Yet as Brandon Byrd at Noodlefood observes, the Chinese system cannot be trusted. Writing about how a minor scandal involving a Milli Vanilli-esq lip-syncing episode at the opening ceremonies has degenerated into the ruling regime's outright censorship of any negative talk about the affair, Boyd writes:
Why China faked the ceremony and why they oppressively censor online comments is essentially the same reason: the Chinese regime is nationalist. At root, the opening ceremonies were meant to be a nationalistic demonstration of a nation's power on the world stage, showing how Chinese competence could produce a magnificent ceremony. That is, it was viewed by Party members (who had the power to shape the final form of the ceremony) as an expression of political prowess. It was China's coming out party, and nothing could blemish its reputation – not even an orthodontic travesty or a flat note here or there. Any expression of weakness or failure is an indication of national failure, of China's inability to succeed. The state, the people, the NATION must look good at any cost, even if it means engaging in deceptive behavior that manipulates children (who may or may not have known about the lip-synching at the time of the performance); even if it means selecting potential Olympic gymnasts at the age of three... even if it means placing stringent government controls on what can and cannot be said through electronic media.The problem the Chinese face with such fraud is that it depends upon our willful acceptance of it; it demands that we shrug it all off and pretend that the games are worth it. Yet the games are not worth it; no sport is worth slavery, censorship and oppression.
The good news is that unlike the Nazi Olympic games of 1936, which were a propaganda triumph of a state hurtling toward brutal totalitarianism, the China of the 2008 games is far more mixed. In many regards, the Chinese people enjoy more freedom of action than we do in America; for example, Chinese businessmen, insomuch as they are productive and don't elicit the attention of the ruling party, are free to produce without constraint. What China lacks is an understanding of the principle of individual rights and the rule of law; any freedom that the Chinese do enjoy is the product of whim and can be taken away just as easily as it can be given. Just ask any of the thousands of Beijing businessmen whose businesses were shuttered so China can host smog-free games.
So while China may not be totalitarian like it was under Mao, it is still very much a nationalist dictatorship; it has changed only in terms of degree and not so much in terms of essentials. The West must not be coy about it. As China works feverishly to present its face to the world, we must see though the pancake makeup and lip-synced little girls. We must see Chinese oppression, caprice and avarice for what it is--and treat it accordingly.