A bouquet for Keith Locke and the Greens

I love sports.

I love the Olympic Games.

A surprising but absolutely useless talent   I possess is that I can recite the City of each games for every  modern Olympic year.  Did you know the 1904 games were held in St Louis, Missouri? If you didn't you do now.  Look how easy it is for a humble blogger to enrich your life.

And  every Olympics within my living memory have been marred by scandal and my peculiar talent also tells me that this was so for many of the games that predate those that I can personally remember. Its Human Nature on display I guess.

Anyway its an Olympic year and you don't need me to tell you that this year they are in Beijing, China.

Nor are any of you unaware that China is not a leading light in the matter of human rights.

Fundamental Principles of Olympism

1. Olympism is a philosophy of life, exalting and combining in a balanced whole the qualities of body, will and mind. Blending sport with culture and education, Olympism seeks to create a way of life based on the joy of effort, the educational value of good example and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles.

2. The goal of Olympism is to place sport at the service of the harmonious development of man, with a view to promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity.

3. The Olympic Movement is the concerted, organised, universal and permanent action, carried out under the supreme authority of the IOC, of all individuals and entities who are inspired by the values of Olympism. It covers the five continents. It reaches its peak with the bringing together of the world’s athletes at the great sports festival, the Olympic Games. Its symbol is five interlaced rings.

4. The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practising sport, without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play. The organisation, administration and management of sport must be controlled by independent sports organisations.

5. Any form of discrimination with regard to a country or a person on grounds of race, religion, politics, gender or otherwise is incompatible with belonging to the Olympic Movement.

6. Belonging to the Olympic Movement requires compliance with the Olympic Charter and recognition by the IOC.

Anyway the New Zealand IOC has inserted a clause in the Athletes contract that requires them

"to not make statements, demonstrate (whether verbally, or by any act or omission) regarding political, religious or racial matters".

Minister of Sport, Clayton Cosgrove, agrees this is appropriate in the usual weasel words of Government double talk.

Sports Minister Clayton Cosgrove told The Press the clause was there for the athletes' protection.

"We all support freedom of speech. But this is entirely a matter for the New Zealand Olympic Committee, which is an independent body.

"It is designed to ensure that athletes are not treated as political pawns so they can concentrate on their sport."

I wonder where he stood during the 1981 Springbok tour, I know where many of his colleagues did including his boss, our Prime Minister. And I wonder what the 1981 versions of these people would think of this clause, would they speak out, protest it, maybe even take to the streets, as they did then? ⁽¹⁾

And we all know what it is they don't want the athletes to talk about but to hide this fact they have shut down other forms of expression as well most of them totally harmless.

Thus if I were about to begin my heat in the 100 meters in Beijing I would not  be permitted under this clause to make the sign  of the cross, a natural act for me and for many athletes of religious conviction. Not that I ever reached the exalted heights of  being an Olympian, in fact  I was an extremely poor sprinter, I enjoyed athletics though and that is the main thing.

From time to time I  agree with the Green Party  and this is one of those times

The Green Party wrote yesterday to the NZOC asking it to amend contracts, guaranteeing the right to speak freely while in China.

"I am asking our Olympic Committee to take out the offending clause," said Green MP Keith Locke.

"Not to do so would put us at odds with other Western countries ... that are allowing their athletes freedom of speech."

And when I think about it, although I am usually at odds with the Greens over their policies and on their basic philosophies they have a virtue that I do admire - they stick up for what they believe in and tend to be utterly consistent in upholding the values they adhere to. Regardless of the political consequences of doing so.

Its a pity we don't more politicians that exhibit this level of integrity.

___________________________________________________________________________

(1) When Clayton Cosgrove made his statement he is not speaking as an individual but speaking for the Government. Which is why it is reasonable to bring other members of the Government into this discussion.

Comments

[Acid Comments]

While they're in China.

I wonder if any of the NZ team will be game (pardon the pun) to try aborted baby fetus soup and similar Chinese dishes made from aborted babies for around $40?

This is the country we want a free trade agreement with.

IMO: Not just this issue, but many other appalling practices and human rights injustices. China should never have been the host for the 2008 Olympics.

I wonder how many $$$ they bribed some of the IOC reps for the hosting rights?

[belt]

not me. way too pricey.

[andrei]

The corruption of the IOC would be a post in itself.

In fact there could be a whole book written on the subject.

[peter]

Goodness me Andrei, I am speechless over this one!

ANY Board, Organisation or Team must have official spokespeople. And the spokesperson must speak on behalf of those he/she represents - not pump their personal spin. Surely you must understand the reason for that!

If any athlete is uneasy about the politics of China, the correct option is to stay at home.

The 1981 tour is a good example of what should happen - the players kept their heads down and the objectors mad themselves unavailable.

If bombs start going off (like when NZ Cricket was in Sri Lanka one time) then the decision is to stay or go. We can't expect those who remain to be scrapping internally over political differences.

Have I been too successful at promoting a liberal message Andrei?

I can see where Keith Locke is coming from but he overlooks the real world issues here. Every sportsman who qualifies and does all preparations to go to the Olympic Games must be given the chance to perform - without political distractions from their teammates.

Also it is New Zealand that is on display here - hopefully a coherent and proud display that we can all be proud of. It is not the role of Olympic teams to divide their own nations!!

[David White]

If you have a bouquet for Keith Locke on this issue, then what do you have to say to him and the Greens on their stance on the Electoral Finance Act?

It is totally hypocritical for them to protest about freedom of speech for olympians in a foreign country, and vote against freedom of speech at home.

[andrei]

Peter,
Also it is New Zealand that is on display here - hopefully a coherent and proud display that we can all be proud of. It is not the role of Olympic teams to divide their own nations!!

I think you will find Peter that New Zealand is not particularly divided over their opinion on the state of Human Rights in China. Everybody I know, left or right seems to be in accord over this.

David;

I stated in my post that there is very little that I agree with the greens over.
That doesn't mean that when they take a position I agree with them on I shouldn't say so. In fact it is worthwhile to do so because they do have a role in our civic life and taking a rigid partisan stand is an unhelpful thing to do when our common goal is to build a better society for ourselves and our children.

What we disagree on is the best way to go about it and sometimes what are the important features of a civil society and what are not.

Just because Keith Locke is wrong on the EFB doesn't mean he is wrong in this case.

[Andrew Davies]

Andrei
I don't think David said you were wrong to agree with Locke on this one. Like myself, I suspect he disagrees with your statement
"And when I think about it, although I am usually at odds with the Greens over their policies and on their basic philosophies they have a virtue that I do admire - they stick up for what they believe in and tend to be utterly consistent in upholding the values they adhere to. Regardless of the political consequences of doing so."

What people say is one thing, what they actually do is another. Keith Locke is the worst kind of hypocrite and I thought Andrei you would have seen that.

[Andrew Davies]

And BTW, that is not saying locke is wrong in this case.

[Andrew Davies]

And I tend to agree with Peter. If you don't like what they do there then do not go. Taxpayers contribute to and support athletes to compete, not to grandstand.

[peter]

Andrei

What you seem to be saying is that NZ should boycott the Olympic Games in China!

Or, alternatively, make it like Moscow - boycotted at a high level, but over to individual athletes if they want to attend.

All of which makes no sense at all, because China is a significant trading partner not only with NZ but with everybody else. Do we know if other countries are boycotting Beijing.

I think I HAVE heard of individual athletes that are refusing to go there. There was on NZer mentioned the other day but cant remember who it was.

Andrei - the EFB is a red herring and I agree with you here. There is nothing wrong with looking at things on an issue by issue basis.

[Acid Comments]

"Or, alternatively, make it like Moscow - boycotted at a high level, but over to individual athletes if they want to attend."

Well the 2008 Olympic Games shouldn't have been awarded to China in the firstplace.

The're some calls for a boycott.

Here's just a few websites.

Boycott 2008 Communist Olympics Blog:

http://boycott2008games.blogspot.com/

Boycott China Olympics 2008:

http://www.boycott-china-2008.info/index.html

Reporters without Borders:

http://www.rsf.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=174

[andrei]

To expand on points raised in this thread.

Is Keith Locke a hypocrite?
Probably but aren't we all to some extent. Does any particular piece of hypocrisy on his part stand out to me? Not really except for the hypocrisy that I see as implicit in the left - that is thay pretend to care about the poor but many of their policies hurt the poor far more than the rich. Example: the new emission standards on imported cars will raise the price of the newly imported cars and this will flow onto raise the prices of the existing cars in NZ fleets thus making it harder for the poor to own a car and if they do it will be a car in poorer condition than otherwise.

Boycotting the Games
I'd be appalled if the Government mandated a boycott, disappointed if the NZ Olympic committee made this decision.

If an individual sportsman who had qualified and been selected decided not to go to make his feelings known I'd cheer that man (or woman).

In 1968 Tommie Smith (Gold Medal winner) and John Carlos (Bronze medal winner) in the 200 metres gave the black power salute on the winners podium in Mexico city. The silver medalist in that event, Australian Peter Norman gave his tacit support to this by wearing an Olympic project human rights badge.

Outrage ensued the two Americans were sent home in disgrace. This is before my time and I am not sure how I feel about their cause. However they did stand up and pay the price. Although today they have acquired a more heroic status.

And so that should be if protest means anything.

More recently Andy Flower and Henry Olonga donned black armbands during a world cup cricket match in Harare. If you don't know why just think Robert Mugabe and it will get you there.

It ended their international cricket careers. Again a high price paid for principle, particularly in the case of Henry Olonga.

This I admire and I suppose that it is the authorities stepping in, both the NZ Olympic committee and government to prevent an athlete acting on a matter of conscience that has got up my nose.

And also disturbing to me is the dishonesty implicit in the clause which precludes any action that someone may take objection too, innocuous though it may be.

[peter]

Andrei

Do be clear about Andy Flowers and Henry Olonga. They were protesting against their OWN government!

Similarly, the actions of Tommie Smith and John Carlow were relevant to the Black Civil Rights movement in the USA.

What you and Keith Locke are advocating is that an athlete under the New Zealand flag, engaged to play sport for his/her country, should subvert their mission to carry out political activity against the Chinese government!

What if it were a member of a Rowing crew?

We have diplomatic channels to express our country's displeasure and we should do that.

And at a personal level Andrei, you and Keith are welcome to boycott goods main in China. If you can!!

Ha Ha Ha !!!

[usabikes]

Do they honestly not see the kind of evil regime they are forbidding their people to criticise? Hard to know which is worse, China's sins or those who will not allow legitimate criticism of them.

The wording of the clause is very similar to that of the British Olympic team. They have a line in their contracts they must agree to or otherwise they won't be allowed to go. Its raising quite a fuss over there given both the state of China's human rights record and the already strong propensity for PC behaviour in Britain.

Interestingly the USA and even Canada(!) have deliberately not included such a clause as they view the rights of the individual competitor to be of greater worth than avoiding any public "unpleasantness". Good for them.

Having been to China just after Tianemen Square I am fully aware of how there is the "official" truth which the govt spouts and the real truth that every man & his dog knows as being the reality. To acquiese to such a clause is to play the silly game of our politicians who look to all intents and purposes similarly to be trying to create two sets of "truths" here and in Britain.

Perhaps the competitors should organise a strike unless this clause is removed?

[Sam Finnemore]

Acid Comments:

http://www.snopes.com/horrors/cannibal/fetus.asp

It's amazing how many people seem to believe this story. Google reveals it to be a particularly common meme amongst those opposed to abortion. But that aside, the taboo against cannibalism is just as strong in China as here. What's your source for the $40 a serving claim?

If you're serious about opposing human rights abuses in China - and there are plenty to oppose, I'm not denying that - try and make sure you're not dealing in the ridiculously fictional...

[Acid Comments]

"If you're serious about opposing human rights abuses in China - and there are plenty to oppose, I'm not denying that - try and make sure you're not dealing in the ridiculously fictional..."

Sam,

That link is you posted is faked.

The're indeed restraunts in some parts of China selling meals made from Aborted fetus baby parts.

Even the Chinese Govt knows this. Although it's 'officially illegal'.

They're even promoted as 'healthfoods.'

[Ryan Sproull]

Acid,

Is there any reason to believe the Snopes debunking is faked, besides your word?

Perhaps, I dunno, some evidence of this healthfood aborted foetus baby part meal allegation?

[Acid Comments]

"Is there any reason to believe the Snopes debunking is faked, besides your word?'

You can tell that photo on snopes is faked which they've been doing the debunking on.

[Sam Finnemore]

Congratulations, you've accepted that the most compelling 'evidence' I've seen of this story is fake.

So let me ask again: where is your information coming from? The "I heard they sell them as healthfoods for $40" palaver sounds a lot like the email meme.

If you want a China scandal to get behind, I'd suggest Tibet. Or organ harvesting from prisoners. Or Falun Gong. They're far better documented. But you might object to sharing a cause with all those loopy lefties and non-Christians, I suppose.