China

Beijing Logo spoof by Beau Bo D'Or

Image © Beau Bo D'Or

Even if, like me, you have studiously avoided watching any of the Olympic coverage, you will probably have seen the odd medals table on a news program or something. They all show the glorious People's Republic beating the evil Empire and its Poodle into second and third place respectively. But hang on, the host nation is the largest nation on earth by population and, whether or not there has been any cheating, such as using babies in the gymnastics or whatever, the simple fact is that their human resources are vast. So, as a completely meaningless bit of fun, I have compared the medals table (at least those nations who have won golds) with their respective populations.

Looking at it this way, we find Jamaica in first place with tiny Bahrain in second. Georgia beats Russia by a mile. Team GB are down in 15th place, but that is well ahead of Russia (25), the United States (29) and the Glorious People's Fatherland is way down at 45th out of 53 countries who won any gold medals at all.

Eat your pants, China! If they had won just one gold, Taiwan would have beaten you by a country mile!

Here's the full list:

Country Rank (Golds) Rank (all medals)
Jamaica 1 1
Bahrain 2 14
Estonia 3 10
New Zealand 4 4
Georgia 5 13
Australia 6 6
Slovakia 7 16
Slovenia 8 3
Latvia 9 18
Netherlands 10 17
Belarus 11 7
Mongolia 12 23
Denmark 13 15
Panama 14 44
Great Britain 15 24
Czech Republic 16 29
Switzerland 17 26
Korea 18 28
Norway 19 12
Finland 20 30
Romania 21 40
Cuba 22 8
Germany 23 36
Bulgaria 24 27
Russian Fed. 25 38
Azerbaijan 26 20
Italy 27 37
Ukraine 28 34
United States 29 42
Hungary 30 21
Tunisia 31 63
Portugal 32 56
Canada 33 33
Spain 34 48
DPR Korea 35 49
Poland 36 53
France 37 32
Zimbabwe 38 43
Japan 39 55
Kazakhstan 40 25
Cameroon 41 71
Kenya 42 52
Ethiopia 43 68
Uzbekistan 44 50
China 45 66
Argentina 46 62
Thailand 47 77
Iran 48 78
Turkey 49 60
Brazil 50 67
Mexico 51 81
Indonesia 52 79
India 53 85

Now, after all the spin, I wonder how many of the Chinese gold medalists are going to have bits amputated by the Glorious Central Committee of the People's Games so that they might also win in the Paralympics?

All this brouhaha about the Olympics, torches, boycotts and so on has not passed me by. I hear all sorts of stuff from the "athletes' side" about how the Olympics is not political, about how people have trained all their lives to get to this supreme test of their skills and abilities against others from every nation on earth. I have some sympathy with that. I was once quite a competitive fencer. I used to love the competitions (second in the West Midlands under 16s foil if you're interested and can believe it!) and I can only imagine the excitement and satisfaction of having made it to the very top on the planet in your discipline.

But saying that the Olympics is not political seems to me nowadays like saying it's non-commercial and strictly amateur - at least the latter has been the case within my life time. But, as we all saw on 7th July 2005 (when there wasn't other news on that day), the choice of venue is intensely political, certainly in the sense that politicians are deeply involved in it. It can (and has already in the case of London) make people fortunes, that others pay for.

I admit to having had misgivings when Beijing was awarded the games - I don't like the fact that Formula One has a race there, though in a sense that's less of an issue because F1 is an unashamedly commercial, big money, oligarchic event that pays but lip service to the troubles of "little people" and with no loftier ideals such as the Olympic movement professes. But I, along with many others it seems, did hope that having such a high profile international event, together with their growing commercial and economic presence in the world, would focus minds in China on reform. Until I think it was last year sometime that someone high up in the Chinese government said something to the effect that China would never be a liberal democracy ("over my dead body" by implication). I accept that moving such a huge population to full democracy would take time, but this was a "never, never, never" type of statement.

Ever since I have thought that "we" should somehow object to the whole shebang and the credence it gives to the veneer of acceptability. I know that in 1980 the Moscow regime was pretty similar to Beijing's and that the boycott then was a specific protest about the invasion of Afghanistan (oh how we can now ruefully laugh about that!) and it did no good whatever so far as I can remember - though even then, China joined the boycott. So as an organized thing, I'm not sure a "national" boycott will do any good this time either. However, as in 1980, there are other symbolic objections we in the democratic world can make. Athletes could attend and take part under the flag of the Olympic movement rather than their national flags and anthems for example.

But it is pure fantasy to say that the Olympics are non-political - they never have been in reality, even long before they became a festival for junk food vendors and sweat shop employers to tout their tawdry wares and part of a professional athlete's career progression. The Soviet Union - and other countries within their sphere of influence - didn't take part from 1928 till 1952. African nations withdrew in protest at South Africa and Rhodesia being allowed to take part in the seventies. If it really were apolitical, why does the torch even go anywhere near Downing Street - surely if it's all above politics it should be a royal occasion.

Personally, if any athlete choses voluntarily, having gained a place in the team, not to attend, putting lives in Darfur, Tibet or, so far little mentioned despite last year's riots and crackdown, Burma before their personal attainment, they'll have my full support and they ought not to be punished or denigrated for making that sacrifice.

For a while now I've been displaying that red banner in the top right hand corner of this site showing that my blog is not available to readers in China, as if they would ever want to read it!

So I am intrigued to find the following entry in my logs today:

58.251.18.36 (whois, map)
reverse.gdsz.cncnet.net
China Flag China
Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)
Win XP
MSIE 6
Referrer: Google: housing price and money supply
Path
1 2007-11-26 08:48:41 0 seconds /money_supply_house_prices_stocks_exchange_assets_prices

So, hello China! Shall I remove the "not available" banner now?

Spotted this on Guardian Unlimited today: Mac adverts on behalf of exploited Chinese workers

You know those artsy Mac adverts where a couple of people explain why they have a Mac against a white background - well a group has done one highlighting the plight of workers in the electronics manufacturing industry in the far east mostly. As you watch it, of course, bear in mind that since Macs basically use the same bits inside as any other PC they're not particularly worse than anyone else - just that the slightly "holier than thou" (I'm a Mac user - I can say that) advert style is easy to spoof.

But it puts me in mind of another one of my unrealised "inventions" - the "Fair Trade PC". We get Fair Trade clothes, footwear, foods. We can try to buy locally produced goods. But with computers and most other consumer electronics we're more or less stuck with what we're given. Why not a "Fair Trade" PC? People pay a premium for Jonathan Ive's beautiful designs, why not for better conditions for the workers?

Syndicate content