While the ideal of the Olympics is that nations come together in the spirit of athletic competition, the reality is that they are highly political events. As those of us who were around in the Cold War remember, the United States and the Soviet Union battled over gold medals in the hopes of showing which nation had the better ideology. There was also the famous boycott of the Olympics by many nations when the USSR invaded Afghanistan. Naturally, the Soviets retaliated four years later. Further, athletes have made political gestures during the games as well.
This year the main political concerns about the Olympics are focused on China’s internal and external problems. From the viewpoint of the West, China has been behaving badly: violating human rights, censoring the media, suffering from corruption, oppressing Tibet, and dealing with nations like Burma and Iran. In response to this behavior, the journey of the Olympic torch was marked by numerous protests. Not surprisingly, Chinese officials are worried that the Olympics will be disrupted by protesters. Because of this, China has been gearing up to crack down on any dissent or protests. Despite these measure, it is likely that some protests will take place.
One moral question about this situation is whether people should use the Olympics as a chance to protest against China’s behavior.
On one hand, there seem to be good moral grounds for such protests. After all, China has acted in various ways comparable to the bad behavior of most other nations: enacting oppressive laws, interfering with the internal affairs of other countries, violating human rights, and so on. Intuitively, such bad behavior should not go without a critical response. Presumably, such protests will be aimed at bringing about a change in China’s behavior.
Of course, mere protests do not generally lead to change. Such protests can, however, begin the process of change. For example, people spoke out against slavery in the United States and eventually slavery was outlawed. As another example, people protested about the fact that women did not have the right to vote in the United States and eventually that right was granted. Perhaps the same could happen in the case of China: the protests will eventually lead to moral improvements. If this can occur, then there would be excellent moral grounds for such protests.
On the other hand, there is the concern that such protests might have an undesirable effect on China’s behavior. While criticizing bad behavior can lead to that behavior stopping, sometimes such criticism can reinforce such behavior. In the case of China, the upcoming Olympics are a chance for the country to show that it is a great power and on its way to becoming a full participant in the world community. If the Olympics go well, then China might be willing to open up more and might start on the slow journey towards changing her behavior to be more pleasing to the liberal countries of the world.
One way to argue against protesting at the Olympics is to use an analogy. Imagine that Bill has not been a very nice person in the neighborhood. However, Bill has been selected to host the neighborhood party this year. He puts a great deal of effort into preparing the party and shows some signs of mending his ways. When the guests arrive, they might be tempted to speak out against his bad behavior. However, if Bill thinks that people are ruining his party, he might decide to simply stick with his bad behavior. However, if the party goes well and his neighbors are friendly, Bill might decide that being a good neighbor is appealing.
However, there is the concern that remaining silent about bad behavior and pretending that things are fine is both delusional and immoral. After all, ignoring such behavior (even for the duration of a party or Olympics) might send the message that such behavior is tolerable.
As an aside, it seems likely that Chinese officials are puzzled by the West’s moralizing and it probably strikes them as somewhat hypocritical. After all, who was protesting when the Western powers were occupying and humiliating China?
Overall, the situation is rather complex. There are excellent justifications for protests against China. However, there are excellent reasons to let China have her moment of Olympic glory.
Mike: it seems to me that you’re asking a political, not a philosophical, question. You’re asking what is the most effective strategy to get China to behave better, so to speak. I’d have to know a lot more about China, its sociology, its culture, its economy, to try to answer that question.
You are quite right about there being a practical question (namely, what would be the most effective strategy to make China behave better).
My intent was to present a moral question as well: should (morally) people protest against China during the Olympic events? In terms of the “yes” answer, the moral argument is that China’s behavior justifies such protests and that the fact that she is hosting the Olympics does not change this. Added to this argument is the utilitarian argument that such protests can create good consequences.
In terms of the “no” answer, the moral argument would be that such protests can have negative consequences (influencing China to behave the same or worse) and not protesting can have positive consequences (influencing China to behave better).
Of course, there is the other moral consideration I raised: not criticizing bad behavior can be regarded as immoral because it could send the message that such behavior is tolerable (thus presumably encouraging it to continue).
Like Aristotle, I think that ethics is a practical matter and an important moral question is “how do we make people good?” Unfortunately, I seem to lack Aristotle’s clarity in regards to purpose. :)
Mike: A few months ago we discussed the subject of Tibet and a possible Olympic boycott in this same blog. At one point a man identifying himself as a Chinese student in London began to participate: he may have been a Chinese functionary sitting in Beijing for all I know. He was well-informed and wrote perfect English. From conversing with this fellow, I realized how little I know about the Chinese mentality or even if there is a Chinese mentality. I hope that people who protest against U.S. policies (in Iraq, in Guantánamo, etc.) have learned by now that burning an American flag does not influence U.S. public opinion in their favor. As a Jew, although an atheist and one opposed to the illegal occupation of the West bank, a swastika imposed on a star of David or on a menorah turns me off instantly. In the case of China, I have no idea what symbols are “sacred”, how to influence the Chinese masses or the Chinese leadership, to what extent the leadership enjoys the support of the masses, etc. The Chinese fellow who wrote in our blog said that a boycott of the Olympics would make the leadership class take a harder line. As I said, he may have been a Communist party functionary, he may have been a Communist party functionary with liberal tendencies (a possible ally), he may have been just a normal Chinese student. When one has no idea who is who, at times it’s best to keep silent. I live in Chile, and I have seen so many foreigners, even in prestigious newspapers, opine about Chile without knowing who is who. It’s easy to get confused: being a communist means one thing in Chile, another thing in the U.K., and still another thing in China, for example.
I think it’s relevant that in the examples cited where change occurred, these were cases of people speaking out within their own countries. It becomes very difficult to criticise when you are an “outsider”. Another analogy would be with regard to family. I am more than happy to recognise the flaws in my own family, but if a stranger were to point them out I would instantly become defensive.
This doesn’t mean that people should be silent about the bad aspects of Chinese society but it does mean that it should be approached with a good deal of thought.
It’s a very good article that I believe comes to the right conclusion; let them have their day in the sun. After all, the main criticism of China, that it is ” enacting oppressive laws, interfering with the internal affairs of other countries, violating human rights, and so on.” can just as easily be applied to the US, but do we really think that if the Games were being held there that they would be subjected to the same level of scrutiny that we see daily being applied to China? This is most likely to be an unconscious outburst of racism, a matter that should be dealt with in a philosophy forum.
Here’s a link to the conversation on the blog a few months ago, mentioned by Amos above:
http://blog.talkingphilosophy.com/?p=244
There are some interesting replies from Wen Xie.
I wonder if opinions have changed.
Mike mentioned that protests helped end slavery in America. But it also coincided with economic developments that made slavery less economically attractive, because of the new farming technology that was coming on the scene. Similarly, it is economic development that is forcing China to change and liberalize, perhaps doing more to change things than protests.
Slavery ended in America more than a hundred years ago. But its end did not also bring equality or better treatment of African-Americans. The process of emancipation took another hundred years to get started, eventually giving African-Africans the right to vote and equal rights under the law.
China has changed dramatically in the last 30 years. It has opened up and liberalized at an unprecedented rate, never before see in history. The Chinese have unbelievable freedoms in comparison to the past. Economically they are quite free. Politically they are not so free, yet. But look how long it took for African-Americans to get their emancipated.
The point of at least some of the protests was not to make China change directly. I t was to draw attention to something that people had ignored for 49 years, namely the occupation of Tibet. People were pointing cameras at things and we just did the equivalent of the waving and shouting “hello mum” behind the newscaster. Suddenly people had heard of Tibet and its situation. That’s the best we could have wanted. This does not cover all of the issues of course!
There should not be mixed olympics with politics. The spirit and belief of the chinese people who receive the olympic’s spirit and belief from the ancient heirtage will be superior compare to the protestor against olympics.
listings of health for senior insurance solution on line agents com ri…
Georgian?breachers airborne frictionless,radio unguarded:…