BoltWatch

Dedicated to those who can tell the difference between A. Bolt and a nut.

Where Andrew Bolt's Deranged Polemic ... Gets What's Coming To It

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

26/3: "Don't boycott China's shame"
Andrew Bolt is not always an apologist for authoritarianism. If it's authoritarianism he can lay at the feet of people he thinks are representative of "the left", he's happy to sink in the boot. Which is good, because that's where we can finally agree on something.

His column today, arguing that the Olympic Games are a fine opportunity to make Beijing choke a bit on the contempt the rest of the world has (or should have) for its outrageous human rights abuses, is fairly reasonable.

Yes, he can't resist trying to have a go at lefties:
Our own protesters like to scream abuse at the West, but at least Western countries and institutions insist that when they give money to foreign nations it’s in exchange for promises to be less corrupt and more democratic.

(I think he's saying here that protesters shouldn't criticise the West because its institutions are at least not as bad as China's. Otherwise I can't for the life of me see the relevance of that remark.)

And he notices the new Prime Minister's (the new MANDARIN SPEAKING PRIME MINISTER WTF OMG) kowtowing to Beijing, in a way he never noticed John Howard's:
Our own Mandarin-speaking Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, for instance, can furiously vow to do “everything within our power” to stop Japan’s “slaughter” of whales, but dares only murmur that China should “exercise restraint” in slaughtering Tibetans.

(Strangely enough, Bolt never applauded the Greens for being the only Australian political party willing to stand up to the Chinese leader when he spoke here in 2004.)

But at least he didn't try to argue that we should leave politics alone and come together to celebrate what the Olympic Games are really about - world-class advertising contracts athletes. His article seems to suggest that, no matter what the IOC says or demands of participants in the Games, they (and we) should stick to our guns. The Chinese are certainly going to stick to theirs - which are, of course, not metaphorical guns.

And so what if he tried to turn this into a bit of a bash-the-left exercise? He's got a particular audience, they expect him to at least play some of his favourite hits when they go to his show. So what if he doesn't apply these standards to less convenient targets and in fact goes to some lengths to use this article to apologise for them? I don't expect him to suddenly oppose Western-friendly governments passing draconian legislation - not when he has the handy "at least they're not as bad as China/Mugabe/Saddam" comeback.

The fact is that on this issue, it doesn't matter - we can unite in being appalled at the autocrats in Beijing and wanting to do something about it. China is a brutal, dissent-crushing dictatorship, and it deserves all the condemnation and unfavourable exposure we can give it. Those who oppose authoritarianism in all its forms; and those who oppose it only when it's from a "communist" regime. Together.

Labels: ,


- posted by Jeremy @ 1:23 PM |


<< Home

Portions of any work of Andrew Bolt are taken from his webpage at http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/, are copyright Andrew Bolt, and are reproduced on the basis of the "fair dealing for purpose of criticism or review" section 41 of the Copyright Act 1968. Other material is copyright by its various authors, which sort of goes without saying really.