"Vietnam, that 100mn-strong beneficiary of friend-shoring, is “not free”, in US watchdog Freedom House’s reckoning. Indonesia, the fourth most populous nation on Earth, is just “partly free”. So too is much of the subcontinent, from where lots of the mistreated workers in Qatar have come. There is no western counterbalancing of China, no Asia strategy at all, without the help of some or all of these nations.
...the outrage over Qatar — whose host status we have had 12 years to get used to — has been stunning. I am glad it exists. Give me Enlightenment chauvinism over the pretence that all models of government are equal...
The outrage reveals something about those who feel it, though. It is plain now that lots of people have paid lip service to the idea of a changing world, a less western-skewed balance of power, without reckoning with its practical effects...
...Four months have passed since Joe Biden bumped fists with Saudi Arabia’s crown prince... ...He knows that victory depends on enlisting allies that fall short of the Jeffersonian ideal of governance. Others are slower to the same realisation. Liberals have traded relativism for a universal conscience just as the world makes such a thing unaffordable."
Providing one of the best infrastructure and preparations the World cup has ever seen, spending 220 billion dollars to do it, and introducing the world cup to a region that has been severely neglected historically, are all amazing achievements by Qatar.
And doing all that while showing your traditions and identity is even better.
Western governments claim to be the champions of Human rights, while Invading Iraq, Afghanistan and supporting the Apartheid occupation in Palestine.
The human right problems in Qatar are peanuts compared to what the West (governments) did in the Middle East.
Yet we don't go on a moaning spree every time the US hosts an event, or every time western politics get injected into sports.
It's our time to host sport events we have always dreamed of, and it's our time to show our culture like you always did.
Illegal homosexuality was part of western culture. Which we know meant untold numbers of hurt individuals. PPL would get beaten up, blackmailed turtured and generally had crappy life because of that "culture".
We can't force "our" new culture on anyone, but we certainly don't need to pretetnd that we accept theirs.
If you call apartheid to what's happening in Israel, than what do you call the treatment if minorities in all other Arab countries?
Because in Israel non jews are in parliament, executive branch (ministers), in the judicial system (judges) in academia , Are graduating as doctors and lawyers , are journalists etc.
If that's apartheid, than how on earth can you say that making homosexuality illegal is just a matter of culture? Being gay is a much more basic defining property than a nationality. And Israel doesn't even make calling yourself a Palestinian or raising the Palestinian flag illegal.
> If you call apartheid to what's happening in Israel, than what do you call the treatment if minorities in all other Arab countries? Because in Israel non jews are in parliament, executive branch (ministers), in the judicial system (judges) in academia , Are graduating as doctors and lawyers , are journalists etc.
This got to be a joke.
Israel is an illegal occupation started by the British in 1917.
They started the biggest open air prison in the world (Gaza), and actively demolished homes to build new illegal settlements.
The same occupation that killed Shireen Abu Akleh, and tried to disrupt her funeral in every way possible.
You have probably been fed disinformation much more than being delusional, but it sounds the same ;)
> Israel is an illegal occupation started by the British in 1917.
If you don't consider the British taking the land from the Ottomans to be legal, than you will have to count turtles all the way down to Adam and Eve.
If you think the treaty made between the Arabs and Jews was illegal, than you simply don't know history.
The first land-for-peace treaty in the area gave the larger and (then) more desirable area of the TransJordan to the Arabs, and the smaller and less wanted pre-1948 area of Palestine to the Jews. It was overseen by the British, who were in control of the area, and de-facto relinquished that control by allowing the agreement.
The Jews were never happy with the agreement, but it was forced upon them by the party legally in control. The Arabs, as with every other land for peace grab, immediately forgot the "peace" part, acted as though the half given was always theirs, and proceeded to attack and kill the Jews.
(The Jews, being somewhat blind to fact, keep on falling for this trick.
It took only a few weeks from when the Israelis left Gaza till rockets were being launched from the land they vacated, Hamas was openly saying that Gaza was always theirs, and that if they would just be given half of Jerusalem there would be peace! - Lucy would be proud.)
> removing the right of return and starting an open-air prison, nothing serious!
The "open air prison" you refer to is a) not a prison at all Tens of thousands of Arabs leave the "open air prison" you have been told of for work, leisure, and college on a daily basis. b) In the densest areas, Israel has tried to build better houses, has poured funds into attempts to improve the area. Hamas will not allow it, (it is in their interest for the people to feel oppressed), and the Israeli government cannot force the rebuilding of homes as it would cause International outrage at their involvement. The funds they sent are instead given to promote terrorist activities. c) Top notch healthcare is available for all Arabs, no matter where they live d) Any Arab that wants to travel abroad is invited to at any time. What "right-of-return" did they have that was removed from them? e) For some reason, there are Arabs from all the nearby countries (Syria, Jordan, etc) trying to get into Israel, even at risk of life. Any comparative look at the treatment that they get at home shows why. If you are ever in the area and are not afraid to be open minded, check it out.
Any attempt to frame Israel as the bad guys might be politically expedient, and it may even be innocently from the garbage you have been fed, but it's factually entirely wrong.
>I mean I can't go joking around as a Nazi in Germany
You can up to some point. Comedians do. People do. There are even Nazi marches in Germany. Although they represent a small fraction of the population and are not liked by others. But legally, you can be right if you deem so.
The difference is that France wants to forbid a symbol of oppression over women, while the middle east wants to forbid expressions of freedom. Take that as you will.
> You must be a troll. To deny the blatant human rights (women...? Gay...?) in places like Qatar
First, talk to any of Qatari women, rather than targeted news reports that only appear when there is an event or a milestone in the Middle East.
As for gays, you said they were human rights, we didn't and we and many other countries don't agree, very simple.
> and go "but what about?" is ridiculous.
There is no what about, the atrocities committed by western governments far outweigh whatever is happening in Qatar.
Yet we don't see the US or UK get blasted because of the invasion of Iraq, Afghanistan and others every time they host a sport event.
Which as I said, is a much bigger human right issue than what happening in Qatar.
Just a question as the answer will be interesting, troll or not:
If you decided that "gays" have no human rights... Can the USA decide that Qataries don't have them either? And then "liberate" the oil from the nonhuman bipedal beings "wasting" it?
> First, talk to any of Qatari women, rather than targeted news reports that only appear when there is an event or a milestone in the Middle East.
I watched a show where a reporter tried exactly that. She wasn't able to find a woman who was willing to talk. The only ones who were willing to share their version of the story were powerful men.
> As for gays, you said they were human rights, we didn't and we and many other countries don't agree, very simple.
Ok, but why does such a country then have to bribe the FIFA, so they will bring in the world cup, when it is known that the country does not agree with the idea of sportsmanship?
Usually I'd say, just create your own anti-gay sports event and leave the existing ones alone, but at this point, I say, the West should pull completely out of the FIFA, ban them from their stadions and form a new football association with modern standards. The FIFA can then move on to host the next "World Cup" in North Korea if they want.
> I watched a show where a reporter tried exactly that. She wasn't able to find a woman who was willing to talk. The only ones who were willing to share their version of the story were powerful men.
Maybe because the historic low interest of women in football + a small population (~330,000 Qataris) would be the result of this?
> Ok, but why does such a country then have to bribe the FIFA, so they will bring in the world cup, when it is known that the country does not agree with the idea of sportsmanship?
First of all, Qatar won the case fair and square, with incredible preparations and infrastructure, that we are seeing in action right now in the world cup.
Seconndly, the hell gays have to do with sportsmanship?
> Usually I'd say, just create your own anti-gay sports event and leave the existing ones alone, but at this point, I say, the West should pull completely out of the FIFA, ban them from their stadions and form a new football association with modern standards. The FIFA can then move on to host the next "World Cup" in North Korea if they want.
This is how much the breaking of the western controlled presentation of sport annoys you?
Sports are for everyone, not just for a part of the world or the other.
> First of all, Qatar won the case fair and square, with incredible preparations and infrastructure, that we are seeing in action right now in the world cup.
Fair and suqare. Just a little bribe here or there.
> Seconndly, the hell gays have to do with sportsmanship?
Discrimination eliminates all sense of sportsmanship.
> This is how much the breaking of the western controlled presentation of sport annoys you?
No, this is how much the corruption of the FIFA annoys me. They enjoy some of my money too (through mandatory broadcasting fees in my country). Let's not forget that the previous World Cup was sold in a similar way. AT THE SAME EVENT to the surprise of the audience of the event. It was only planned to award one WC, when suddenly the FIFA surprised the world with an additional announcement for 2022.
> Sports are for everyone, not just for a part of the world or the other.
Yes. Where is the problem now if a male player wants to kiss men, or if fans want to wear rainbow shirts? If a country takes offense with such basic and harmless things, then no, we shouldn't attend sports events there for our own dignity.
Whataboutism. If you argue with a greater evil, nothing will ever be solved. Quatar did/does some nasty things and right now people have the possibility to boycott. Right now it's there and we will talk about it.
All countries do nasty things all the time. But currently we're looking east.
More like Hypocrisy.
Many of the nations who are crying foul of human rights issues in Qatar committed way bigger atrocities in recent history than Qatar ever did.
Glad to know that over 6000 people who died as a direct result of constructing stadiums is 'peanuts'.
Yes, we have problems in the West, including modern slavery in certain industries. But last time I checked, we didn't use slaves to build the stadiums hosting our events nor did thousands of people die unnecessarily during construction. There is a very direct cause and effect correlation here that absolutely did not need to happen given the obvious wealth held in Qatar.
Right, we don't kill 6000 people building stadiums. We instead send men with guns and bombs to kill many many many more people than that all throughout the globe
I don't think politicians should be so pure that they don't deal with anyone that don't live up to their ideals.
I also think we should be able to criticise other cultures without being accused of racism, or requiring our own countries to be perfect.
Ultimately we live on a small planet. We need to get along with our neighbours, even if we don't agree with some things they do. I don't think that's hypocracy.
I hate football, but have been very excited for this World Cup for a while. It has not disappointed. Only a handful of games have been played, and major world groups have truly been brought together. Ancient, intolerant cultures, hypocritical "woke" money- and power- grabbers, and a sport-loving populace who openly do not care about either set of issues.
People love to talk about the paradox of "tolerating intolerance", but it is a very self-correcting issue. If you tolerate intolerance for long enough, you will find yourself in an intolerant society.
Qatar: ~650 deaths per year from ~2M low end migrant labours doing construction under harsh conditions.
USA: ~900 deaths per year from ~1.5M "temporary workers" AKA migrant labours in various sectors doing similarly intensive labour under harsh conditions (i.e. agriculture farm hands).
I'm guessing Qatar critics not interested in crunching those ratios and portion rage accordingly.
Keep in mind Qatar is country with 3M people where ~10% or 300K are citizens, then some professional expats, then a fuckload of migrant workers. Relative amount of remittances flowing out of Qatar to disproportionately improve lives in Asia / Africa is huge. Workers are still get paid multiple for what they would back home relative to skill set. Contiions in Qatar = hazard pay. Granted it's out of Qatars hands to demographically not rely on outside labour, but IMO their per capita remittances are easily net good. Yeah they could treat workers better and mitigate (which they have over the years like other Gulf states), but I'm betting if you ask countries that supply Qatari labour if they'd fine with 10x more deaths for 10x the remittance boosting development, they'd pick more deaths in a heart beat. For each labour that dies or gets fucked by VISA scams, multiple more are using remittances to generations of family members out of poverty.
51 comments
[ 0.29 ms ] story [ 108 ms ] thread"Vietnam, that 100mn-strong beneficiary of friend-shoring, is “not free”, in US watchdog Freedom House’s reckoning. Indonesia, the fourth most populous nation on Earth, is just “partly free”. So too is much of the subcontinent, from where lots of the mistreated workers in Qatar have come. There is no western counterbalancing of China, no Asia strategy at all, without the help of some or all of these nations.
...the outrage over Qatar — whose host status we have had 12 years to get used to — has been stunning. I am glad it exists. Give me Enlightenment chauvinism over the pretence that all models of government are equal...
The outrage reveals something about those who feel it, though. It is plain now that lots of people have paid lip service to the idea of a changing world, a less western-skewed balance of power, without reckoning with its practical effects...
...Four months have passed since Joe Biden bumped fists with Saudi Arabia’s crown prince... ...He knows that victory depends on enlisting allies that fall short of the Jeffersonian ideal of governance. Others are slower to the same realisation. Liberals have traded relativism for a universal conscience just as the world makes such a thing unaffordable."
And doing all that while showing your traditions and identity is even better.
Western governments claim to be the champions of Human rights, while Invading Iraq, Afghanistan and supporting the Apartheid occupation in Palestine.
The human right problems in Qatar are peanuts compared to what the West (governments) did in the Middle East.
Yet we don't go on a moaning spree every time the US hosts an event, or every time western politics get injected into sports.
It's our time to host sport events we have always dreamed of, and it's our time to show our culture like you always did.
If foreigners protest next WC, they will not be arrested. And there will not be a threat of arrest chilling their speech.
There are actual differences here. Is restricted speech part of the "culture"? What about illegal homosexuality?
> Is restricted speech part of the "culture"?
I mean I can't go joking around as a Nazi in Germany, yet that's not banned in the US.
> What about illegal homosexuality?
That is part of the culture. We and many others don't accept it, simple.
If you call apartheid to what's happening in Israel, than what do you call the treatment if minorities in all other Arab countries? Because in Israel non jews are in parliament, executive branch (ministers), in the judicial system (judges) in academia , Are graduating as doctors and lawyers , are journalists etc.
If that's apartheid, than how on earth can you say that making homosexuality illegal is just a matter of culture? Being gay is a much more basic defining property than a nationality. And Israel doesn't even make calling yourself a Palestinian or raising the Palestinian flag illegal.
You are delusional.
This got to be a joke. Israel is an illegal occupation started by the British in 1917. They started the biggest open air prison in the world (Gaza), and actively demolished homes to build new illegal settlements.
The same occupation that killed Shireen Abu Akleh, and tried to disrupt her funeral in every way possible.
I will let the Amnesty report speak for itself
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/02/israels-apart...
> than how on earth can you say that making homosexuality illegal is just a matter of culture?
Because we don't accept it, simple. You changed your culture to accept it, we didn't and won't do it.
> even make calling yourself a Palestinian or raising the Palestinian flag illegal.
Ha ha ha, just stealing the land, removing the right of return and starting an open-air prison, nothing serious! /s.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/5/13/why-is-israel-afrai...
> Israel is an illegal occupation started by the British in 1917.
If you don't consider the British taking the land from the Ottomans to be legal, than you will have to count turtles all the way down to Adam and Eve.
If you think the treaty made between the Arabs and Jews was illegal, than you simply don't know history.
The first land-for-peace treaty in the area gave the larger and (then) more desirable area of the TransJordan to the Arabs, and the smaller and less wanted pre-1948 area of Palestine to the Jews. It was overseen by the British, who were in control of the area, and de-facto relinquished that control by allowing the agreement.
The Jews were never happy with the agreement, but it was forced upon them by the party legally in control. The Arabs, as with every other land for peace grab, immediately forgot the "peace" part, acted as though the half given was always theirs, and proceeded to attack and kill the Jews.
(The Jews, being somewhat blind to fact, keep on falling for this trick.
It took only a few weeks from when the Israelis left Gaza till rockets were being launched from the land they vacated, Hamas was openly saying that Gaza was always theirs, and that if they would just be given half of Jerusalem there would be peace! - Lucy would be proud.)
> removing the right of return and starting an open-air prison, nothing serious!
The "open air prison" you refer to is a) not a prison at all Tens of thousands of Arabs leave the "open air prison" you have been told of for work, leisure, and college on a daily basis. b) In the densest areas, Israel has tried to build better houses, has poured funds into attempts to improve the area. Hamas will not allow it, (it is in their interest for the people to feel oppressed), and the Israeli government cannot force the rebuilding of homes as it would cause International outrage at their involvement. The funds they sent are instead given to promote terrorist activities. c) Top notch healthcare is available for all Arabs, no matter where they live d) Any Arab that wants to travel abroad is invited to at any time. What "right-of-return" did they have that was removed from them? e) For some reason, there are Arabs from all the nearby countries (Syria, Jordan, etc) trying to get into Israel, even at risk of life. Any comparative look at the treatment that they get at home shows why. If you are ever in the area and are not afraid to be open minded, check it out.
Any attempt to frame Israel as the bad guys might be politically expedient, and it may even be innocently from the garbage you have been fed, but it's factually entirely wrong.
You can up to some point. Comedians do. People do. There are even Nazi marches in Germany. Although they represent a small fraction of the population and are not liked by others. But legally, you can be right if you deem so.
Source:a German who doesn't like Nazis.
And America, or really any country outside the Middle East, isn’t killing 1 stadium builder for every 60 mins of football to be played.
There are plenty of Muslim women with hijab in streets and workplaces in France.
Source: I am French and living in France.
Looks like for now, it's only for minors
it's also banned in sports
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/1/19/french-senators-vot...
Still don't think equating the level of freedom in Qatar to the West is a fair comment.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/7/5/tunisia-bans-face-ve...
First, talk to any of Qatari women, rather than targeted news reports that only appear when there is an event or a milestone in the Middle East.
As for gays, you said they were human rights, we didn't and we and many other countries don't agree, very simple.
> and go "but what about?" is ridiculous.
There is no what about, the atrocities committed by western governments far outweigh whatever is happening in Qatar. Yet we don't see the US or UK get blasted because of the invasion of Iraq, Afghanistan and others every time they host a sport event. Which as I said, is a much bigger human right issue than what happening in Qatar.
It'll be hard to get their unbiased opinion with their male guardian permanently present.
If you decided that "gays" have no human rights... Can the USA decide that Qataries don't have them either? And then "liberate" the oil from the nonhuman bipedal beings "wasting" it?
This is a hypothetical, naturally.
As for dehumanization that's exactly what the Apartheid occupation is trying to do against Palestinians.
I watched a show where a reporter tried exactly that. She wasn't able to find a woman who was willing to talk. The only ones who were willing to share their version of the story were powerful men.
> As for gays, you said they were human rights, we didn't and we and many other countries don't agree, very simple.
Ok, but why does such a country then have to bribe the FIFA, so they will bring in the world cup, when it is known that the country does not agree with the idea of sportsmanship?
Usually I'd say, just create your own anti-gay sports event and leave the existing ones alone, but at this point, I say, the West should pull completely out of the FIFA, ban them from their stadions and form a new football association with modern standards. The FIFA can then move on to host the next "World Cup" in North Korea if they want.
Maybe because the historic low interest of women in football + a small population (~330,000 Qataris) would be the result of this?
> Ok, but why does such a country then have to bribe the FIFA, so they will bring in the world cup, when it is known that the country does not agree with the idea of sportsmanship?
First of all, Qatar won the case fair and square, with incredible preparations and infrastructure, that we are seeing in action right now in the world cup.
Seconndly, the hell gays have to do with sportsmanship?
> Usually I'd say, just create your own anti-gay sports event and leave the existing ones alone, but at this point, I say, the West should pull completely out of the FIFA, ban them from their stadions and form a new football association with modern standards. The FIFA can then move on to host the next "World Cup" in North Korea if they want.
This is how much the breaking of the western controlled presentation of sport annoys you?
Sports are for everyone, not just for a part of the world or the other.
Fair and suqare. Just a little bribe here or there.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/nov/14/fifa-briber...
> Seconndly, the hell gays have to do with sportsmanship?
Discrimination eliminates all sense of sportsmanship.
> This is how much the breaking of the western controlled presentation of sport annoys you?
No, this is how much the corruption of the FIFA annoys me. They enjoy some of my money too (through mandatory broadcasting fees in my country). Let's not forget that the previous World Cup was sold in a similar way. AT THE SAME EVENT to the surprise of the audience of the event. It was only planned to award one WC, when suddenly the FIFA surprised the world with an additional announcement for 2022.
> Sports are for everyone, not just for a part of the world or the other.
Yes. Where is the problem now if a male player wants to kiss men, or if fans want to wear rainbow shirts? If a country takes offense with such basic and harmless things, then no, we shouldn't attend sports events there for our own dignity.
Well no not really. First few results are a mix of America, China and UAE...
Yes, we have problems in the West, including modern slavery in certain industries. But last time I checked, we didn't use slaves to build the stadiums hosting our events nor did thousands of people die unnecessarily during construction. There is a very direct cause and effect correlation here that absolutely did not need to happen given the obvious wealth held in Qatar.
I also think we should be able to criticise other cultures without being accused of racism, or requiring our own countries to be perfect.
Ultimately we live on a small planet. We need to get along with our neighbours, even if we don't agree with some things they do. I don't think that's hypocracy.
People love to talk about the paradox of "tolerating intolerance", but it is a very self-correcting issue. If you tolerate intolerance for long enough, you will find yourself in an intolerant society.
Qatar: ~650 deaths per year from ~2M low end migrant labours doing construction under harsh conditions.
USA: ~900 deaths per year from ~1.5M "temporary workers" AKA migrant labours in various sectors doing similarly intensive labour under harsh conditions (i.e. agriculture farm hands).
I'm guessing Qatar critics not interested in crunching those ratios and portion rage accordingly.
Keep in mind Qatar is country with 3M people where ~10% or 300K are citizens, then some professional expats, then a fuckload of migrant workers. Relative amount of remittances flowing out of Qatar to disproportionately improve lives in Asia / Africa is huge. Workers are still get paid multiple for what they would back home relative to skill set. Contiions in Qatar = hazard pay. Granted it's out of Qatars hands to demographically not rely on outside labour, but IMO their per capita remittances are easily net good. Yeah they could treat workers better and mitigate (which they have over the years like other Gulf states), but I'm betting if you ask countries that supply Qatari labour if they'd fine with 10x more deaths for 10x the remittance boosting development, they'd pick more deaths in a heart beat. For each labour that dies or gets fucked by VISA scams, multiple more are using remittances to generations of family members out of poverty.