A Chequer-Board of Nights and Days

Anne Applebaum makes the case that boycotting the 2008 Summer Olympics is a perfectly appropriate response if one is at all concerned about, say, Tibet.  Or Darfur.  Or the threat of military action against Taiwan (since the US is no longer in a position to defend Taiwan, as best I can tell).  Or human rights within China.  Or free speech within China.  Or just the seriously creepy Mascots Formerly Known as the Five Friendlies. (Although no one from Atlanta has the right to criticize other Olympic mascots.)

I am inclined to agree with her (I generally prefer the Winter Olympics, anyway, and am rather eagerly looking forward to the 2010 edition of such) but have to ask: how does one boycott said Games as a consumer?  The athletes, corporate sponsors, and so on aren't going to opt out, so it falls to the would-be Olympic watcher/buyer.  Well, refusing to watch TV is a difficult way to get your message across if you're not a Nielsen rater.  Could you boycott all the corporate sponsors of said Games? Check out the list (h/t to this site).  That's a lot of brands, and you will have to work at making sure any brand you buy is not a subsidiary of one of those brands.  (Glaceau, for example, is not big on telling you that they got bought by Coca-Cola a while back.)  I can promise you I will not buy a Volkswagen between August 8 and 24.  I can also promise you this will not make one damn bit of difference to the way things are run in China.

Applebaum invokes the boycott of South Africa as an example of a boycott leading to effective political change. I fear that by doing so she highlights how much easier it was to boycott countries at a time when globalization was less widespread.  If you've been able to divest successfully for a cause, my hat is off to you.