Governments and corporate leaders worry more about their economy and profits rather than human rights. Human rights almost always takes a back seat against the economy and profits.
The diplomatic boycott that some of the countries have announced is actually a façade as it does nothing really significant to deter China. At most the media in China would be deprived of an opportunity to report on the dress worn by the first lady of the U.S.A on the opening day. That would not put any dent on China's revenue from the Winter Olympics or on its ambition to showcase to its own citizens and the world at large how successful they have been in hosting the Olympics.
It is the same with ordinary people too. Most of us prioritize convenience and cheaper products over human rights. Our part in it cannot be dismissed as irrelevant or insignificant. After all we elected the governments that are in power. They are supposed to represent our voice.
If they don't shouldn't we be voicing our disapproval?
Cheap not free By Brett Jordan is licensed under CC BY 2.0 | Edited by Fit.Zone
I don't see enough of us doing that.
Where are the NGOs that represent human rights? Where are the people who take to the streets for matters that affect them personally but not for matters they don't identify with? If enough of us start boycotting products and services of China and the companies that pander to China, then governments and companies will take note and would act accordingly. Would the Olympic athletes sacrifice years they spent in training and the prospect of a medal for a fair and just world?
There is a rumor that the French president may announce a total boycott of the winter Olympics. But that is not because he really cares for human rights. If he does announce a full boycott he would probably be doing it to spite the U.S for scuttling its submarine deal with Australia. Perhaps he has ambitions to become the next EU leader and wants to showcase himself to be a bold and dare-to-be-different kind of leader.
What about the countries that have active territorial disputes with China? In spite of China's belligerence and posturing these countries are unlikely to announce a full boycott of the winter Olympics. The façade of a diplomatic boycott is more likely, if at all.
To be fair more than 180 human rights groups did call for a full boycott of the games. However they stopped short of further actions which would be necessary to put pressure on Beijing.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Yes, a call for boycott, without more, is hollow activism.
Talk is more about the tennis star that was raped and a cover up happening. I think there will be some countries thinking twice about going as rightly they should.
Was going to curate this but can't as you have done no comments for over a month. 10 minutes a day is not too much to ask as it is now costing you. Give and take as this is a two way street and not a one way. Support will be given when you add something more to the community.
This is exactly my point. Why limit it to the tennis star and the cover up?
For Beijing 2008 there were talks of freeing Tibet and soon after the games were over it was forgotten. Whilst Tibet is still under Chinese occupation, China has been awarded with Beijing 2022 and the talk is now limited to tennis star and cover up only.
Soon after Beijing 2022 Peng Shuai would also be forgotten!
Congratulations @fit.zone! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s):
Your next target is to reach 12000 upvotes.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPTo support your work, I also upvoted your post!
Support the HiveBuzz project. Vote for our proposal!