothing, so why should the Olympics?

A boycott is the only leverage we have.

Of course, Wal-Mart won't be joining any boycott. Without Communist Chinese products Wal-Mart would have to close it's doors.

[Shanshan]

I hate the way you talked: "Why the world should turn a blind eye towards the abuses of the Chinese government­." Firstly, your opinion, or the people who hold the same opinions as yours, should not represent "the World", Secondly, I strongly suggest you check on the both sides of a coin before you make your judgements. I personally think Chinese government's policy to Tibetan Autonomy Region should be improved in some extent, however, On March. 14, the mob and rioter did killed some innocent lives, including Han and Tibetans. They should be punished by Chinese laws.

[SonofLiberty1]

During our Revolutionary war, a rag tag tiny army, living off the land, managed to defeat an empire
and proclaimed a new nation.

Are you telling me that 1.3 Billion Chinese can't do the same?

I'm all for a Boycott and I'm doing it and I suggest Americans do the same.

[MagisterLudi]

1.During your Revolutionary war " rag tag army managed to defeat an empire."

The ONLY reason that Americans gained independence is because France and Spain were involved in conflict with England. Otherwise you'd still be eating bangers and mash. Learn history.

2.Are you telling me that 1.3 Billion Chinese can't do the same?

Chinese are VERY happy with the direction the country is taking. Misunderstanding of this is not a sin, but with this level of knowledge one should be more humble and refrain from making barely comprehensible pronouncements.

[Steamboater]

"The ONLY reason that Americans gained independence is because France and Spain were involved in conflict with England. Otherwise you'd still be eating bangers and mash. Learn history."
You could use a good lesson yourself. Yes, France and Spain were on our side and that's exactly the point. Other nations, no matter their reasons, stood up to Britain, just as nations around the world today should stand up to China and boycott these Olympics.

"Chinese are VERY happy with the direction the country is taking. Misunderstanding of this is not a sin, but with this level of knowledge one should be more humble and refrain from making barely comprehensible pronouncem­ents."

One could say the same of the Germans in the 30's or the Soviets when in power. Sorry Charlie, but no one's going to shut up just to please a corrupt dictatorship in China that beats down the will and spirit of it's citizens and those of Tibet. What happens with a country like China where the Chinese have been deprived of human rights for so long is that the government doles it out piece by piece and then it's population is so grateful for the meager output that they're perceived as 'VERY happy". The problem with dictators though is that that what it gives, it can easily take away. That's something you should understand.

[SamThornton]

Unfortunately, the only message that gets sent by participating in the Olympics is that it's OK with us if the Chinese government shoots people in Tibet and institute what amounts to martial law while the fun and games are ongoing. What, us worry? How pathetic can we get?

The Olympics haven't been about amateur sports in quite some time. It's all about self-promotion. Self-promotion by athletes intent on becoming celebrities with endorsement deals. Self-promotion by corporations eager to flog their products. Self-promotion by tin-pot dictators who want to be vindicated for being tin-pot dictators.

Athletic contests? Give me a break. That part is all about pharmaceutical legerdemain -- who can dope up without getting caught.

Bread and circuses. Circuses and bread.