Some people have a problem with celebrities airing there political views. I haven’t. Really. It’s good to see public debate of important issues, and encouraging to think that some of our camera friendly superiors have more than champagne and charlie floating through their minds.
It’s a shame though, that some aren’t as dedicated to their values as they’d like to appear. The BBC announced this week (BBC Sport, 28/05/08) that the face of their Olympic coverage would be provided by Damon Albarn and Jamie Hewletts ‘Monkey’, star of ancient chinese legend and also of their most recent project.
It seems a little odd that given Albarns commitment to anti-war and humanitarian causes, as well as his past support of the Free Tibet movement, he’d choose to associate himself with the Bejing Olympics. Hypocritical even. Equally surprising is the manner in which the BBC has been turned into an advertising vehicle for Albarns musical (Royal Opera House, July 23rd-26th, Tickets £10 – £75).
Tags: bbc, Damon Albarn, Free Tibet, Jamie Hewlett, Media, Monkey, Olympics, Politics
June 3, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Nice website Mr Matt, although I do not agree entirely with your (and many others) view on the 2008 Olympics.
Many Free Tibet protesters are not happy that China is hosting this years Olympics but I think that China’s politics and the Olympic games are mutually exclusive. I don’t see why it isn’t possible to support the games and the Free Tibet movement. Moreover, I don’t see how boycotting the games would lead to a change in policies in China. Would a boycott of the 1936 Olympics have resulted in WWII or the holocaust no happening??
June 4, 2008 at 9:00 pm
Cheers Craig, thanks for havin a look!
Anyhow, I dont think, particularly with the Olympics, you can divorce the politics from the sport. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) was established as a means of promoting peace and international co-operation through sport. The IOC charter contains a number of clauses which jarr with China’s status as host for 2008.
It states that:
“Olympism seeks to create…respect for universal fundamental ethical principles,” (IOC charter, p.11).
“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,” (IOC charter, p.11).
In this sense, the Olympic movement apears to be inextricably linked with harmonious international relations and therefore politics. Furthermore, the charter also raises the issue of Human rights itself:
“The practice of sport is a human right.” (IOC charter, p.11).
It seems odd that the IOC will celebrate Human rights in sport but ignore abuses in host countries.
Boycotting the games won’t alter China’s policy, but i don’t think the protests are designed or intended to bring about such rapid change. China’s hosting of the games has provided the Free Tibet movement with an excellent stage on which to voice their protest but change takes time.
It’d be wrong to say for instance that the boycotting of South African sport bought about the end of apartheid, but in a small way it did help to bring about change. Similarly, you can’t say that Rosa Parks bought victory for the American Civil Rights movement though her actions made an obvious contribution.
However, repeatedly raising the issues, particularly during periods of intense media scrutiny, may well eventually influence international opinion and hopefully bring about change.
(btw, I still have your Gorillaz cd. That’s seven years and counting now!)
June 5, 2008 at 9:26 am
I am forever a cynic and therefore don’t think that protesting will yield results, but maybe you are right, and that it isn’t about causing an immediate change but helping to change peoples attitudes.
That said, I think it is a bit harsh to call Allbran a hypocrite.
Its been seven years but I still remember that my favourite track was M1A1. One day I’ll hear it again, maybe….
June 5, 2008 at 7:52 pm
i’ll make it up to a round ten i think, then you can have it back.