I found it mildly uncomfortable that Oliver admitted he'll still be watching the World Cup. How can you enjoy watching something like this, let alone miss an opportunity to push for a boycott?...
I found it mildly uncomfortable that Oliver admitted he'll still be watching the World Cup. How can you enjoy watching something like this, let alone miss an opportunity to push for a boycott? Aren't you just becoming part of the problem? Wouldn't your outrage be more powerful if you're also mourning the event which your morals prevented you from watching?
I don't understand how it can possibly be enjoyable either. Might be a bit of a reach, this comparison, but I feel about the WC as I feel about Kevin Spacey movies or Louis C. K. shows. I can't...
I don't understand how it can possibly be enjoyable either.
Might be a bit of a reach, this comparison, but I feel about the WC as I feel about Kevin Spacey movies or Louis C. K. shows. I can't not think about the crimes committed by them whilst watching. Obviously, that fact alone makes it impossible to enjoy watching it.
I can't help but think that people who can enjoy watching these things despite the crimes committed by these persons really need to adjust their moral compasses. And yes, I am very much aware that I should probably get off my high horse about it
I think that's a matter of humanity, or the limits of what we can do as individuals, or where pragmatism meets doing something for the principle of things and nothing more. I know that's...
I think that's a matter of humanity, or the limits of what we can do as individuals, or where pragmatism meets doing something for the principle of things and nothing more.
I know that's convoluted. I'll try to explain:
It's easy to dismiss something as whataboutism and nothing more. A race to the bottom doesn't do anyone any good.
However, highlighting our own two-facedness is perfectly all right. Why should we boycott the world cup when we accept child labor, slave labor and unnecessary deaths in the production of all sorts of daily goods? We buy clothes, shoes, gadgets and all sorts of things where people have suffered way more than anything related to the Qatar world cup.
Often to pinch pennies because we're greedy.
There's a solid, legitimate criticism that we're holding this world cup to different standards than things in our daily lives. That's where we support and propagate huge human rights abuses.
If it's a matter of principle, why do we only care about principles for something that happens every four years, not every day in our daily lives?
Many people who say they'll boycott the world cup in my circle won't miss much because they don't even care much about the world cup. The sacrifice made here to make a point is very low for very many. That reeks of hypocrisy and meaningless protest.
The world cup will be on at work for me. If put on headphones to avoid hearing something, choose to go to a meeting room to not see images or whatever, no-one will know,
My viewership won't matter one iota. A personal boycott won't accomplish anything on my behalf.
Just like no-one in the grand scheme of things will notice whether or not I buy products made in occupied territories and stamped "made in Israel".
Yes individual consumer choices matter, but how effective is a boycott, any boycott?
Further, many people, and Oliver surely included, will manage to be entertained perfectly well by the actual football. Suspension of all the negative aspects surrounding the ball will disappear when the players play.
That's why sports-washing is so effective. When you get a championship you're essentially buying strong emotional reactions from people in a setting where they'll ignore much of the surrounding negatives.
The stakes of something that happens once every four years, where a moment could be the greatest in a person's life, or a sports moment talked about for decades or generations. You can be a part of that.
If you're not a part of that moment, the social cost in your country or circle can be huge to boot. The amount of things pulling against boycott are huge. Many are able to ignore things like pigs being extremely social and intelligent animals solely because bacon tastes a little better than something else I could be eating right now. The world championships go way beyond that.
Living ethical lives has huge costs of will-power and otherwise, sacrifice and demands of attention. Many have more than enough with their lives without that extra layer. In many countries, these will be argued as luxury problems that only rich folk in the first world can worry about.
Some may say Oliver should've been quiet and not said anything about a personal boycott or not due to his audience or reach or similar. A lie of omission is still a lie.
We need to be honest about the magnitude and shape of boycott if we are to be reasonable in why or why not they have an impact.
If we in the West make this out to be bigger and more important than other social issues with strong reasons for calls to action, we'll rightly be made out to be racist, opportunist and otherwise dishonest in relation to other countries.
If one does things for the sake of principle, one has to be principled. Most of us are not. The others who are need to be extremely consistent to avoid being seen simply as folk willing to throw the first stone irrespective of sin.
The pressure from the world to change things for the better, to change FIFA, to change Qatar, to do better on human rights and in championships has been immense.
Once the deal was done to go to Qatar in the winter (!) of 2022, what realism has there been in extracting change? Many have given things a fair shot, a good run. How much worse would things have been without that?
Surely these things will impact further championships, other sports, how companies position themselves as advertisers and many other positive things.
Some battles are lost. We should spend time and energy on ones that aren't, where change can be achieved. Going by what Qatar and FIFA are saying at the outset of the championship, there is no recipient willing to make changes on the other side of the table.
Knowing that, why do things for show that are just for show?
The Iranian men's team protest by not singing their national anthem today was a strong, meaningful protest that gains its power from the stage upon where it was made.
That opportunity, taken, in the face of the football-crazy Iranian people on the world stage was only possible and potent because people were watching the match against England today. This was one of their only chances of making a protest that reaches hundreds of millions and becomes real world news. But it also reaches a local audience and may help usurp a terrible regime.
That would happen with a world cup in any other place than Qatar too, but now we're stuck with a world cup in Qatar. How do we make the best of the bad situation?
These matters are not easy. People aren't rational. I think showing at least a tiny part of that complexity is important for Oliver and everyone else to do.
I would argue it's the other way around; periodic, visible events like this are opportune times to gather support and make a statement. There is a constant background radiation of child labor,...
why do we only care about principles for something that happens every four years
I would argue it's the other way around; periodic, visible events like this are opportune times to gather support and make a statement. There is a constant background radiation of child labor, slave labor, and unnecessary deaths in the world, but we are collectively bad at taking action on slow, creeping trends. As you stated, the chance of making a protest that reaches hundred of millions is an incredible opportunity.
Yes, for those that care nothing for the World Cup, a boycott is meaningless. But less so for fans, where a circle of friends would take notice that one or two are intentionally out of the loop; doubly so for Oliver because of the platform he wields. What if major teams refuse to play? What if major advertisers pulled out due to mass protest and bad PR? What if an alternative organization to FIFA started trying to woo teams away? I find it disappointing that many with a voice considered the battle lost before even starting.
I found it mildly uncomfortable that Oliver admitted he'll still be watching the World Cup. How can you enjoy watching something like this, let alone miss an opportunity to push for a boycott? Aren't you just becoming part of the problem? Wouldn't your outrage be more powerful if you're also mourning the event which your morals prevented you from watching?
I don't understand how it can possibly be enjoyable either.
Might be a bit of a reach, this comparison, but I feel about the WC as I feel about Kevin Spacey movies or Louis C. K. shows. I can't not think about the crimes committed by them whilst watching. Obviously, that fact alone makes it impossible to enjoy watching it.
I can't help but think that people who can enjoy watching these things despite the crimes committed by these persons really need to adjust their moral compasses. And yes, I am very much aware that I should probably get off my high horse about it
I think that's a matter of humanity, or the limits of what we can do as individuals, or where pragmatism meets doing something for the principle of things and nothing more.
I know that's convoluted. I'll try to explain:
It's easy to dismiss something as whataboutism and nothing more. A race to the bottom doesn't do anyone any good.
However, highlighting our own two-facedness is perfectly all right. Why should we boycott the world cup when we accept child labor, slave labor and unnecessary deaths in the production of all sorts of daily goods? We buy clothes, shoes, gadgets and all sorts of things where people have suffered way more than anything related to the Qatar world cup.
Often to pinch pennies because we're greedy.
There's a solid, legitimate criticism that we're holding this world cup to different standards than things in our daily lives. That's where we support and propagate huge human rights abuses.
If it's a matter of principle, why do we only care about principles for something that happens every four years, not every day in our daily lives?
Many people who say they'll boycott the world cup in my circle won't miss much because they don't even care much about the world cup. The sacrifice made here to make a point is very low for very many. That reeks of hypocrisy and meaningless protest.
The world cup will be on at work for me. If put on headphones to avoid hearing something, choose to go to a meeting room to not see images or whatever, no-one will know,
My viewership won't matter one iota. A personal boycott won't accomplish anything on my behalf.
Just like no-one in the grand scheme of things will notice whether or not I buy products made in occupied territories and stamped "made in Israel".
Yes individual consumer choices matter, but how effective is a boycott, any boycott?
Further, many people, and Oliver surely included, will manage to be entertained perfectly well by the actual football. Suspension of all the negative aspects surrounding the ball will disappear when the players play.
That's why sports-washing is so effective. When you get a championship you're essentially buying strong emotional reactions from people in a setting where they'll ignore much of the surrounding negatives.
The stakes of something that happens once every four years, where a moment could be the greatest in a person's life, or a sports moment talked about for decades or generations. You can be a part of that.
If you're not a part of that moment, the social cost in your country or circle can be huge to boot. The amount of things pulling against boycott are huge. Many are able to ignore things like pigs being extremely social and intelligent animals solely because bacon tastes a little better than something else I could be eating right now. The world championships go way beyond that.
Living ethical lives has huge costs of will-power and otherwise, sacrifice and demands of attention. Many have more than enough with their lives without that extra layer. In many countries, these will be argued as luxury problems that only rich folk in the first world can worry about.
Some may say Oliver should've been quiet and not said anything about a personal boycott or not due to his audience or reach or similar. A lie of omission is still a lie.
We need to be honest about the magnitude and shape of boycott if we are to be reasonable in why or why not they have an impact.
If we in the West make this out to be bigger and more important than other social issues with strong reasons for calls to action, we'll rightly be made out to be racist, opportunist and otherwise dishonest in relation to other countries.
If one does things for the sake of principle, one has to be principled. Most of us are not. The others who are need to be extremely consistent to avoid being seen simply as folk willing to throw the first stone irrespective of sin.
The pressure from the world to change things for the better, to change FIFA, to change Qatar, to do better on human rights and in championships has been immense.
Once the deal was done to go to Qatar in the winter (!) of 2022, what realism has there been in extracting change? Many have given things a fair shot, a good run. How much worse would things have been without that?
Surely these things will impact further championships, other sports, how companies position themselves as advertisers and many other positive things.
Some battles are lost. We should spend time and energy on ones that aren't, where change can be achieved. Going by what Qatar and FIFA are saying at the outset of the championship, there is no recipient willing to make changes on the other side of the table.
Knowing that, why do things for show that are just for show?
The Iranian men's team protest by not singing their national anthem today was a strong, meaningful protest that gains its power from the stage upon where it was made.
That opportunity, taken, in the face of the football-crazy Iranian people on the world stage was only possible and potent because people were watching the match against England today. This was one of their only chances of making a protest that reaches hundreds of millions and becomes real world news. But it also reaches a local audience and may help usurp a terrible regime.
That would happen with a world cup in any other place than Qatar too, but now we're stuck with a world cup in Qatar. How do we make the best of the bad situation?
These matters are not easy. People aren't rational. I think showing at least a tiny part of that complexity is important for Oliver and everyone else to do.
I would argue it's the other way around; periodic, visible events like this are opportune times to gather support and make a statement. There is a constant background radiation of child labor, slave labor, and unnecessary deaths in the world, but we are collectively bad at taking action on slow, creeping trends. As you stated, the chance of making a protest that reaches hundred of millions is an incredible opportunity.
Yes, for those that care nothing for the World Cup, a boycott is meaningless. But less so for fans, where a circle of friends would take notice that one or two are intentionally out of the loop; doubly so for Oliver because of the platform he wields. What if major teams refuse to play? What if major advertisers pulled out due to mass protest and bad PR? What if an alternative organization to FIFA started trying to woo teams away? I find it disappointing that many with a voice considered the battle lost before even starting.