you know, I do understand boycotts and the pressures that they produce. I participated in various boycotts...including the Caesar Chavez things and others.

I am always conflicted about this as regards the Olympics. The Olympics itself is an event for peace...and has been since ancient Greece. They would declare a respite from hostilities during that time.

My concern is this....that it just sets two kinds of peaceful manifestations against each other.

For example, I used to run a local Amnesty International Group. At almost every single event we ran, the Socialist Workers Party or some such group would come by and try to co-op our talk and our event to their agenda. Not that I am against economic reform or something, I am not. It is just that, you know, you can't accomplish every goal at once. Here we were, talking to a basically mainstream crowd, about the horrors of some human rights abuse...and some very extreme political revolutionaries would come into the Barnes and Noble or whatever and shout about this, that or the other thing. I mean, you know, if everything is just a sea of shouting, nothing gets accomplished....for anyone.

The Olympics itself brings the world community together in harmony over sports. I think that itself is a very very powerful force. How often does the world community get together? And regularly? I really think that the OIympics remains the single largest, continual meeting of the minds of the world community. I can't stress how important I think that is.

I honestly do not know which is the best path...whether to use the Olympics to press for the human rights progress or not. I truly don't know. But I think that this other side of the argument is important.

China is a developing country in many respects. I think it has made huge progress in many areas. I think it still has a long way to go.

Which is the better route, to welcome them into the world community through sharing cultural exchanges, like the Olympics, or to pressure them for change? I don't know. I would guess that some of both is necessary. I just hope that one does not co-opt and ruin the other.

You know if you try to beat someone over the head to change, it is not necessarily the best course of action. Perhaps in some instances that kind of pressure is necessary. I just hope that the outrage over the abuses do not usurp some kind of reflection about what is the best methodology for change. You know, China has nukes. The US has nukes. It is very important that our two countries come together diplomatically and culturally, to preserve that kind of international peace and harmony.

China is filled with abuses....horrible lack of environmental controls....poor management in many areas, causing hordes of suffering across the board. There also seem to be some very good hearted people in their government, truly trying to make good progress towards limiting the real sufferings of their own people. I am just concerned that if the world pressure against China is so strong and vocal, that their response will be the opposite of reform...that they will withdraw from the international scene and wall themselves off more. That happened before, when the student movement gained international support. China had been allowing much of it to occur. But when the world community stepped in and railed against them...they just walled off even more. It had the opposite effect of reform. It was reforming, slowly - and the cries for change, made it stop and change direction!

You know, it is like this...if you are dealing with an alcoholic and you can convince the person to take a few less drinks....that may be the best you can do. Then, later, you have the opportunity to try and work for even more reform. If you try and pressure the alcoholic into going "cold turkey" - you may just cause a rebellion and drive him deeper into darkness. I think the activists do need to consider the larger picture and how that plays out. We do want and need China to be part of the international community and in a climate in which they do not feel like they are being "chided" like a disobedient child.

Like, I said, I don't know what is best. I don't.

I wish the best for the Tibetan people being horribly abused. I wish the best for continuing international harmony between China and the world community. I hope that progress can be made in both areas.

A question to people who are seeking a "balanced" approach to the current situation in Tibet: do you take the same approach to the Nazi Holocaust? Are you interested in making sure that you understand the Nazi point of view? I'm just curious where you people draw the line.

Isn't the Chinese government's treatment of Tibetans essentially similar to the U.S. government's treatment of Native Americans? If you don't think so, you need to be better informed. If you do think so, why haven't you boycotted the Olympics for as long as the U.S. has been involved?