Moving the Winter Olympics...

[Dashenka]

Isinbayeva said what I was saying...


Whether or not you agree with it, it's Russia's law and you have to accept it when you come to Russia.

[meikle]

Whether or not you agree with it, it's Russia's law and you have to accept it when you come to Russia.

And the counterpoint is, "Then the Olympics should not come to Russia."

[Dashenka]

And as I said before as well... if one law can prevent the IOC from deciding where to hold the Olympics, you can't hold them anywhere.

[gaggedLouise]

Well, I still motion that if it's going to be Russia, the ROC should have chosen some city in Siberia as its candidate. Tomsk/Altay or, still better, Petropavlovsk far out on the Kamchatka would have been amazing for big winter events. And would have left a legacy for those cities both in sports and in pulling in foreign tourists.

[Kythia]

Is there the transport infrastructure to get there though?

[Dashenka]

Well, I still motion that if it's going to be Russia, the ROC should have chosen some city in Siberia as its candidate. Tomsk/Altay or, still better, Petropavlovsk far out on the Kamchatka would have been amazing for big winter events. And would have left a legacy for those cities both in sports and in pulling in foreign tourists.

I agree... although not with those cities :)

Is there the transport infrastructure to get there though?

No. But cities like Chelyabinsk or Novosibirsk have or Moscow. They would have been better than Sochi which is a summer resort town and it reeks of money and prestige.

[gaggedLouise]

Is there the transport infrastructure to get there though?

Tomsk has an airport and it's on the transsiberian mainline*. They might have had to expand the airport facilities but they have had to do a massive amount of construction work around Sochi too, to provide for arenas and roads. The Altay range has been home to skiing tourism and contests for ages, as well as trekking and climbing, so there are a number of ski resorts there

With Petropavlovsk, well, the area was blocked even to most Russians back in the Soviet era because it faces Alaska and Japan, it was or is militarily a bit sensitive, but it's a major harbour town, so it wouldn't be that hard to get people in and out. And for satellite transmission of live pictures and so on it would be perfect. And both of these areas are much more secure on snow and cold than Sochi and its "high-altitude partner" up on the slopes of the Caucasus.

Sochi has had to do a lot of upgrading or new construction of railway, roads and a new terminal for its airport, and some of it has been trailing far behind schedule, long before the complication of the anti-gay laws turned up. Siphoning-off of money, slow direction and so on.


*Well, on a side part of it, an extension about thirty miles long. The Transsib isn't one single line, in some regions it's a network of lines running along different corridors, or widely apart.

[gaggedLouise]

Okay for Novosibirsk, that would still have allowed some place in the Altay as the setting for the alpine and skiing events.  :-)

[Dashenka]

It's a public secret that Sochi was Putin's vote and prestige project. It's not suitable for an event like the Olympics but it suits itself for something like this


Moscow would have been a much more obvious choice with the skating hall at Kolomna. Petropavlovsk is too far from civilization to do anything and with the current tensions between Japan and Russian over the Kurill Islands, politically not the best choice either. As for Tomsk... it's just a town in the middle of Russia. Not really great to show Russia from it's best side.

Novosibirsk is Russia's third largest city. Making it perfect for the Olympics.

[Cyrano Johnson]

Isinbayeva said what I was saying...

I think you're being hard on yourself here. Isinbayeva's rephrase, when perhaps she reconsidered how she would like to be remembered from this time, said what you were saying about disagreeing with the law but thinking people should respect it. Though I don't agree with that, what Isinbayeva originally said -- and claims to have been "misunderstood" about -- was much, much stupider. (The inevitable consequence of attempting to actually justify such an incoherent law.)

[gaggedLouise]

Ironically, one of the reasons Putin would not have supported a Moscow bid when he could have Sochi is likely that in Sochi it'll be easier to keep tabs on who gets around to the arenas and to public spaces. It would have been much easier for Russian opposition activists to attract media attention in Moscow, it's sort of their home ground and there will be established local networks, places to gather for events and so on. With stuff that could have been more damaging to Putin at home than any protest by a couple of individual athletes over this law.

[Ephiral]

And as I said before as well... if one law can prevent the IOC from deciding where to hold the Olympics, you can't hold them anywhere.

Because all laws are morally equal and interchangeable, of course. Riiiiight.

[Dashenka]

Who decides that? You? The IOC? The human right organizations?

You cannot decide what is morally equal or not. Hate to bring it to you but you can't.

Just because you and a lot of other countries in the western world don't agree with a law, for you is enough to boycot the Olympics?

Sorry but to me that is arogance and in a way ignorance.

"Look at us... we are the best and everybody should do as we do..."

It doesn't work that way.

[Trieste]

"I find this law to be morally unjust and support a boycott of the Olympics in Russia based on that fact" is not actually equivalent to "I am morally superior and insist on dictating the actions of all others".

Nor is having faults a preclusion to pointing out fault in others.

Dashenka, you have repeatedly expressed distaste for western culture, and I understand that the backlash against the Russian anti-gay law probably feels like a personal attack. However, you stated previously in this thread that you left your home because it was becoming increasingly hostile for you. Don't you think that's just a little bit, I dunno, unsettling? Wrong? Worth notice?

[Dashenka]

"I find this law to be morally unjust and support a boycott of the Olympics in Russia based on that fact" is not actually equivalent to "I am morally superior and insist on dictating the actions of all others".

Nor is having faults a preclusion to pointing out fault in others.

Dashenka, you have repeatedly expressed distaste for western culture, and I understand that the backlash against the Russian anti-gay law probably feels like a personal attack. However, you stated previously in this thread that you left your home because it was becoming increasingly hostile for you. Don't you think that's just a little bit, I dunno, unsettling? Wrong? Worth notice?

I always said I disagree with the law and with a lot of things in Russia. I do not have a distaste for western culture at all. I'm living in a western culture now and I love it.

My problem is that people in this thread don't accept the fact that Russia isn't as free in terms of homosexuality (or in any other case for that matter) and that because of that, we should boycot the Olympics. To me that feels like Russia (or the Putin regime as stated before) should change the entire countries point of view because the rest of the world doesn't agree with something the Russians feel.

The western culture don't agree with this anti propaganda law, so Russia should change it or face the consequences? As I said before, every country has a rule or law that most other countries don't like. Nobody makes a fuss about that but since homosexuality is a hot item all over the world (which is why the law was implemented in the first place) suddenly this law gets all the attention and all other stupid (and sometimes dangerous laws) all over the world are not getting attention.

I used to be pro Putin and pro Russia, even on this website I showed that I admit but Putin's lost his marbles and the country is going to hell. One problem I would worry about a lot more at the Olympics is the racism in Russia, not the anti gay propaganda. You can be gay in your hotel room, you can't be black. Nobody worries about that... why? Because of the hot item homosexuality is.

[Trieste]

The thing is, if another country has laws that are "stupid" or whatever, and people want to boycott other places due to those laws, they are free to do so. The consequences that each country faces is proportional to the rest of the world's opinion of their actions (or inaction, whichever). Russia's actions happen to have pulled a strong response. Other laws don't always pull so strong a response.

And most people do acknowledge that their countries do have laws that are nonsensical, or annoying, or even disgusting or unfair. Again, that doesn't invalidate their feelings about Russia's laws. The argument that "well, other countries have laws that I don't like!" doesn't actually make the Russian law in question any better, or any worse, or whatever.

It's kind of like saying that a country cannot be concerned about third-world famine if they have starving people in their own country. Well, yes, actually they can. And the rest of the world can say "Russia, this is an egregious civil rights violation" while still having their own civil rights issues. One doesn't actually have a lot of bearing on the other.

[Dashenka]

I agree with that and I never said that they couldn't. Fact of the matter is that this law is there and that every athlete or person is free to decide whether or not they come to Russia to participate or watch the Olympics. Nobody is being forced.

So other than the law being stupid and idiotic, I don't see a problem. If you stick to the law, you should be safe. You have to keep to the law in every country, however stupid the laws are. If you don't you have a chance of being arrested.

[meikle]

Just because you and a lot of other countries in the western world don't agree with a law, for you is enough to boycot the Olympics?

Yes.

Here's a counterpoint: For a long time in the US, women couldn't vote and minority men were faced with unfair restrictions on their ability to vote (say, poll taxes, literacy tests, etc), and Jim Crow laws existed to separate white populations from black populations (through, say, what we call Jim Crow laws.)  A lot of people said, "That's just the way it is, if you don't like it just go somewhere else."  But a lot of people didn't go somewhere else, they vocally expressed their unhappiness with the situation, and forced things to change.  In the case of the civil rights movement, boycotts played a very important role in making those changes occur.

Now, I'm not a Russian national, but it's also no longer the 60s; we live in an increasingly globalized world, and because we do, world issues are increasingly visible and our voices can be heard more loudly than ever before.  I am not okay with homosexual people being mistreated because they exist on the other side of a border, and it is not reasonable to think that imaginary lines ought to protect oppressors.

[Oniya]

In related news...
Donald Trump is taking a slightly different approach.

[Cyrano Johnson]

You cannot decide what is morally equal or not. Hate to bring it to you but you can't.

Arguably, each of us has a responsibility to decide just that.

Sorry but to me that is arogance and in a way ignorance.

What's arrogant and ignorant is the law in question, and attempts to defend it or protect Russia from consequences attached to passing it.

Again, we've heard this all before from defenders of this or that unjust law around the world. Apartheid? "How dare you judge us!" Saudi Arabia's draconian Wahhabism? "Outsiders will never understand!" Segregation in the States? "The South is the South, it's just our ways."

Every one of those situations was changed or is being changed thanks in part to outside pressure. Demanding that Russia be exempt is silly.

That some Russians will get defensive about it is predictable -- because of course they rightly fear that outside pressure can make a difference. But on balance with the proposition of just sitting by and watching an entire population of LGBT people be brutalized, it really just isn't going to matter to the wider world if they get defensive. It doesn't matter how many millions of times they repeat blather like "other countries have bad laws" and "it's not for you to judge;" LGBT people in other countries have made vast strides in terms of being heard and having the freedom to be who they are in public, and if you really think you're going to tell them "just shut up while Russia treats your brothers and sisters there like it's the 1930s," you're nuts. And if you think you're going to derail them by implying that they're imperialists trying to oppress Russia*, you're nuts.

(* Of course I get why that comes up: being dragged prematurely into trying to "act like the West" is part of why the last couple of decades have sucked so much for Russia. So the notion of being "dictated to by the West" is repellent. And not all of Russia's issues with attempts at Western hegemony are fictitious; Bush's attempt to encircle Russia during his tenure was quite real. But people are going to have to learn to differentiate between justified issues and nutty conspiracy theory. The LGBT lobby is not some tentacle of Western Empire, indeed quite the reverse; there are no doubt still movers and shakers in the edifice of Western Empire who wish it would all go away. The CIA is not going to undermine Russia by "promoting" homosexuality there, and fundamentally I don't believe there are that many Russians who believe that that is actually a possible thing; gays are just a convenient scapegoat for other problems.)

[Dashenka]

I really don't understand your problem.

Some facts:
There aren't a lot of gay people in Russia.
The vast majority of the Russians doesn't agree with homosexuality so,
The government made a law to 'protect' the children, so,

You can accept it, or don't go there.



The whole world's been trying to chance the US Law on gun ownership.
The whole world's been against legalizing drugs in some European countries.
A lot of people are against the unrestricted autobahn speeds in Germany.

Every country is different. Stop judging countries by your own standards.


And for the millionth time...

I DO NOT AGREE WITH THAT LAW!

Nor do I care what you say about Russia. This has nothing to do with me being Russian, this has to do with a country filing a law and everybody else just having to accept it.


I don't like the gun law in the US, so I don't go to the US because I'm afraid I'll get shot by some random imbecile with a gun. If you're afraid to get arrested because you have to be openly gay in Russia, don't go to Russia.

It's really that simple.

[Cyrano Johnson]

The whole world's been trying to chance the US Law on gun ownership.
The whole world's been against legalizing drugs in some European countries.
A lot of people are against the unrestricted autobahn speeds in Germany.

Um, no. The "whole world" does not have any very vivid opinion I'm aware of about the latter two things and has made no concerted campaign about the first. Those are the same kinds of false equivalencies you've been trying to use to fog the issue since the beginning. That tactic will fail no matter how many times you repeat it, because no amount of repetition can make the equivalencies less false.

Every country is different. Stop judging countries by your own standards.

And no amount of repetition can make this anything more than an empty platitude.

I DO NOT AGREE WITH THAT LAW!

Then stop being defensive about it. Nobody is forcing you to engage in the kind of rhetorical gymnastics you've engaged in to argue that there should be no pressure or no international opinion whatever about this law with which you supposedly disagree so much.

Nor do I care what you say about Russia. This has nothing to do with me being Russian

I'm sorry, I have to admit I have difficulty believing this.

[Dashenka]

God some of you are just the most narrowminded people in the world... My gosh...

"Oh somebody has a different opinion, let's complain about it and boycot them."



It's tragic and quite sad.


I don't defend the law, I defend the people that agree with that law. Because what you are saying is that 130 million Russians should shut up about their homofobia and suck it up, so that a handful of gay athletes can come to Russia for the Olympics.

[meikle]

You keep bringing up the United States' gun laws.

Meanwhile, here in the United States, there are those of us who actively oppose the regularity with which guns are available, and we have success in a lot of places.  I guess we could just flee the country to a place where the people have already done the work for us, though?

Laws are not immutable, Dashenka.  Yes, we have every right to voice our dissent.  This is not 'narrowminded'; narrowminded is believing that something is okay because it's the law.  Not all laws are just; one of our greatest civil liberty leaders put it thusly:

"One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws."  Russia's law is unjust; it should not be obeyed, it certainly should not be treated as sacrosanct just because a hundred million bigots like it.  Accepting an unjust law simply because it's the law is fear, not righteousness.

[Cyrano Johnson]

"Oh somebody has a different opinion, let's complain about it and boycot them."

Another empty platitude, Dashenka. It's not like we're talking about a difference of opinion about spitting gum on the sidewalk or what kind of folk music sounds better. Issues impacting justice for a group of people will attract attention: what's "narrowminded" is to whine about that fact.

I don't defend the law, I defend the people that agree with that law

Which when it comes down to it is a distinction without a difference.

what you are saying is that 130 million Russians should shut up about their homofobia and suck it up

Yes. Because that's preferable to telling the victims of that hatred to shut up and suck it up. That's how issues like this tend to work: if you choose to be a bully, you don't get to claim you're being oppressed because other people call you out for being a bully.