I think all dissent is valid towards an eventual tipping point. Most change comes from a culmination of a collection of non decisive or even non effective dissent.. Even glorious spectacular revolutions are preceeded by apparently ineffectual dissent.
Boycott The Qatar World Cup?
- Thread starter OldSchoolManc
- Start date
I think all dissent is valid towards an eventual tipping point. Most change comes from a culmination of a collection of non decisive or even non effective dissent.. Even glorious spectacular revolutions are preceeded by apparently ineffectual dissent.
Agreed entirely. Also, isn't it the sponsor that's sending a message there, as opposed to the national team?
I honestly can't understand why some see it as black and white as 'either play or don't play'.
That's a very unnuanced / simple take imo.
It's not like Denmark has decided where the World Cup should be hosted. Every nation want to play the World Cup surely, but should Denmark/countries just quit, because it's been forced upon them to play there?
Besides, this is actually shedding some light on the high death toll on migrant-workers. Why would that be a bad thing?
You mean like Cantona was being paid by Nike while ignoring their entire business model is based on worker exploitation? Rich.
If we're strict and consitent about who should and who shouldn't be allowed to host tournaments because of human rights violations, I wholeheartedly agree that Qatar shouldn't. But as has been pointed out to death in this very thread, neither should the proponents of the costliest human rights abuses of recent times, including your beloved UK, US and the like.
Problem is that people maintain these obvious double standards, and when its showed in their faces they refuse to acknowledge anything and scream whataboutism. These are valid points being raised and you would do well to have maybe a bit of introspection.
As for the rest of the criticism, laughable. There are plenty of leagues (perhaps even more, who knows) that are disrupted by summer world cups. No, it should not only be held during your summer - thats pure, unadultered western-centric babbel.
And to those minimizing western human rights violations because of the immigrants that seek to live in these countries, give your head a wobble. Not only is this human rights pariah Qatar chock-full of immigrants, it didnt design and implement destructive "foreign policy" that ran entire nations into the ground, thus creating mass exodus to where their resources where shipped to when they were stolen.
Give me a break.
Serious question, what are the 'good' countries out there?
Problem is that whatever the criticisms of Western foreign policy, most people are relatively free there. The same cannot be said about LGBT people and women in Qatar. Why host a tournament meant to attract people all over the world when much of the world isn't fairly treated by the hosts? You shouldn't. That excludes Qatar and SA and means countries like the UK/US are better choices.
Well put! Been fed up of anti-Qatar brigade. I for one believe that the World Cup is going to be a huge success in terms of viewership. Fans from gulf and Asia have been clamoring for tickets and are excited been given a chance to experience the WC at an affordable price, considering its location and ease to reach Qatar as against any European or American (North or South). Counting down to the bonanza!
There are still valid criticisms of the world cup being held in Qatar, as there were n Brazil (where I lived at the time), Russia, the United States, South Africa, etc... We should not ignore the plight of the workers, or corruption within FIFA. I just find it extremely dissapointing that people come up with all these objections only when they dont get their way. Otherwise, they are fine with human rights abuses, corruption, discrimmination, etc.. not enough for me to boycott the thing, mind! Will also be enjoying as many matches as I can.
Are there any? Good is a strange, conditioned, and subjective concept. Ultimately, like you, people have a worldview and pursue it, often with a dramatic human toll. No one is more guilty of this that the west. Gun to my head, I'd say Costa Rica is a good country.
Relatively free? I am a black man living in the South Side of Chicago. Please spare me the "relatively free" bit. There are large swathes of the population that are treated as underclasses. Much of the world isnt treated fairly by the US, Brazil, South Africa, Russia, etc... the problem isn't pointing it out when its Qatar, but failing to do so when its in the West. At face value, it really undermines your outrage when its ok for some but a sin for others.
Whats more, most of these admittedly despotic regimes are propped up with western dollars, western policy and western military power. And who cares if people live relatively free there, if policy from these countries directly results in oppression, death, and destruction elsewhere? I fail to see how living freer in the US and UK (if we admit thats the case), negates their actions causing people to live tortured lives in foreign lands. That is ofcourse if we agree that a life lived is worth the same in the UK as it is in Haiti, or Afghanistan.
Anyways, I recognize that my POV may completely undermine the view you have of your world, where some (people like you, in your country, and in the west) are good while others are bad. I don't expect you to change your opinion. Just know that other opinions exist and they are not more incorrect than yours.
Isn't your entire post little more than whataboutism ? You claim others scream it and yet proceed to list foreign policies of other countries to balance against Qatar's, then claim hypocrisy.
I think Cantona's point is a good one. No one considers Qatar a football nation, which would be in contrast to the likes of the US and South Africa which have leagues and half way decent national teams. The Qataris got the WC based purely on bribery, only to have to then rearrange the major European club seasons to conform to the climate changes of the middle east. That alone is more than enough reason not to have it there. And that's even before we get to the inconvenient truth of thousands of migrants having died there so the Qataris can sportwash their way to international legitimacy.
I mean, a lot of what you say is true. We agree on a lot, but we’ve just seen the world mourn an old lady who was the face of colonialist Britain, under whos reign the subcontinent was robbed of its spices and jewels (one of which is in the queen’s crown, oh the irony). The US, where I am incredibly proudly from, goes on telling the world not to wage war while we start so many for profit ourselves, all the while buying guns (don’t even get me started on our gun problem) from the Saudis and have just gotten rid of abortion rights.
Do you see what I’m trying to say here? The non-ethical/moral reasons I’m on board with. I agree that I’d much rather have the WC somewhere else, ideally in the summer so that it doesn’t disrupt the season, but to question this on ethical grounds by the West is not only laughable but just incredibly hypocritical. Stones, glass houses…….
I think there are about 4 reasons not to have in in Qatar - and only one (the migrant issue) is "ethical". Well maybe two, if you consider that there is evidence the Qatari's bribed FIFA officials to close the deal. The other two are "its not a football nation" (as highlighted by Cantona) and "they fecked European club football by forcing a winter WC".
Any one of the 4 reasons is sufficient grounds to hold it elsewhere imo. All four collectively make for an airtight case.
The bribery I’m not going to go into, because I’m sure it happens a lot more than we’re made aware of. But I agree in terms of playing conditions, disruption, its not ideal. Heck I obviously even agree with the rest of them, its just the hypocrisy on some of this stuff bothers me to no end. I just can’t see past it.
Word.
Feck this world cup and feck Fifa giving it to a homophobic regime where thousands died building it. Sports-washing is ruining football.
In general i would agree with you and @moses . Nothing is black and white. But in this case, for me at least, it is.
They are the host. In my view, if you don't like host then don't go there. If you do, accept his rules and respect him. Sure, we can say that they don't deserve respect but as i said, you have option to not go there. It is not like you are forced to go. Boycott of WC is a powerful message. Refusing money (like Cantona did) is a strong message. This is just cheap populism.
As someone said earlier, this is like going to party, saying to host i don't like you and i think you are a scum and then asking - "Where is the food and booze?".
Why dont go to the main problem, FIFA. Disband FIFA and start freh with new one.
Like clockwork. Screaming whataboutism when legitimate double standards are brought up. If you cant see how the hipocrisy in only pointing out misgivings that go against your position undermines your outrage, then you are a lost cause. Your position is not righteous, nor original. It happens every time people want to shout down other's position cause they cant stand being taken to task.
I have neither the obligation nor the patience to walk you through understanding how one can recognize the problems with the Qatar world cup, but also find it extremely hypocritical and borderline discriminatory to only point it out in certain cases.
Ill tackle the rest of your points in turn:
1. So the US is more of a footballing nation than Qatar? According to who? You?
That is a highly contentious (if not wildly inaccurate) point today, much more in 1994 when the world cup was hosted in the US. In the real world, football is widely accepted to be the most popular sport in Qatar. In the US it is, at best, the 4th most popular. The Qatari team is significantly better than the South african team. Right off the bat your pount falls apart. Moving on.
2. Interrupting the Europpean season?
You should check how many football seasons are interrupted by summer world cups. Maybe you dont care, because Europe seems to be the only important thing. But football is played outside of Europe, and many people have long dealt with disruptions to their seasons. Fair enough if you think the only disruptions that matter are in Europe. Atleast admit it.
3. Sportswashing international legacy.
Hilarious. What exactly is the international legacy of Russia? Of the US? Of France? Maybe they should consider a bit more sportwashing.
4. 6500
No worker should ever have to die to build wealth for others. That we can agree on. However, the companies building and profiting these stadiums are largely western. Moreover, the number is hugely misleading as it references works that arent even related to the world cup, are unverified, and not really that different from worker death rates in other developed counties.
I mean, the indian government themselves already pointed out that this number is largely in line with conditions in other countries we hear no complaining about.
I’m sorry this is nothing like going to a party. I hope you can see the nuances if looking.
1) The party in your argument is arranged primarily for the host. In this case the World Cup is arranged for all countries in the World and then secondly celebrates one country each WC year. Also a country plays on behalf of millions where mostly all want to watch football - a party-goer is just one person.
2) a party can be thrown every other day. This “party” comes every 4th year. Unless it’s a birthday party in a leap year
.3) Denmark is a little country. Even quitting would probably not feed others to not go + you actually want to play in the WC.
4) If you want to shed light on something, why not shed light at something at the event. A prime example is Jesse Owens going to the Berlin Olympics in 36.
5) The rules of how to arrange the “Party” here are quite simple (dont kill people) and not like your argument “their party, their booze” which yes I agree if it’s smaller things like manners. National teams are not driven in 100% commercial interest neither like you describe since money is a big factor in your argument of quitting. The players (who you want to back out) just want to play the World Cup - the players are not the sponsors or havent come up with the campaign neither which I think you tend to overlook. You see the sponsor, the FA and the players as one “partygoer” here but everyone of these has different motives or nuances to their motives.
source?
I only asked is Gary Neville getting paid
Only Bhutan would pass the moral test of being able to host a World Cup. But then again, I don't know enough about their history.
These are all good points. The world is a very screwed up place, and every country has a lot to reckon with in its past and present, and it is not whataboutism to point it out. If the same standards are applied everywhere, the world cup would simply not be staged anywhere.
He was asked this on 5live yesterday and stated very clearly that he had not been paid a penny, he said he believed all countries had a right to the World Cup and though there were huge issues within Qatar he would prefer to try to change things by being at the table talking rather than standing outside and shouting!
Right, sorry. Apologies if it came off as agressive but the point stands.
I mean it shouldnt take you too long to verify. I am an architect myself and it is common knowledge that a huge part of construction in the middle east is handled by western companies.
As for the world cup infrastructure specifically, some arabic, some east asian, but primarily western. Thornton Tomassetti (USA), Populous (USA/UK), Schlaich Bergermann Partners (Germany), Fenwick Iribarren Architects (Spain), Foster and Partners (UK), Carillion (UK), WeBuild SpA (Italy), Interserve (UK), Buro Happold (UK), among others. I mean Albert Speer Architects (the firm founded by the son of that Albert Speer) is heavily involved. You couldn't make it up.
Thats enough for me. There really are enough things to find objectionable with this world cup, including homophobia, workers rights, fundamentalist sexism and corruption to have t stoop as low as to complain about the weather, or the fact that precious European seasons will be interrupted. I just find it ridiculous that this same energy isn't maintained when its the west.
Still, we must criticize all of these things whenever we can.
Last edited:
This problem will be solved in the coming decades. All the ice in Antarctica will melt, and we can build great beautiful stadiums there (the worst politicians from every country can offer their labor), and the continent can become the permanent host.
If he really did not take money from them, then it is a very reasonable stance to take.
Yes the world is an imperfect place but the idea that every flaw or transgression is equal is just ridiculous and the definition of whataboutism.
Well thank god we have Moses to tell us the objective truth about which transgressions are worse than others and which ones are worthy of our outrage.
Nobody claims that they are. But for all the countries in question - let's say Qatar and the US - only a biased soul would say that one is better than the other in terms of the suffering they have brought upon the world.
Edit: just to add, I am an Indian but have lived in the US and love many things about it. At the same time, I know enough history to know what the government and the corporations of this country have done in the world.
Don't be absurd. Sometimes it's obvious.
Indeed. Compared to Qatar, the transgressions of the West (including the US and the UK) as well as the most recent host Russia are several orders of magnitute worse.
I wasn't in favour of Russia hosting it either.
The main problem I have with your stance is you seem more bothered about equality of blame than you do with the actual atrocities that are happening in Qatar or anywhere else.
It's not just yourself, this is a widespresd thing.
The world could be burning, coming to an end in hours and there'd still be a group of people more concerned with how the blame is being divided up.
The workers living in terrible conditions, the gay people living in fear, I doubt they care right now about England's colonial history. They just want an immediate improvement to their lives. That's what really matters.
The only good thing about that post is that you capitalised my name and demoted god.
Respect..
Dividing blame is not really what this is about. The issue is the outrage that some people reserve for actions of only certain countries. Perhaps there was a debate in previous years when the tournament was going to held in Russia, but certainly it was less than now when it is going to be in Qatar.
When a World Cup is next awarded to the US, will we see this level of outrage even though the country's supreme court has made abortion illegal? Even though a girl knocked up by her uncle in a southern state has to travel a thousand miles to save her life? That's not a colonial legacy or a problem in the past but something that is happening right now.
edit: language
There's a degree of hypocrisy there, they're comfortable in doing business in that country?
https://me.hummel.net/sa-qa/
Personally I'm not sure I agree with everything he said, but he spoke really well about it. If you're in the UK you can listen to it here or with a VPN if your elsewhere. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0d36kbq
6500 people dead while constructing stadiums is par for the course? Sounds terrible if true.
Thats a staggering number if true.
Wont be watching it.
Corruption to the core and disgusting
That is a massive assumption based on nothing. Are you saying that because I criticise Qatar it's not on principles and morals but some sort of racism? Absolute nonsense. There are well documented reasons to criticise Qatar, refute them or qualify them but any more of this and we will just create a new thread to discuss the whataboutery. I have criticised the US most of my adult life solely of the actions of the US, and I never mentioned Qatar once, so I don''t see why the US is relevant here?