one thin that is starting to bother me is the use of words like regime when dicussing the Israeli government. It is a democratically elected government dealin with an extremely difficult situation.
Yes- in an ideal world, we should be able to just hand the Palestinians over their own homeland. But do a people who sanctify homicide bombers really deserving of their own land? At what point do you stand up and say that they are unacceptable. And given the long history of hostility towards Israel, don't they have a right to maintain their security (something that would be made much harder by simply giving in to all of the Palestinian demands. Israel is making some mistakes, but to simply portray Palestine and the Arab world as victims to this injustice is bulls**t. Lets get over this automatic instinct to back the underdog and really look at what's happening. On Fri, 28 May 2004, Robert Taylor wrote: > IMO, if you are playing in a regime just to a certain section of the > population becuase of segregation that results from internationally > acknowledged abuses of human rights, you ARE tacitly accepting that state's > legitamacy. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Bean [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 10:15 AM > To: Brendan Nelson > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: RE: (313) danny wang > > > 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 > > > > ##################################################################################### > Note: > > Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily > represent > those of Channel Four Television Corporation unless specifically stated. This > email > and any files transmitted are confidential and intended solely for the use of > the > individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this > email in > error, please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Thank You. > ##################################################################################### > >
