I agree with you, except that I'm not sure that performing for individuals in a country means that you implicitly acknowledge/approve of the regime they live under. Performing as part of a government organised festival for example might be a different matter.
Essentially I don't think unelected individuals should be judged on the actions of their government. > > Not having the knowledge myself, does anyone on the list know=20 > > if the cultural boycott of South Africa had an effect on the=20 > > fall of apartheid? > > It probably didn't, but any artist or business who dealt with the=20 > apartheid regime as though it were a normal government was giving=20 > it their tacit approval. The cultural boycott was one way among=20 > many that members of the international community used to send a=20 > signal to the apartheid regime that their form of government was=20 > not seen as acceptable by the wider world. > > It's certainly true that no-one's ever going to change the world by=20 > convincing artists (whether musicians or people in other creative=20 > fields) not to go to countries that are ruled by inhuman or murderous=20 > governments. It comes down to the individual artist's conscience, and=20 > whether they're happy to implicitly acknowledge the legitimacy=20 > of these sorts of regimes. I guess that Daniel Wang is, or at least=20 > (as Rob suggested) he hasn't thought much about the world beyond=20 > talced NY dancefloors. > > Brendan >
