One of the best Journalists in this country sums what sportswashing is all about, it's a video on the 10 year anniversary of Abramovich's ownership in 2013, please watch this video in it's entirety and when he finishes speaking, listen to what they say to him in the studio, that is sportswashing to a tee, they don't want to talk about his past, how he stole the wealth, how he assembled a a private army in the "aluminium wars" and they were over a 100 deaths in that war, the blood he has on his hands from the 90's, sportswashing deflects from the things they don't want people to know or forget, be it a individual, a state or whatever
Saudi Arabia since that Embassy killing, have bought a PL team, won pursesfor HW boxing title fights in Riyadh, UFC, WWE, built 2 F1 tracks and are about to take over Golf with a super league, the Embassy killing, war in Yemen seems to have been forgotten.
I'm not really sure you are understanding my point though mate.
I get tbe theory behind the argument, but I'm just not sure of the reality. Do people honestly think, that Putin would be worried about attacking Abramovich because he owned a football club? His actions appear to suggest otherwise. I cant agree with Syeds assertion there. It's not supported by evidence.
I'm also not sure of his discussion around the morality of it, or that exploiting a crisis is a uniquely Russian thing. It's not. Warren Buffet has built his career on exploiting crisis, and getting rich from buying assets under their value.
Syed talks about it like its theft, but it's the essence of capitalism. The wealthiest seek to exploit crisis to acquire assets at way under their value. That's what the best traders do. It gets spoken about differently in the west but its true. Buffets most successful early trade in Geico almost certainly came with insider knowledge from his father than congressman. I like Buffet, but can see there is a complexity that is missing from Syeds argument here.
Likewise you look at this country, and there is corruption from politicians everywhere. Hancock's mates being awarded contracts for donations. Its everywhere.
Likewise privatisations are about giving away public assets under the value. They call it "wealth creation" or whatever but its theft. Thatcher sold Girobank for pennies on the pound. It's not a Putin thing, or a Russian thing, but about capitalism and neo-liberalism.
Syed should acquaint himself with Naomi Kleins book the Shock Doctrine. What happened in Russia is American policy 101. Yet nobody talks about Americans who make money on the stock markets and the hedge funds, or banks or whoever are centrally involved in this process as in any way complicit. Russia is one country where it exists, but as Klein noted, it's just one of many countries where the same has occurred. The root cause is America, Americanism and the Hedge fund industry that drives it.
Your Syeds of this world exist to obfuscate from this reality. He writes in the Murdoch press and is essentially a right winger, dare I say it a far right figure, penning nonsense about the left.
Rather than look at American imperialism, war, capitalism, privatisation etc he distorts the picture, picking up on legitimate grievances to distort the narrative. Giving the impression Abramovichs rise was some sort of aberration when he reflects the natural follow on from America foreign policy (who's paw prints are all over the Yeltsin takeover).
For the thick, and those only marginally cleverer than the thick he will be some sort of genius. A one eyed man in a desert of blindness. For the truly enlightened, it's just ignorant.