This blog was created so that Jessica and I could describe our experiences of moving home. However, moving home has become rather uninteresting. So, since people use blogs to talk about anything and everything, I thought I would share my view about the Olympic torch in SF. I have tried to stay away from extremely controversial topics so as not to upset anyone. However, I think I just needed to say something about this one issue (there may be more in the future if I am bored enough).To those I may upset, please feel free to leave a comment. But remember, this is just my point of view... and I'm entitled to one... well, at least in the US I am.
So, specially for the San Franciscans or the Bay Area-ians....
The Olympic torch made it's only North American stop last week in SF. Interesting that the powers to be, whoever they might be, chose SF. Prior to arriving in SF, the torch ran into mucho problems in London and Paris and many expected some kind of problems in SF.
So why SF?
Maybe when the route was planned, no one expected any kind of problems. Having lived in the Bay Area for many years, I know that SF is probably one of the most liberal cities in the country. Wouldn't you (the powers to be) have considered all possible things that might occur going through SF? I don't know.
Anyway, that was not what I really wanted to write about.
I wanted to speak more specifically about Mayor Gavin Newsom's decision to change the route of the torch relay (without making it public) and the protesters.
I am not a huge fan of Gavin Newsom. I think he is nothing more than a pretty boy who sits at Starbucks to gain public attention. He has done very little in his time in office, for better or for worse. (eg He fucked someone's wife. It's definitely newsworthy, but does absolutely nothing for the city of SF)
With that being said, I think he made an excellent decision in changing the route of the torch relay. Probably his best decision in office (and this is for the better).
Why? Because it saved him from answering to everyone if someone had gotten injured anytime during the torch relay. His role is to "look after" the citizens of SF. And with his decision, he did that. His roles is not to please EVERYONE (which he probably tries to do), but an educated guess would be a majority of the protesters are not citizens of SF, for that matter, maybe not even citizens/residents of the state of CA. So, with his role as the mayor of SF in mind. I think he made the right choice.
He was criticized for his decision. One of his chief critics was Aaron Peskin, SF Board of Supervisors President. Screw Aaron Peskin!! Aaron Peskin, just like Chris Daly, do not have minds of their own. The only things that come out of their mouths are to say they disagree with Gavin Newsom. They view that as their role in life. Not to say educated things, but just to disagree. If Gavin Newsom had allowed the original torch relay to go on and one person as much as broke a finger nail, Aaron Peskin would be all over Gavin Newsom saying that he did a poor job handling the torch relay. Aaron Peskin, who is representing the city should also have been more concerned about the safety of the residents of SF and not that the demonstrators got their chance to protest.
Sorry, I went off point there for a moment.
Back to Gavin Newsom's decision. As much as what I say is hypothetical, many of us probably know that the chance that the demonstrations would become somewhat rowdy is true. In the event the it did and someone (or more than one) were injured, that would have been a headache for Gavin Newsom. If it got worse than rowdy, it might (and again I say it is hypothetical) have become a headache for the emergency services in SF. However, prevention of such a situation was definitely better than waiting to see if it actually happens. With that, I rest my case that Gavin Newsom made the correct choice for the residents of SF, whom he represents.
On a different note, but on the same topic...
Why do people protest/demonstrate against the Olympic torch?
I find that quite hard to understand.
The torch is NOT a symbol of China and it's policies.
The torch DOES NOT represent human rights policies in China.
The torch DOES NOT represent Tibet.
The torch DOES NOT represent Darfur.
The torch is but a SYMBOL.
The torch is but a SYMBOL of the OLYMPIC GAMES.
The Olympic Games themselves supposedly serves to UNITE people and countries through "games".
So, again, I find it extremely hard to comprehend, why protests against the torch?
(1) Take it up with the Olympic selection committee that awarded China the games for 2008.
(2) Do you think China really cares that all these people are protesting at the torch relays? No, in fact, they probably secretly wish that these people do protest. They are probably actually secretly wishing that these protests get violent and people get hurt. Then the leaders in China can come out and say what a disgrace the western world is. The leaders in China can use the protests as a platform to speak out against the actions of the western world. In my opinion, these protests are actually counter productive.
(3) What do you think the people in China are hearing about these protests/demonstrations? Probably same as the points I have made in (2). In fact, not PROBABLY, but DEFINITELY. The news over here have shown interviews with Chinese citizens who don't understand why the western world is out to "spoil the Olympic games". So, all these demonstrations have done nothing to draw their attention to EVERYTHING the demonstrators are protesting about, but instead, all it has done is draw attention to how these protesters are trying to disrupt a SPORTING EVENT. Again, the demonstrations ARE NOT hitting their mark.
(4) Who are these demonstrations affecting?
The people it is not supposed to affect. In the SF Chronicle, a father said he pulled his 14 yr old daughter from the torch relay because of concern for her safety. It is not likely (she may, but in terms of probability) she will ever get a chance again to carry the Olympic torch. No one I know can actually lay that claim to fame. The Chronicle also gave an example of some woman who was suffering from some disease pulling out. She is not likely to be alive at the next Olympics. These are the people these demonstrations are affecting. They ARE NOT affecting the people who make policies in Tibet (nor Darfur, nor anywhere else). Those people (whom you are supposedly protesting against) are sitting in their couches in their home country watching this on TV. These demonstrations are affecting the normal you and I people. So, why do it??
Lastly, to end of.
If you feel so strongly about any of those issues the demonstrators are protesting about. I think you should take a more proactive step against those people. So, to the protesters standing by the Embarcadero waterfront last week. If you have the balls, go to China and demonstrate. If you feel so strongly about your cause, go to China and stand up for your cause. Standing in San Francisco and demonstrating about your cause is going NOWHERE. Have the balls to do it in China!! And if you are thrown in jail in China, you know you are in jail for the right reason... standing up for you cause. If you get executed in China, you know you have died for the right reason... you died (almost like a martyr) for what you stand up for. DO IT!!
London, Paris and San Francisco are not the places to protest. It goes unheard. London, Paris and San Francisco are but just cities you see on paper/plastic bags to locate your fashion/advertising offices.
