By: Anne

Anne — Fri, 09 May 2008 21:06:58 +0000

Christopher,
you raise an interesting issue concerning “a shifting geopolitics where traditional assumptions about the global hegemonic position of Western states can no longer be taken for granted.” You assume that the Olypmics in China hail (or acknowledge) the end of Western hegemony – I see your point when you argue from an economic view. China’s economy is influential enough by now for China to move things on the global stage, yes. On the other hand, I would argue that it depends on the intentions behind the decision of giving the Olympics to Beijing. I can just as well imagine a hegemon (or rather a group of powerful states, which is not exactly the same) that is forcing a potential threat to either get on board or drop out of the competition. As the protests show, China is under immense pressure regarding (not only) its politics in Tibet. So far, it seems that the Olympics have brought mostly trouble for the Chinese. Both government and people are constantly shamed by the Western media. The ideological and real-political differences between China and the West are paraded in front of the rich West. The shortcomings of the former are highlighted and even ridiculed, thus cementing the “superiority” of Western values on several global stages. An alternative interpretation to yours may be that the Olympics are a real good way to renew or reinforce the West’s dominance – after all, don’t we see and read all day how brutal those Chinese are? The growing political and public pressure might push China into a corner where it may have to tread much more lightly instead of proudly being the up-and-coming superpower.
Moreover, the concept of the Olympics is a Western one. Because the event is so prestigious, even non-Western countries want to be part – opening their doors wide to the hegemon to come and make a possibly lasting impression.
Now, of course I don’t know which interpretation is the right one. Probably, it’s a little of both, and a lot else. Still, I would caution against seeing the Beijing Olympics as a great promise for a new and more just global order – or even only as a friendly gesture of the West in the eastward direction.

By: charlotte nunn

charlotte nunn — Wed, 07 May 2008 12:53:25 +0000

Superb reasoning! Plus, it strikes me that the Beijing Olympics is the exact global catalyst that the world needs right now, despite the world’s NOT being able to see this right now – esp. in the West!

Comments on: For the French (if not the Parisians) Two Million Chinese Customers Carry the Olympic Torch

By: Anne

By: charlotte nunn