Steven Spielberg has decided to withdraw as artistic consultant to the Beijing Olympics.
Spielberg is protesting the violence in Darfur which he has linked to the Chinese government.
It won't make any difference what Spielberg does.
Here's why.
1. What's he know about Chinese art? He was being used, not the other way around.
2. The Games are much stronger than any one individual.
3. The IOC cannot solve the world's problems. Whether Spielberg is participating or not, doesn't matter one iota.
4. A boycott of the Games hurts the boycotter not the Games.
5. The IOC is a sporting event, not a political one.
Spielberg's withdrawal only shows his inability to make a difference. He can't have an impact so he won't.
"Spielberg, phone home!"
It is posts like this that make me hesitant to go back to wharton for an MBA. Will I become this absurdly enraptured by profits in China and so ignorant of the importance of political and social events?
As for points 4, ask the Soviet Union in 1980 if boycotts hurt the boycotter more.
As for point 5, ask Nazi Germany in 1936 if the Olympic games aren't political.
While I cherish your wonderful insight on business in China, I wish it wouldn't come at the expense of a basic grasp of history.
Posted by: Janus | February 24, 2008 1:57 AM | Permalink to Comment