Tuesday, January 26, 2010

World Cup 2010. Good for SA?

While I find it frustrating and somewhat sinister that the group "Boycott 2010 World Cup" was deleted from Facebook, I cannot say that I was entirely behind its goals (no pun intended).

In short, I am in favour of the 2010 World Cup, and highly averse to the idea of boycotting it in any way, and I'm quite prepared to state why.

The objections to the tournament can be summed up in the following points:

1. It's a gigantic waste of money.
2. It's an opportunity for the ruling party to present itself in a positive light
3. Tourists will be murdered and criminals will have a field day.

First off, I'm a huge soccer fan and it must come as no surprise that Europeans view the game very differently to South Africans.

Back in 1985, just before my 8th birthday in fact, I went to visit relatives in Yorkshire, up in the Danelaw where my old man is from. He decided to take me to a (then) First Division game but none of the local teams were playing at home. It turned out the only local team that was, Bradford City, was in the second division and I couldn't get enthusiastic about a 2nd division game so we didn't go.

That afternoon, May 11th 1985, Bradford stadium burnt down killing 56 supporters and injuring 200.

The element of danger has always been present in the game, and 1985 was also the year of the Heysel disaster. Violence has accompanied football for years, and it's fair to say a lot of people go to games with some degree of caution.

To answer the three above points in order,

1. It would only be a waste of money if the SA government had spent it on, let's say, new BMWs or private jets. The billions that have been spent on stadiums (see above) provided thousands of jobs within South Africa, and given the visitor numbers expected it can be assumed that this amount of money will enter the country from abroad and be spent in South Africa.

I roughly calculated, although the figures are far from final, that each visitor must spend around R30,000 for the country to break even, and this is hardly unrealistic. Air fares alone represent a third of that and that's not to mention hotels, bars and restaurants, who will clean up during the month-long tournament.

That's just breaking even. Countries that have hosted major tournaments, such as Germany, have experienced a continuous boost to their economies as a result, with the event itself providing a kick-start to the wider economy. Those profits must be spent after all.

It is fair to say that there is a reason countries are falling over themselves to host the FIFA World Cup.

Finally, on this point, the white community will benefit disproportionally from the event. Who owns all the hotels, guest houses, game lodges, bars and restaurants? 'Nuff said.



2. The ANC wants to showcase South Africa as a successful Rainbow Nation. Let them. Who believes governments? People aren't stupid, they will see for themselves the reality of South African life, what are we afraid of? Focussing the attention of the world on South Africa can never be a bad thing. The government cannot control how people perceive the country, they have tried in the past and failed.

Rather see this as an opportunity to let people see the good and the bad for themselves and make their own decisions. ILSA, and many others, will continue to present the truth as we see it.

3. Maybe. Maybe not. No doubt the gangs have their plans, but these may amount to no more than the usual hotel robberies rather than mass murder in the streets. While crime against tourists is high, actual murders are not.

As long as concerned citizens continue to report the truth, nobody can say they weren't warned. There are many foreigners living in South Africa, all are fully aware of the risks, but make a daily choice to live there. Soccer fans are no different. Great efforts will be made to protect them and as long as they are wise, they could well be fine.

But most importantly, we are not responsible for them. Many of the naysayers, who have preached for years against the awfulness of liberal foreigners, now somehow care about them? This makes no sense. Those who said "I told you so" when a German girl was murdered in Cape Town last year can't really make that claim. Visitors to South Africa know the risks, are aware of the precautions, and choose to come anyway. Would we really want to stop them?

One valid criticism is that criminal gangs may use the opportunity to become more sophisticated, and become more daring during the World Cup. This is true, but there is an equal chance of them becoming very dead in the process, and that's an opportunity I wouldn't like to see missed either.

People, lots of them, are coming to spend a month in South Africa, to spend money and enjoy themselves. I for one would rather find a way to make money out of it, rather than find ways not to.

13 Opinion(s):

Anonymous said...

The money has already been spent, so crying over spilt milk won't solve anything. Instead, people can try to make these games the best they can be despite the massive obstacles. In the end you never know what miracles may come out of it.

Anonymous said...

I think the negativity that SA's have about the SWC is that ultimately the tax payer will foot the bill for any short-fall. Also, the beautiful new stadia are hard to justify when they will most probably lie fallow after the event. As an example, the CT stadium was a third full for the first soccer match held there. One would have thought that the CT people would've taken the opportunity to see the stadium and bought tickets. When you see how much money the government has spent on this event, and how much money hasn't been spent on other areas then you can understand why people (tax payers mostly) are frustrated and jaundiced towards this event. I myself think that crime won't be an issue as the ANC know they have to put their best foot forward for the international media. Afterwards is another story. We all know they are useless as a government as this is the main gripe. We should see the SWC in context of the mood of the country and not as an isolated event. Only then can you understand why not everyone is for this.

Laager said...

On the issue of warning the rest of the world and trying to discourage the holding of FWC2010:

The now defunct website RSA-overseas mobilised an e-mail campaign to FIFA. Thousands of e-mails were sent to FIFA pointing out the crine rate, the ignorance and naivity of foreign fans regarding SA, and imploring FIFA to reloacte the event elsewhere. This was all about 4 years ago when FIFA still had time to change host nations.

FIFA chose to ignore all these warnings and well-intended advice and proceed with SA as the host nation.

So if the carnage does take place and, worst case scenario, FIFA are forced to abandon an incomplete tournament, there is no way that Sepp Blatter can face the world and say "We did not know. No one warned/advised us about the dangers of this country"

Andrea Muhrrteyn said...

HI Viking,

I don't know whose 'boycott' justifications you found, but they weren't the main one's used for the Boycott 2010 World Cup Campaign, at all!

The fundamental principle of hte Boycott 2010 World Cup Campaign are these:
* A Farmer Genocide is occuring.
* A state of Black Aparthied exists.
* White Apartheid was boycotted, as being evil and racist.
* Black Apartheid is evil, so requries the same moral principles to be applied.

The justifications are explained at above page, and were also explained at: Pro-SA Boycott 2010 World Cup Campaign on Facebook Letter to Daily News Senior Journalist, in response to her hitpiece: Anti-SA Smear Campaign on FAcebook.

The Boycott 2010 World Cup: Truth and Justice, or Secession page was setup on FAcebook, after the previous
Boycott 2010 World Cup page, was deleted. It has also now been deleted, a few hours ago.

So, Boycott 2010 World Cup pages, have now TWICE been deleted from Facebook; while Blackwash (which is a Black group, for blacks only, with the goal of exterminating whites from Africa)... is going along just fine on Facebook.

As to your statement about World Cup finances benefitting South Africa. Your finances are incorrectly accounted.

Nor did germany make money, or China from the olympics. Both lost money. South Africa will lose much more money, in fact it will heamorhage money...

See, among others:
* SA's Inconvenient Truth: False Hopes about the 2010 World Cup
* Fahrenheit 2010

So... life goes on! ;-)

white-southafrican said...

I am also opposed to this 2010 thing. One person dead is one to many and in my view people will be robbed and will die.

I support a multi state solution for RSA, as that is the only way whites will survive in the long run.

Anonymous said...

I have to agree with Andrea on this one as I think this article takes too simplistic a view. The Germans did not make money on the last World Cup but neither was it their aim,I think if you do your research you will find the Germans were trying to achieve some sort of National unity which they did.The contribution to their economy was less than 1%.You also have to take into account that as a football loving Nation,Germany could and vave made great use of the Stadia that were built or refurbished.Can South Africa say the same?
Next up are the Tourists and it is not good enough to say "we warned you." For Gods sake this is the biggest sporting event on the Planet by far and people have right to expect to go to such events without having an ever present worry about security.South Africa cannot offer this and dont give me that drivel about "crime is everywhere." Last Saturday I took my 12 year old to a game attended by 52,000 last Saturday and there wasnt even the suggestion of any problem.Its just not acceptable to say to Europeans "have your wits about you." They do not live with an ever present threat to their lives.
It should never have been awarded to South Africa in the first place and again if you do your research you will find it only was because the ANC promised Blatter the entire African vote to have him re-elected as President of FIFA in exchange for the World Cup.In the event he did not need it but Blatter is the most corrupt and hated person in World football.

Viking said...

@Andrea

thanks for commenting. I think that objection presupposes that the Apartheid-era boycott was justified and I don't think it was, as politics should not encrouch on sporting events. I also think the 1980 and 84 Olympic boycotts were wrong, and only the USSR boycotted Hitler's 1936 Olympics, where he tried, but failed, to show the world the glory of his regime.

The financial objections, well there are two elements. Germany, according to the link I provided, made an outright profit - please provide a link that says otherwise - but the second element is like that of a Keynesian kick-start to the economy, which is not so easy to measure.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/46140/world_cup_2006_economics.html

This link provides a contrary argument to mine, but even it talks about growth and permanent jobs created.

We will have to wait and see.

Andrea Muhrrteyn said...

Hi viking,

No worries.. ;-)

No the objection does not pre-suppose that the apartheid era boycott had to be 'justified'. I don't think it was, but it was supported worldwide as justified, irrespective of lacking 'just war' justification.

In fact, I think my Boycott Campaign has far more just war justification than the Anti-Apartheid Boycott Campaign.

I will have to agree to disagree that politics and sports are not linked. It was not SAFA who bid for the World Cup, but the ANC.

On this I am in agreement with a strange source, but I agree on his principle, but not his method.

"The Personal is Political".

I don't compartmentalize my 'business' from my politics, or my sport from my politics. My whole life I live in accordance with my political cultural values. I don't practice one form of politics in the political arena, another at home, another at the sports field. but maybe you mean something different by 'politics' than i do.

As I said, happy to agree to disagree.

As for financial objections: there are plenty links to germany having made a financial loss, i have written them previously, but cant' remember which post, i will look for you, later, just bit busy right now. but will try and find them for you.

It may be in these links:
http://why-we-are-white-refugees.blogspot.com/search/label/*%202010%20WC%3A%20Big%20Five, about costs of stadiums.

As for the Keynesian kickstart, it will happen to be as fake as Obama's keynesian kickstart of printing $2 trillion...

All it has and will do is increase inflation, massively and raise food prices, as it has done...

None of this benefits the black poor, who are now being encouraged to see the world cup as follows, by among others Andile Mngxitama, of the Sowetan, in his request to the President for a debate on white racism :
This explains why we are hosting a shockingly expensive Soccer World Cup for the enrichment and enjoyment of whites. The debt of the World Cup is likely to be paid even by our children.

(My Response to him)

Poor blacks are already being primed to blame whites, for the expenses and problems of the world cup, when all those stadiums don't give them jobs etc...

Viking said...

Your response to Andile Mngxitama is excellent. They like to complain about the "white owned media" but in reality when someone like this, or Malema, opens their mouth their lies spread like wildfire.
You've just reminded me to post on the Malema interview I saw yesterday ...

Exzanian said...

Viking, you make a good argument. Personally I think it is not good for anyone wishing disaster upon the WC and especially some poor innocent tourists being killed, in the hope that that will "at last" show the world what is happening in SA...At the same time, I simply cannot find a fibre in my body wishing the WC to be a success, because I know the vainglorious ANC are waiting to lap up the credit, after all they have done to wreck the country so far. I guess it's best just to be neutral and see how it pans out. One thing you can be sure of, after 2010, the whole world will know what a fucking vuvuzela is!

Viking said...

@Ex

I always admire you ability to break down arguments into their basic elements, when it takes me about ten pages to do it..
You are right in what you say, the ANC will look on this as THEIR success, and that's a horrible prospect..

Lime said...

@ Ex - good one (as always)! Share your vuvuzela sentiments 100%.

Andrea Muhrrteyn said...

Viking,

Glad you liked my response to ol Andile... And yes i agree..
in reality when someone like this, or Malema, opens their mouth their lies spread like wildfire.

When it becomes inconvenient for them to acknowledge their own refusal to confront reality, and/or their lack of impartial serious enquiry, before going off on some hair brained scheme, because the FIFA-Mafia, made them a suicidal offer they could not refuse.... then of course -- once again -- whitey will be the 'devil'...

As for the SWC being a success... I dont know.. i doubt how it could be. there are rumblings from china, that their financial bubble is about to burst, which when it does so may be more spectacular worldwide, than the sub-prime et al crisis of the USA...; which will ripple through economic markets (already allegedly there is panic in banks in china, and their 'reserve bank' is going ballistic trying to do damage control')... so if that bursts before June... only the super rich and super crazy, will be coming to SWC.., and each of htem will be able to have htier own SAPS protection, in empty stadiums, which will be filled with free tickets.. should be interesting, to say the least! ;-)