Kilgour, Defrantz and Olympic boycotts

[mijopo]

There was a great discussion yesterday on NPR between David Kilgour, former MP and human rights lawyer, and Anita DeFrantz, American IOC member.  Kilgour was there to voice his support for a limited opening ceremonies boycott but ended up speaking out very strongly against Chinese human rights abuses, and China's role in Tibet and Darfur, and the

Comments

[mijopo]

Well, setting aside the effectiveness question, on which I disagree with you, cultural and economic boycotts have proven effective in the past, there are other reasons to consider a boycott. For one, it witholds a general indicator of legitimacy which may prove to be a disincentive to other nations who might otherwise think that the world is able to grow comfortable with nations that abuse human rights and support genocide.

Secondly, there's a simple question of right and wrong. If I learn that my neighbour beats his wife and kids, and he invites me over to play poker, I'll decline the invitation. What if I learn that if I won't play he can easily find someone else to take my spot or that he'll continue to be an a-hole even if I don't show up? Doesn't really make a lick of difference, I just don't feel right about socializing with such a creep and if he owned a store I wouldn't feel right about buying goods from it.

[mijopo]

But at the same time as an earlier point was made: we shouldn't punish the athletes necessarilly either.

Nobody made this point earlier, did they?

[zastrazzi]

I raised the point as one that should be dismissed as a factor ;)

[binro33]

China's economy is strong enough that if we chose to stop trading with them then it'd hurt us far more than it'd hurt them.

I figure it'd hurt Walmart more than it'd hurt anything else.

[zastrazzi]

That strikes me as good enough reason right there :)