Beijing Olympics – Political battleground?

Title of article: Beijing Olympics – Political battleground?
Author: Leta Hong Fincher
Publisher/Date of magazine: NewsVOA
Date the article was written: 24th April 2008
Link to article

Ever since the International Olympics Committee appointed Beijing as the host country for the 2008 Olympics, ongoing political debates have ravaged the country. As the article stated, a wide range of political groups is using the 2008 Beijing Olympics for their own political purposes. The most well-known of these campaigns includes the free-Tibet movements. The Tibetans seeks to use this opportunity to raise awareness of their own situation under China’s control.

In my personal opinion, I think that many of these campaigns are actually irrelevant to the Olympics. One good example would be Team Darfur, seeking to advocate the end of violence in Darfur and China’s ties with Sudan. Boycotting the Beijing Olympics would hardly help to improve the situation in Darfur. What Team Darfur really needs to do is to seek audience with the Chinese government and propose a solution to solve the problem at hand. Instead of mindlessly protesting against the Chinese government, this is a much more efficient way of inducing change on their part.

Another issue of great concern is the fact that many of these activists are in fact anti-Chinese. These people protests not because they are concerned with China’s policies, but because they are dissatisfied with China in general. Of course, not every so-called “activist” is anti-Chinese, but if one was to ask all of them the same question – why exactly the Tibetans are unhappy and want independence, I believe that not many can actually give an accurate answer.

Then again, as Olympics historian David Wallechinsky pointed out, politics has always been involved in the Olympics. Unknown to most, the first time the torch relay was carried out was during the controversial Berlin Olympics in 1936. It was then a propagandistic move by the Nazis to promote the idea of Aryan superiority. Ever since then, politics became a significant part of Olympics. The article also includes several other times when politics were significantly evident in the Olympics.

In conclusion, I think that governments should draw a line between politics and the Olympics. The Olympics games were originally intended for the world to come together to celebrate sportsmanship, not create more hatred between people. The modern concept of linking Olympics with politics is destructive to this notion and boycotts on Olympic Games rarely, if ever, bring about a chance in policy. Activists can find other means to convey their thoughts instead of demonstrating against the Olympics as it is a world event, not just a one man show by the host country.

Title of article: Are we afraid of political diversity?
Author: Wayne
Publisher/Date of magazine: Singapore angle - Perspectives
Date the article was written: 4th February 2007

In this blog entry, I refer to the article posted here. This article was published in February 2007, in response to an announcement made by the PAP government that they have assembled a "new media capabilities group" to "counter" its critics online.

Singapore’s form of political system has always been a heated source of debate over the years. Even though Singapore claims that it is practicing democracy, many people may consider Singapore as only a partial democracy. This is mostly attributable to the fact that there are hardly any opposing political parties in Singapore and therefore the elections are always extremely one-sided, with the PAP taking majority of the seats in parliament. Moreover, freedom of speech in Singapore is acceptable only if they are deemed inoffensive. All of this has led to much criticism by internet users on blogs and forums.

Then again, there has never been a comprehensive definition for any form of government. An example is the communist government in China which has changed so much over the past few decades that it one might argue that it is not communist anymore. Therefore, Singapore being a democratic country is also a relative point of view from the Singapore government.

Getting to the main point of the article, the PAP government assembled a “media capabilities group” to post anonymously on online media so as to “counter” PAP’s critics in cyberspace. This move had been strongly criticized by many well-known bloggers as hypocritical and part of the government’s propaganda efforts. The article, however, presents a different kind of view. The government introducing such groups might be beneficial to the development of our online society.

Firstly, members of this “media capabilities group” can accurately represent the government’s point of view. Hence, when they comment on blogs and forums, we will be able to better understand what the government is thinking. This will also provoke thoughts and provide a mean of constructive debate between the government and the people.

Secondly, as internet users can now interact directly with members of the PAP, getting across our thoughts to the government is made easier. Many of the criticisms made by internet users are not without valid reasons and hopefully this will be able to induce changes in the government’s political system.

As long as the comments made by this group of people are constructive, it might actually be a good thing that it was created. It shows that the government is willing to engage the internet users rather than to control and silence them. If our government is willing to listen to its citizens and change its political viewpoints when faced with the people’s discontent, it will then be a truly democratic society as we recite in our pledge. All in all, the effects of this “media capabilities group” will be evident in time to come, and hopefully it will be for the better.

Russel Baker's On Becoming a Writer

Title of article: On becoming a Writer
Author: Russell Baker
Publisher/Date of magazine: 2003
Date the article was written: Unknown


I would like to comment on the article written by Russell Baker. The article said that when he was still a boy, the only thing that really interested him was writing. Even so, the idea was not very firm in his head as he found many unattractive sides of the English language. Grammar was boring, writing compositions turned out to be chores and classics were 'as deadening as chloroform'.

Then, one eventful day during his third-year English, he was required to write another one of those essays that he thought were 'hard labour'. However, when he looked down the list of topics, he saw one that really interested him, "The Art of Eating Spaghetti". It brought back reminisces of his family eating spaghetti together. Therefore, he wrote his essay based on this memory and handed it in to Mr Fleagle, his 'prim' English teacher.

As everyone might be already suspecting by now, his essay was hand-picked by Mr Fleagle to be read to the class. This incident fueled his interest in writing and he sought to become a writer, even though he was also quite sure that writing could not lead him to a job after high school.

Being a student in high school myself, I was quite intrigued when I read this essay. The story led me to realise that little things in life can make quite a big difference. For Russell Baker, it was the decision of a teacher to praise his writing that eventually morphed him into the writer that he is today. For us, it might be other insignificant events that happen in life, but it might change the person that we are going to become one day.

Another important issue that Russell Baker reiterated in his essay is that he thought writing could not lead him to a job after high school. This point led me thinking about the kind of life and job that I would live in after my own schooldays. For me, it might not be that hot at hands as I still have quite a bit of education left, but it will come one day. Russell Baker thought that he could not earn a living as a writer but still, he is one of the most renowned writers of today. Therefore, if I pursue my own interests, who knows if I can live by it or not? After all, times are changing and new jobs opportunities pop up everyday.

That's about it for my reflection. Lastly, I would like to comment on the fact that the article was quite well-written despite being non-fiction. It's not really that humorous, but it puts a smile to the lips to whoever reads it. I think it is due to the fact that he uses lively, appropriate words at the appropriate times. I will never be as good in writing, but I think that every person has different aims in life.