More on Beijing 2008

Last month I commented on a Slate.com story about boycotting the Beijing 08 Olympic Games. This week I was directed to an editorial in April's Economist highlighting the spectacular failure of the IOC's "quiet diplomacy":

A DEVELOPING country gets the Olympic games as an acknowledgment of its new, exalted status. An authoritarian government, awash with money, exploits the chance to project a peaceful, progressive image. Critics of the regime use the games as a chance to demand more democracy and human rights. There are demonstrations, forcefully broken up.

This is the story, more or less, of the Beijing Olympics 2008—so far. But it also describes the run-up to the Mexico City Olympic games of 40 years ago. Then, the protests ended in a massacre, an awful sign of how far governments can go to protect a cherished sporting show.

In "honor" of the start of the 08 games I'm wearing this shirt by Thread Pit on Friday:

Boycott Beijing 2008?

Anne Applebaum at Slate.com has the right idea, why not boycott the 2008 Olympics?

Unfortunately, the American people have, as a whole, lost the stomach for prosecuting righteousness if it means getting our own hands dirty. Or, more to the point, not getting that Coke at McDonalds for lunch, paying for it with your Visa, driving there in your V-Dub, taking pictures of the kids' soccer game with your Kodak, letting them wear Addidas, or making dinner with your GE appliances. Or doing without a whole host of integral products and services. We wouldn't want of offend anyone now, would we? Yes, we really are that lazy.