I agree, in part, with the comments of J. Garner in his letter headlined 'Beijing's Olympic bid hampered by dreadful human-rights record' (South China Morning Post, July 9).
The Olympics have been commercialised in recent years. However, that doesn't mean they should be excised from everyone's minds, as if they are not worth organising and holding. The Olympics, despite commercialisation, represent an ideal held in many people's minds of what humans can achieve.
Despite the commercialisation and nationalism of which Mr Garner complains, the Olympics have made many a young boy or girl take up exercise or sports and have produced many wonderful athletes. National pride is a factor, but this is always the case when hosting any international event. Is Mr Garner dismissing all commercialised sporting events, such as the World Cup?
It is not just the people of Beijing who want to host the Olympics. The whole of China supports Beijing's bid, as do many overseas Chinese. People of different races and from a variety of cultures want the Chinese capital's bid to succeed. It is unfair that the Games have been held in the United States more times than in any other country.
The Olympic movement is not about politics. It is about sport. Besides, what some people regard as a democracy, other people regard as an inhumane regime. The US has the death penalty, and many people are against this. Should we therefore refuse any future bid to host the Games from an American city until capital punishment is ended in that country? I think many people would disagree with such an argument.
There have been many improvements in China. Since the open-door policy was introduced in 1979, China has made great advances, more than most governments could hope to do in the space of 20 years. Given the country's large population, the Chinese Government has done well to prevent famine.