Slate’s Explainer on how Georgia (the one that had to deal with Russia this week) has been known as “Georgia” and whether this is the same as Georgia (of United States of America) – with the answer being kind of, but not quite (“St. George” being the derivation, but some differences of how this came to be).
The Olympic controversy, as Team Spain did a Very Bad Thing – at least from the perspective of North Americans of East Asian descent – as noted by New York City Councilman John Liu; even if the Chinese of China don’t feel offended, I sure found the Team Spain’s slanty-eye pose in an ad as repugnant as a minority and as a Chinese-American.
Time.com’s China Blog got on the story.
NY Times’ Harvey Araton ponders on whether Spain ought to be “punished” for this stunt:
Chinese Web sites have reported on the issue but without great energy or emotion. In my office Wednesday, the photo was shown to two Chinese staffers. Neither viewed it with surprise or disgust, but more with bewilderment.
An American I know who has spent much time here speculated that the Chinese reaction would naturally differ from that of Chinese people living in the West, where, as with any minority, they would understandably be more sensitive to such a display.
And then there is the prevalent perception that people here do not want to dwell too much on anything beyond the Olympics they have been waiting so long for, prepared for so lavishly and organized so well. They want attention focused on the athletes, on the architecture, on the hospitality, not on causes and controversies.
This being the Olympics, where every perceived antisocial slight is recorded and remembered, the Spaniards will have to carry the fallout of the photo around for a while, not unfairly. Context is important, though. There can be far worse demonstrations in the sporting arena, such as the Iranian swimmer who called in sick to his swimming heat, almost certainly to avoid getting into the pool with an Israeli.
That was a truly revolting development, a flagrant foul.
It’s easy for some of us to demand some kind of resolution, but this isn’t easy – there are people who sincerely don’t get it and don’t feel bothered at all by it – whether the Asians themselves or the offenders who claim it was all in “fun.” Maybe this is at least a teaching moment or an opportunity to learn.
Considering that one of the Spanish players is an NBA player, he might be the one person who could be “punished,” since I doubt that the NBA would want to offend the Asian American community – or at least they want to avoid a perception of double standard, as noted by Adrian Wojnarowski on Yahoo!Sports:
“The simple question is, ‘Would Stern and the league hold the American players accountable?’ And I think the answer to that is yes,” one NBA general manager said. “So why wouldn’t he hold the ‘other’ NBA players accountable – unless the rules only apply to the American players.”
So far, there’s nothing out of the league office. Rest assured, unless there’s an outcry over that photo, the NBA will wish this story away. Maybe the league will even issue a mild rebuke. It won’t be enough. Maybe this doesn’t rise to a suspension, but there should be significant fines and a bold condemnation. There needs to be a message delivered to NBA players everywhere: When you earn your money with us, you are always on the clock. [Jason] Kidd, Kobe and LeBron understand it. It’s time the rest of the league does, too.
As some suggest he’ll do, Stern can’t dismiss this as the business of a federation team. These are NBA players returning to NBA cities this year. Never mind the host country and millions of fans here, but consider the Asian-American season ticket holders in cosmopolitan cities such as Toronto and Los Angeles. One of the reasons the New Jersey Nets traded for Yi Jianlian was to market him to a large Asian-American base in Metropolitan New York.
The NBA is a global league, so understand: Whatever the summer uniform, it’s the players who are forever representing the logo. The idea that Stern shouldn’t act on this behavior because it falls under FIBA and Spanish rule is ridiculous. [….]
Stern is walking a slippery slope here, balancing relationships and partnerships in China and Europe. Already, there are jealousies developing in Europe over the way Stern is fawning over the Chinese market. Some European teams have told American marketers and agents that they’ve felt neglected in Stern’s wanderlust for Asia. FIBA is the governing body for European basketball and they’ve already dismissed this as a non-issue. That’s FIBA’s right, but the NBA has a different responsibility here. It has to take the higher ground.
“It would start an international riot if we did it, but they aren’t us,” an Eastern Conference executive said. “It’s low-rent stuff, but FIBA won’t do squat, so (the) NBA would show them up with any punitive action. I would be shocked if the NBA does any more than condemn (the) action.”
These Games have been a fascinating illustration in the complexities of the NBA’s globalization. The Americans have been treated like rock stars in China. Team USA has handled everything with grace and good humor. After too many trips overseas when this wasn’t the case for America’s national team, it sure is now.
Yes, there are different attitudes in the world, different sensibilities in Europe and North America. But for the NBA, there can be just one set of right and wrong. There should be only a strong voice and strong action now. No one should have to call for accountability from the Spaniards – the way that they would for Americans. Once and for all, David Stern has to be clear that there aren’t rules and responsibilities for different athletes, and different backgrounds – just those for an NBA player.
Meanwhile, Newsweek has an article on how Asian Americans who have mental illnesses have a serious struggle, particularly when untreated. Considering the pressure and stress of culture and life, it ain’t easy.
Last but not least: in medical ethics, there are questions and considerations as to how far we may ethically perform medical innovations, because the idea is to start off with doing no harm to patients. But, should there be a similar question for technological advances? Fascinating article in the Science section of the NY Times on that topic; Cornelia Dean writes:
Many scientists don’t like talking about their research before it has taken shape, for fear of losing control over it, according to David Goldston, former chief of staff at the House Science Committee and a columnist for the journal Nature. This mind-set is “generally healthy,” he wrote in a recent column, but it is “maladapted for situations that call for focused research to resolve societal issues that need to be faced with some urgency.”
And then there is the longstanding scientific fear that if they engage with the public for any reason, their work will be misunderstood or portrayed in inaccurate or sensationalized terms.
Francis S. Collins, who is stepping down as head of the government human genome project, said he had often heard researchers say “it’s better if people don’t know about it.” But he said he was proud that the National Human Genome Research Institute had from the beginning devoted substantial financing to research on privacy, discrimination and other ethical issues raised by progress in genetics. If scientific research has serious potential implications in the real world, “the sooner there is an opportunity for public discussion the better,” he said in a recent interview.
In part, that is because some emerging technologies will require political adjustments. For example, if the planet came to depend on chemicals in space or orbiting mirrors or regular oceanic infusions of iron, system failure could mean catastrophic — and immediate — climate change. But maintaining the systems requires a political establishment with guaranteed indefinite stability.
As Dr. Collins put it, the political process these days is “not well designed to handle issues that are not already in a crisis.” Or as Mr. Goldston put it, “with no grand debate over first principles and no accusations of acting in bad faith, nanotechnology has received only fitful attention.”
Granted, if Thomas Edison worried about whether the radioactivity from his inventing applications for electricity would cause health problems, we wouldn’t have the technology we have today, and if not for atomic weapons, well…
We do live in interesting times.