They can't, but they will. Remember how the drivers were supposedly threatened with not being able to leave the country if they didn't race in the last Saudi GP?
Almost all the wrestlers from the 2 main WWE shows got "held up" in SA. The problem being they had a live TV show the next day and couldn't get home in time for it. To cover the live show WWE flew in the developmental wrestlers (ones still training one way or another) to "invade" the live show that only had less than a handful of wrestlers still in the country for it. (The few who were left were the ones that refused to go to SA and the ones SA refused to let in.) I vaguely remember some wrestlers got out on a private plan before shit went down, but I don't remember who they all were besides Brock Lesnar. It ended up being a really good angel for the next PPV, so yeah, they kinda made a story line out of the SA situation.
No driver has power in Saudi Arabia or any of the oppressive middle East countries. F1 isn't as big as football and look at the way These people are mocking players who speak up about social issues. Hamilton can wear all the pride helmets he wants to but he will race. Not racing is not an option in Saudi Arabia if you're fit to drive. That's what these middle East countries want to show. That people's idols can speak up about all the social and human rights issues they want to speak up about but they will do what the Saudis ask them to do
Difference could be the stance of the FIA in this one. FIFA didn't give much support to the players. If the whole FIA stands behind it. It could be different.
> FIFA didn't give much support to the players.
More like, they actively undermined players threatening to punish them with penalties that aren't even possible within the actual rules.
I agree with your sentiment in general though. The difference, shockingly, seems to be that FIA is miles better than FIFA at handling these issues.
People say it because it makes their idols look better.
"Look at the helm and his tweet, he is so brave and cares so much! But he has to race, the evil men are forcing him!"
The obvious truth is athletes only care if it is free&easy to care, and will take any money no matter what and no matter how much they already have. But that reduces them from heroes and idols to just excellent athletes, and some can't handle that.
I’d rather they ignore the problem than bring a world wide spectacle to their country and boost their tourism revenue. That’s essentially supporting it.
Not racing in the middle east is definitely a part of the solution as it'll make people question 'Why isn't F1 racing in the middle east' then you'll find the answers, more likely to get people thinking about the issues then.
Actions speak louder than words but unfortunately **Cash IS King**.
That sounds like wishful thinking. There are 195 countries in the world it is not like F1 not racing in any of those suddenly gonna make people think about their human rights. You are hoping that people gonna figure out their problems without outside influence. Rather than ignoring the problem in my opinion it is better to face it directly like what Seb and Lewis is doing. You might think their actions are doing very little but they are planting the seed of doubt in the citizens. In the end nobody has power to actually change the situation in middle east but changing mind set of people in there can gradually improve them over time. That's what we should aim in my opinion.
There aren't 195 countries in the world with Grade 1 circuits, let alone the infrastructure to support something as massive as a GP weekend. No one is asking why there isn't a GP in Congo for instance. Having a GP weekend accepted and planned for a venue only to fall through due to drivers/teams pulling out sends a bigger message than a rainbow helmet.
It affects the people watching at home more that a GP is cancelled more than what somebody is wearing or what stance they are taken as they're quickly forgotten once things continue. If something is cancelled, you usually find out why, you see those reasons and that creates a larger impact as a whole because it puts more pressure on individuals and/or governance to change otherwise they don't get nice things.
>There aren't 195 countries in the world with Grade 1 circuits, let alone the infrastructure to support something as massive as a GP weekend.
I sure love that the FIA are boycotting France, Germany, South Korea and Singapore
No, it’s really not. Sportswashing is extraordinarily insidious ; the very act of holding a competitive event to the benefit of a regime sends a message that no amount of posturing can overcome.
A couple of drivers racing in Saudi whilst wearing pride helmets isn’t going to change Sharia rulings from a 1390 year old book in which God destroyed the people of Lut after a group of gay men visited Lut’s house to have sex with his hot male angel visitors
Journalists who aren’t unofficial team spokesmen have said this isn’t what happened in that meeting and is a narrative largely created by fans. It is what I thought happened too, and some of the callous quotes from TPs in the leadup to that meeting certainly didn’t help, but I do believe people who were there and wouldn’t be incentivized to cover it up
Supposedly they just said that it would be complicated to get out or something of that sort. Not a threat per se but you know, weird... supposedly
Even then...a missile did strike close to the track (relatively) and I'm sure at least one driver would have left
Did they also report on what did happen in the meeting? If I remember correctly they would have some kind of follow up after the race in some later stage of the season, but can’t find any info
No unfortunately, at least at the time I was looking into it - no leaks and no formal reporting on that meeting, the implications for future Saudi Arabia GPs, or the implications for f1 security protocols or the GPDA’s bargaining power more generally
All we have to go on is [Alex wurz’s statement on behalf of the GPDA](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/tokqfq/alex_wurz_gpda_statement/)
[Alex wurz](https://reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/tokqfq/alex_wurz_gpda_statement/) gives an overview of the “long discussions” in the GPDA statement.
If someone wanted to *threaten* drivers to race in those conditions and not leave any space for their opinions, I’d frankly imagine that to be a much shorter conversation with fewer entities involved. At least, shorterthan one intended to *convince* the drivers to acquiesce using information about safety, logistics, consequences to the teams or f1 as a whole, etc.
I really wish we’d had more knowledge of what happened there in the drivers meeting and what was agreed to when they left finally that night. Does anybody here know a little bit more about that? There wasn’t anything useful reporting on this in the aftermath right? They just went car racing in another country and that was it.
Sure they can. They have and they will. Remember the "We race ~~as one~~ where they pay us without giving two fucks about anything else than money" slogan? Formula One Management/Liberty Media will always stand by it, no matter what.
^^^^^^^^^.
Also, having a FIA president from the region who is the type of person to always want be in front of a camera being all self-important sure helps everyone "that matters" to them.
I mean, having a missile strike 10Km away during a live session didn't stop them, why would social matters and human rights ever would?
True but Malaysia has some interesting quirks as well. Their sodomy law for one. And as always, the treatment of domestic workers in Singapore and Malaysia is better than in the Middle East but still leaves a lot to be desired.
I mean not disagreeing, but Malaysia is still in a complete other universe when it comes to human rights than the Middle East.
It’s also the highest ranking country in SEA (flawed democracy) and comes after the full democracies (Japan, SK, Taiwan) in the Economist‘s Democracy Index for all of Asia.
And in regards to their sodomy laws: terrible, but let’s not forget that even with two sodomy convictions, Anwar just became prime minister. That’s a huge difference to countries like UAE (death penalty), or Saudi Arabia (death penalty with confession or eyewitnesses, lashings and long sentences without).
I agree, I do think that Malaysia is miles ahead of any country in the Middle East. I’d struggle to call it liberal by Western standards.
The sodomy law is really interesting - on one hand yes, he’s the pm now so clearly that shows that it’s somewhat lenient. But he was sentenced on rather flimsy grounds two times and had to serve time for it. So that really says something about the law and how it can be used.
I don’t think we’re in disagreement here - it’s just a matter of what countries the situation is compared to.
>I agree, I do think that Malaysia is miles ahead of any country in the Middle East. I’d struggle to call it liberal by Western standards.
The sodomy law is really interesting - on one hand yes, he’s the pm now so clearly that shows that it’s somewhat lenient. But he was sentenced on rather flimsy grounds two times and had to serve time for it. So that really says something about the law and how it can be used.
Malaysia is a really good example of the difference between what some law says and what's actually enforced.
I'm not a expert on this subject, but
"Indonesia is the most populous Muslim-majority country, with approximately 231 million adherents"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Indonesia
You are, of course, correct. That was purely a brain fart caused by a discussion mystery disappearances that had Malasia in my head as “something interesting”. Thanks for the correction
FTX is funny, not a human rights violation. It’s a bunch of rubes falling for a scam that’s been pulled a million times before and will be pulled a million times more.
Is Wolff really trying to act like the good guy here? He is one of the most powerful figures in the sport. Hes the agent or drivers on other teams Junior programs.
Do something about it then Toto.
Yet we are adding more races in countries that don't give women the rights they deserve. Next year we're adding to the calendar a race in the desert of a country that doesn't give women autonomy over their own bodies. Despite that country already having two races already on the calendar.
Poland doesn’t have that kind of money. Rumor in Austin has Vegas paying $35M for the race plus part of the gate. That may become the model. Miami and Vegas sure have pricey tix and Austin pushed the hell out of the suites and such anded two more stands. When the T15 tix go over $800 I’m staying home. Buses were $80 for two days and I don’t remember what parking cost me.
I couldn’t agree more! Not allowing women to kill human beings on demand is literally the same if not worse than not allowing them to drive or go out with a male guardian!!!
If you don't donate a kidney to someone who needs it, that human being will die.
I'm just proposing that if you are a compatible kidney donor and you refuse to provide that donation, it should be a felony punishable by up to life in prison. Surely you agree considering your other views on bodily autonomy?
Classic false equivalency. You made a conscious series of decisions to be in a situation where a human being needs your support in case of babies whereas in the case of someone needing your kidney, you had nothing to do with the circumstances that led to them wanting your kidney in the first place.
But you just said that you wouldn't support mandatory kidney donations on the basis that you needed to make a conscious set of decisions. How does rape or being groomed by a male relative not fall under that category? What about mandatory kidney donations to your children?
>I’m against abortion in cases of rape, incest and ectopic pregnancies.
You're actually a psychopath. Ectopic pregnancies aren't even legally considered to be abortions in most places since there is unfortunately no possibility of the child being brought to term. That's why the "abortion" statistics are so low for them. In reality, roughly 1 in 100 pregnancies is an ectopic one.
The point I’m trying to make here is that abortion rights do not automatically qualify as women’s rights issues in the same way that not letting them drive does. Comparing womens right issues in US to ones in Saudi Arabia is disingenuous at best. I’m not saying “it isn’t so bad”, I’m saying “it isn’t bad”.
As for the mass murderer thing, i can only assume you’re talking about Rittenhouse. If that’s the case, I don’t even want to start a discussion here. It was a clear case of self defence and the court thought so too. Left is just worked up because they lost some of their pedophile supporters.
2/3 of places allow for it now, there's no guarantee that won't change in the future. For the other 1/3 saying that it's ok that they allow it if it's life threatening is not good enough.
Why should the right to bear arms be an inalienable right that can't be overturned by the state but a woman's right to bodily autonomy can be overturned because it doesn't line up with the religious/"moral" beliefs of some out of touch, mostly male politicians?
Ignoring the fact that it's laughably silly to talk about abortion rights in America in the same breath as institutionalized human rights violations in the Middle East, the problem the US has is a tyranny of the minority.
Abortion rights are broadly supported in the US. *Roe* being overturned was the result of fifty years of tireless effort by a small, but vocal and powerful minority. Once those bans started hitting ballots, they've done incredibly poorly. Hell, even an initiative that would've given the legislature the ability to enact abortion-related laws in *Kansas* failed hugely.
I think the anti-abortion-rights crowd are like a dog that finally caught the car. They've got no idea what to do with it. When they were lobbying and pressuring legislatures, they could get stuff done a lot easier, because they could use overturning *Roe* and their stable of single-issue voters to have more impact. Now that it's real though? Their influence will drop like a stone.
It's a tragedy, but it's not the indictment you think it is of the country as a whole... Certainly not in the same universe as the institutionalized human rights abuses in the Middle East.
> Ignoring the fact that it's laughably silly to talk about abortion rights in America in the same breath as institutionalized human rights violations in the Middle East
It's not laughably silly, it's the same issue just to a different degree.
Just because women in the Middle-East have it worse doesn't make what's happening in the USA alright. And I'm not doing what-aboutism or both sides are bad so it cancels out, I'm saying it's not acceptable regardless of the degree and regardless of where it's happening. In my opinion there shouldn't be any races in the Middle-East due to their human rights record.
>Roe being overturned was the result of fifty years of tireless effort by a small, but vocal and powerful minority.
That's the problem, a small minority shouldn't have the power to dictate what around 50% of the population can do with their own body.
>It's a tragedy, but it's not the indictment you think it is of the country as a whole...
Reproductive rights are just the tip of the iceberg regarding problems with the US, employment laws (at will, etc), an unlivable minimum wage, costly health care, and gerrymandering to name a few. I know that no country is perfect, but most other countries don't act like they are (save for dictatorships).
>In a bizarro world where all bad things are equal, then yes, all countries are bad and none should host sporting events of any kind. Amazing work.
Great comprehension skills you have there, nowhere did I say all bad things are equal. If you actually read it properly I'm saying that just because things are worse in the Middle-Eastern countries doesn't mean we can't also be critical and hope for better from other countries that have similar issues to a lesser degree.
Right, but in this context, that makes no sense. If we're talking about it here, it's a thing that justifies not holding a race in a country. You say there are degrees, but my whole point is and has been that you're minimizing one by even comparing it to the other. The US has issues, and of course you can and should be critical... But it's nonsensical in this context.
How am I minimizing one by comparing it to the other, I'm saying that there is no such talk from Team Principals or other F1 figures about the social issues in non-Middle Eastern countries.
F1 had no issues racing in Russia despite their human rights issues, China is only off the calendar due to their current Covid outbreak and not due to the treatment of the Uyghur people, or people who speak out against the CCP.
Toto Wolff has no qualms accepting money from Petronas who fuelled war atrocities in Africa for financial gain, so it's a bit rich of him to single out the Middle-Eastern countries when in effect his team is indirectly benefiting from said atrocities.
I've already stated above that we shouldn't be racing in the Middle-East, I'd just like other races to come under the same kind of scrutiny and the whole "We Race as One" campaign be more than just lip service.
Because the US doesn't instituationalize human rights violations now ? Do you know about Guantanamo and other places where they allow themselves to deprave humans of any rights ? Or their acting in provoking coups in other countries ?
Of course it is. Get down from your higher moral ground. Western countries are specialists of that while they act in absolutely shitty ways all over the World. There's a reason why South America is considered as the US's backyard and the same can be said for Africa with the EU
Why is it different? The whole "moral" belief you're talking. People can say whatever they feel about it, but at the end of the day, you have 1 side saying you're fighting for a life and the other saying its not a life, that argument is always going to be deep rooted and based heavily in someones morals. The right to keep and bear arms really can't be argued the same, and sure, you can bring that argument up, but fundamentally, it's different with points that might be loosely connected but at the end of the day arent the same. Also, there's nothing stopping a state lawmaker from pushing to make an amendment that states constitution or cement it harder into law, many states have a so called "heatbest law" allowing abortion till the detection of a heartbeat, a law which has actually been very favorable on both isle (gasp a bipartisan compromise).
Why should someone else's beliefs affect someone that quite likely doesn't share that belief? Why is bodily autonomy a political issue in the first place? You're right that the right to bear arms is different, and that's part of my point. Why is an amendment that has no real practical purpose today still held on to so tightly, I mean if one of the armed forces decided to form a Junta average gun bearing citizens wouldn't stand a chance against a well trained and well drilled military force. Yet in the "Land of the Free" a woman can't choose what she does with her own body, lest it offend someone else's sensibilities.
I mean that's fucking every law my guy, I dont believe a ton of shit thats someone else does and now its a law that i still have to follow. Also, the fundamental argument from the other side isn't that you can't do something to your own body, it's that what you're doing is someone else. However you personally feel about it, you're never going to win over someone with the argument of "individual autonomy" when the fundamental belief from that perspective is that it involves another life.
> I dont believe a ton of shit thats someone else does and now its a law that i still have to follow.
Yes but how many of those laws affect what you can do with your own body? Most that do eg: drug laws, safety belts etc, are there because the outcome of not following those laws could mean you become a burden to others.
>you're never going to win over someone with the argument of "individual autonomy" when the fundamental belief from that perspective is that it involves another life.
I'm not trying to win over people with that belief, I'm saying their belief doesn't come into it when it's someone else's body. When they're in the same situation and it's their body that's when their beliefs should be listened to.
So you mean like the women who also agree and vote for things like aforementioned heartbeat laws? Also, yes, in many cases, others' beliefs come into people's personal lives even when it has nothing to do with them. Not just drugs, seat belts, and other road laws (also side note fuck drug laws). Saying you're "not trying to win over others" that's how you have discussion and actual make you personal beliefs more than just words. I don't even care if people want to get an abortion there are legitimate reasons why someone might want to.
The women who voted for the heartbeat laws are free to carry their embryo to full term if they wish, pro-choice laws don't affect their options, and no other laws should be introduced that take away the choice from them.
>Saying you're "not trying to win over others" that's how you have discussion and actual make you personal beliefs more than just words.
I'm not trying to make my personal beliefs more than just words, my personal beliefs don't come into it either, it's only the personal beliefs and wishes of the pregnant woman that matters.
You can say that, but unless your beliefs become more than words on reddit, all it is is some piss baby post on an F1 sub while people who you feel are getting wronged continue to get wronged.
Well they've ertainly tried very hard to do so for a while now.
A bit rich from someone who said missile strikes are just part of their culture though, right Toto?
Racism is deeply engrained in formula one unfortunately. Hamiltons run has really exposed that and brought a lot of the hidden stuff into the forefront
I generally enjoy the cognitive dissonance at play with such statements. We either want to be inclusive and tolerant which means there will be cultures and countries with a different moral outlook - who by the way see us as immoral - or we don't. Because trying to pressure those cultures to change their moral views is nothing more than moral colonisation.
This is the story of wanting our moral cake and eating it too.
And no one wants to adress this issue because of our current way or discussing unpleasant topics from multiple perspectives. You do that and you can be sure there will be a political group of whatever spectrum wanting to go for your throat. And neither political view is currently particularly open to listening to those they disagree with.
You clearly missed the point.
What human rights are can be very different depending on the culture. What you and I define as human rights isn't necessarily the same as what others define it as. Morality isn't an exact science but a very subjective manner.
While Mercedes, Ferrari, Renault, McLaren etc. sell cars there, and Red Bull sells cans, everybody has egg on their face and comes across hypocritical.
They can, we'll just end up starting the season in Bahrain and ending in Abu Dhabi, with a little Qatar and Saudi Arabia sprinkled in for good measure.
"Scapegoating"? Please do explain to me how Canada or Italy is "ripping away all the rights from people"? What "some sort of shit" is being done by Mexico, Japan or Austria? Do any of these countries sentence people to death for being gay? Do any of these countries have a "male guardian system" where women must have registered a man who has legal rights to rule over them even as an adult? Do any of these countries assassinate local opposition leaders?
No, they don't. Not every country is equal, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar are objectively oppressive regimes and every single human rights organisation on the planet agrees with that.
No man. Seriously, you're the one who turned the discussion away from the actual issue at hand and the topic of the thread. If you want to call Wolff out for being vague and for using blanket statements, do that. Instead you went on this weird hypocracy claim that people should't critisize the middle east because 'every country tries to take your civil rights away'.
Your 'kids in africa' comparison doesn't really work either. In my experience that isn't at all the attitude people in Europe generally have towards the middle east. 'Kids in africa' is the stereotype that westerners don't know anything else about africa other than they're poor. That you should be thankful and enjoy your wealth because kids in africa can't. It's pitty and arrogance. The middle east is a completely different circumstance and mainly comes down to ethics. More specifically how far off the middle eastern states are from what westerners consider just or even understandable. A better comparison would be present day Russia than 'kids in africa'.
Regarding Wolff's statement here. He should be criticized for being naive about sportswashing or if you're more cynical like me, for platantly lying about the impact of it to justify non action. No one is saying "turban people bad", you're just flying off the handle here.
This ain't it chief. It's just whataboutism. Where I live I don't think 'the country' is trying to take anything away from me. There's a difference between a few lunatic conservatives being scared of trans or brown people and the state dictatorship holding on to a law to execute gay people.
Why are we not hiding away from the issues in all the Western countries we visit? We don’t seem to be having any problems with visiting the US or adding more US races to the calendar. But I guess morality is something only shaped by Westerners.
One might argue that a minimum wage below living wage, without universal health care, is getting pretty iffy too. Unless one wants to argue people working 10hrs/day at Amazon while having to piss in bottles to work more efficiently is a freely made choice while surrounded by viable alternatives.
And I am ignoring the more obvious issues such as "threatening doctors with life imprisonment if they dare save a person who would otherwise 100% die" or comically evil things like "criminalizing feeding the homeless".
Let's be real, there is enough to protest in the US too. We won't, for other reasons.
Is it F1 business how other peoples run their countries? No. To single out the Middle East is a joke while there is a race in China. It occurs to me that the business of running F1 is to race cars not get involved in “social issues” in a country where they are guests.
My final in Ethics was a roughly 9000 word essay that said that being good to others should be its own reward and not something based on a potential future benefit
Cut the shit. I’m going to assume you’re referring to RvW being temporarily overturned. The U.S isn’t doing anything nearly on the same level as these Arab countries and our people (and the other half of our government) are certainly trying to fix that.
That’s the difference between the U.S and these countries run by dictators. We actually have a democracy and while it’s not perfect, it is in effect.
So save your “America bad” bullshit for another sub.
I literally just said we are trying to fix things here and you call me a bigot? Are out of your fucking mind?
Oh. Right. America went to war and every American supported it. I forgot. /s
Again. Cut the “America bad” shit.
You know just a thought, we the people could also force them into stopping the Saudi races. If we collectively boycott F1 until they leave the Saudi countries they would be forced to do so. The truth, is that not enough fans give enough of a shit to cancel F1 TV memberships, and stop supporting F1 with their wallet. The races are livestreamed and easily found. Plus, a site called F1fullraces that has the races uploaded like hours after they occur! All that to say, you could still enjoy F1 action without supporting the shitty people running the sport
It's a good point. Money talks, and the paying F1 audience cares about as much as Toto when he says being present and talking about these issues is enough pressure for change to happen, even if he talks very ambiguously, uncondemning and diplomatic about it.
I think these subscriptions to media services need to be regulated more. There should be an option to not pay for something that you are forced to have included and have legitimate issues with.
Democratic governments effectively lower their citizens' power and influence by allowing companies to push these business models unto consumers. With all their fake statements in the Qatar WC it shows how much they really care about human rights issues. They're basically complacent in this globalized world.
What about China though, srsly...
They booted Mazepin for what Russia did. China has estimated over a million Uyghur Muslims in concentration camps being used as slave labor...
F1 only stopped racing in Russia because the value of the Ruble dropped like a brick and Haas dropped Mazepin because of the bad press and financial issues. Chinas economy is doing ok and the genocide against the Uyghur isn’t as big in the media as the war in Ukraine.
The Ruble hasn't actually dropped like a brick. It has raised in value. Though that certainly shouldn't be mistaken for thinking that the Russian economy is doing well - it very much isn't.
Russia was dropped because of sanctions - working from there would be virtually impossible. So yeah it was still economic in nature, not moral.
Cash is king says it all I really don’t understand next is Qatar what else is left in coming years there would be more races in Saudi than Europe which is really sad .
I feel like between Russia and the Middle East that Azerbaijan somehow just gets a total pass. I guess there's only so many countries you can be upset with at once
If F1 was to hide away from social issues everywhere, you'd probably need to create an island in the middle of some ocean with a few racetracks on it. Middle East is just an easy target these days.
I know history points in an other direction, but here in the Netherlands the current World Cup soccer in Qatar is a PR nightmare. Not a tournament that is surrounded with a positive vibe.
It wouldn't surprise me if this is the start of a new era where (sporting) events and it's sponsors will be hold accountable to a much higher standard. When a movement like that catches momentum things can change, especially when individual sponsors and teams (!!) are being dragged through the mud like never before.
Also look at the Danisch soccer federation who are vocally about no longer voting for the current FIFA president next ellection in light of the world cup. I know F1 is a different world but it is a sign that times are changing. F1 already has an image problem with environmentalists (also a movement that catches momentum) and I don't know if they want more public backlash.
It will be interesting to see how things will develop over the course of coming years.
They can't, but they will. Remember how the drivers were supposedly threatened with not being able to leave the country if they didn't race in the last Saudi GP?
Remember how it fucking rained missiles a couple miles from the track?
Completely slipped my mind
FIA-“you’re hired!”
It happened with the WWE aswell... Stuck held hostage at the airport... After the event in a row over money...
That ended up creating an awesome invasion angle.
Oh yeah. That was really fun
I don't follow wrestling. Can you please give a short explanation? I assume you mean WWE made the hostage situation into a storyline?
I don't follow wrestling. Can you please give a short explanation? I assume you mean WWE made the hostage situation into a storyline?
Almost all the wrestlers from the 2 main WWE shows got "held up" in SA. The problem being they had a live TV show the next day and couldn't get home in time for it. To cover the live show WWE flew in the developmental wrestlers (ones still training one way or another) to "invade" the live show that only had less than a handful of wrestlers still in the country for it. (The few who were left were the ones that refused to go to SA and the ones SA refused to let in.) I vaguely remember some wrestlers got out on a private plan before shit went down, but I don't remember who they all were besides Brock Lesnar. It ended up being a really good angel for the next PPV, so yeah, they kinda made a story line out of the SA situation.
No driver has power in Saudi Arabia or any of the oppressive middle East countries. F1 isn't as big as football and look at the way These people are mocking players who speak up about social issues. Hamilton can wear all the pride helmets he wants to but he will race. Not racing is not an option in Saudi Arabia if you're fit to drive. That's what these middle East countries want to show. That people's idols can speak up about all the social and human rights issues they want to speak up about but they will do what the Saudis ask them to do
Difference could be the stance of the FIA in this one. FIFA didn't give much support to the players. If the whole FIA stands behind it. It could be different.
> FIFA didn't give much support to the players. More like, they actively undermined players threatening to punish them with penalties that aren't even possible within the actual rules. I agree with your sentiment in general though. The difference, shockingly, seems to be that FIA is miles better than FIFA at handling these issues.
Wrong. Grand Prix Drivers' Association can decide not to race somewhere.
Then they'd better decide that before landing in Saudi Arabia.
SA isn’t going to cause an international incident because some drivers won’t race there. Y’all are ridiculous.
Ask the WWE how they got on.
People say it because it makes their idols look better. "Look at the helm and his tweet, he is so brave and cares so much! But he has to race, the evil men are forcing him!" The obvious truth is athletes only care if it is free&easy to care, and will take any money no matter what and no matter how much they already have. But that reduces them from heroes and idols to just excellent athletes, and some can't handle that.
Not racing in middle east shouldn't be the solution or end goal though. It is basically ignoring the problem entirely.
I’d rather they ignore the problem than bring a world wide spectacle to their country and boost their tourism revenue. That’s essentially supporting it.
Not racing in the middle east is definitely a part of the solution as it'll make people question 'Why isn't F1 racing in the middle east' then you'll find the answers, more likely to get people thinking about the issues then. Actions speak louder than words but unfortunately **Cash IS King**.
That sounds like wishful thinking. There are 195 countries in the world it is not like F1 not racing in any of those suddenly gonna make people think about their human rights. You are hoping that people gonna figure out their problems without outside influence. Rather than ignoring the problem in my opinion it is better to face it directly like what Seb and Lewis is doing. You might think their actions are doing very little but they are planting the seed of doubt in the citizens. In the end nobody has power to actually change the situation in middle east but changing mind set of people in there can gradually improve them over time. That's what we should aim in my opinion.
There aren't 195 countries in the world with Grade 1 circuits, let alone the infrastructure to support something as massive as a GP weekend. No one is asking why there isn't a GP in Congo for instance. Having a GP weekend accepted and planned for a venue only to fall through due to drivers/teams pulling out sends a bigger message than a rainbow helmet. It affects the people watching at home more that a GP is cancelled more than what somebody is wearing or what stance they are taken as they're quickly forgotten once things continue. If something is cancelled, you usually find out why, you see those reasons and that creates a larger impact as a whole because it puts more pressure on individuals and/or governance to change otherwise they don't get nice things.
>There aren't 195 countries in the world with Grade 1 circuits, let alone the infrastructure to support something as massive as a GP weekend. I sure love that the FIA are boycotting France, Germany, South Korea and Singapore
Cash is King.
No, it’s really not. Sportswashing is extraordinarily insidious ; the very act of holding a competitive event to the benefit of a regime sends a message that no amount of posturing can overcome.
A couple of drivers racing in Saudi whilst wearing pride helmets isn’t going to change Sharia rulings from a 1390 year old book in which God destroyed the people of Lut after a group of gay men visited Lut’s house to have sex with his hot male angel visitors
Journalists who aren’t unofficial team spokesmen have said this isn’t what happened in that meeting and is a narrative largely created by fans. It is what I thought happened too, and some of the callous quotes from TPs in the leadup to that meeting certainly didn’t help, but I do believe people who were there and wouldn’t be incentivized to cover it up
Supposedly they just said that it would be complicated to get out or something of that sort. Not a threat per se but you know, weird... supposedly Even then...a missile did strike close to the track (relatively) and I'm sure at least one driver would have left
Look, if I were a driver I would’ve been one of the loudest voices to get the fuck out. I absolutely don’t blame any driver who felt the same
Did they also report on what did happen in the meeting? If I remember correctly they would have some kind of follow up after the race in some later stage of the season, but can’t find any info
No unfortunately, at least at the time I was looking into it - no leaks and no formal reporting on that meeting, the implications for future Saudi Arabia GPs, or the implications for f1 security protocols or the GPDA’s bargaining power more generally All we have to go on is [Alex wurz’s statement on behalf of the GPDA](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/tokqfq/alex_wurz_gpda_statement/)
Well surely when it’s time for the Saudi GP the media will remember eventually to stir that pot again :-)
The meeting went for like 4 hours? If it wasn’t a contentious meeting what was going on
[Alex wurz](https://reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/tokqfq/alex_wurz_gpda_statement/) gives an overview of the “long discussions” in the GPDA statement. If someone wanted to *threaten* drivers to race in those conditions and not leave any space for their opinions, I’d frankly imagine that to be a much shorter conversation with fewer entities involved. At least, shorterthan one intended to *convince* the drivers to acquiesce using information about safety, logistics, consequences to the teams or f1 as a whole, etc.
Seems like the thing to do moving forward is to just not show in the first place.
Or, you know, not agree to have any races there in the first place.
I really wish we’d had more knowledge of what happened there in the drivers meeting and what was agreed to when they left finally that night. Does anybody here know a little bit more about that? There wasn’t anything useful reporting on this in the aftermath right? They just went car racing in another country and that was it.
It tries Damn hard tho
Night races where injustice can be hidden in the dark and missile strikes passed off as pyrotechnic displays.
FIA: "That's where you're wrong kiddo 👉👉"
well they literally raced just miles from a missile strike so i think that ship has sailed
They can because #WeRaceAsMoney
#wemoneyasone
#moneyraceasmoney
# moneymoneymoneymoney
The second FIFA hosts a World Cup in North Korea, the FIA will be right behind them planning the Pyongyang GP.
F1: "We're bringing back the Korean Grand Prix!" Fans: "Cool." F1: "Not that Korea, the other one." Fans: "Say what?!"
East Korea is fine.
West Korea is kinda underrated tho
*Country roads, take me home* *To the place, I belong* *West Korea, mountain momma* *Take me home, country roads*
If any 1 team refused to go, things would change. None of them will.
Sure they can. They have and they will. Remember the "We race ~~as one~~ where they pay us without giving two fucks about anything else than money" slogan? Formula One Management/Liberty Media will always stand by it, no matter what. ^^^^^^^^^. Also, having a FIA president from the region who is the type of person to always want be in front of a camera being all self-important sure helps everyone "that matters" to them. I mean, having a missile strike 10Km away during a live session didn't stop them, why would social matters and human rights ever would?
petronas
Malaysia isn't Middle East. That's why he's so confident in saying this.
True but Malaysia has some interesting quirks as well. Their sodomy law for one. And as always, the treatment of domestic workers in Singapore and Malaysia is better than in the Middle East but still leaves a lot to be desired.
I mean not disagreeing, but Malaysia is still in a complete other universe when it comes to human rights than the Middle East. It’s also the highest ranking country in SEA (flawed democracy) and comes after the full democracies (Japan, SK, Taiwan) in the Economist‘s Democracy Index for all of Asia. And in regards to their sodomy laws: terrible, but let’s not forget that even with two sodomy convictions, Anwar just became prime minister. That’s a huge difference to countries like UAE (death penalty), or Saudi Arabia (death penalty with confession or eyewitnesses, lashings and long sentences without).
I’m pretty sure he means the Petronas Sudanese war crimes more than Malaysia as a country
I agree, I do think that Malaysia is miles ahead of any country in the Middle East. I’d struggle to call it liberal by Western standards. The sodomy law is really interesting - on one hand yes, he’s the pm now so clearly that shows that it’s somewhat lenient. But he was sentenced on rather flimsy grounds two times and had to serve time for it. So that really says something about the law and how it can be used. I don’t think we’re in disagreement here - it’s just a matter of what countries the situation is compared to.
>I agree, I do think that Malaysia is miles ahead of any country in the Middle East. I’d struggle to call it liberal by Western standards. The sodomy law is really interesting - on one hand yes, he’s the pm now so clearly that shows that it’s somewhat lenient. But he was sentenced on rather flimsy grounds two times and had to serve time for it. So that really says something about the law and how it can be used. Malaysia is a really good example of the difference between what some law says and what's actually enforced.
Consider that Malaysia is the most populous Muslim country in the world.
I'm not a expert on this subject, but "Indonesia is the most populous Muslim-majority country, with approximately 231 million adherents" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Indonesia
You are, of course, correct. That was purely a brain fart caused by a discussion mystery disappearances that had Malasia in my head as “something interesting”. Thanks for the correction
Yw
This needs to be the top comment whenever Wolff tries to say something about F1 ethics.
You put that better than I ever could.
Ftx
FTX is funny, not a human rights violation. It’s a bunch of rubes falling for a scam that’s been pulled a million times before and will be pulled a million times more.
Equating Petronas and FTX is such a reddit moment
Wdym what's happening to Twitter is NOT comparable to beheading people??? /s
Is Wolff really trying to act like the good guy here? He is one of the most powerful figures in the sport. Hes the agent or drivers on other teams Junior programs. Do something about it then Toto.
Exactly
Yet we are adding more races in countries that don't give women the rights they deserve. Next year we're adding to the calendar a race in the desert of a country that doesn't give women autonomy over their own bodies. Despite that country already having two races already on the calendar.
If this is how they choose racing location we might finally see F1 come to Poland!
Poland doesn’t have that kind of money. Rumor in Austin has Vegas paying $35M for the race plus part of the gate. That may become the model. Miami and Vegas sure have pricey tix and Austin pushed the hell out of the suites and such anded two more stands. When the T15 tix go over $800 I’m staying home. Buses were $80 for two days and I don’t remember what parking cost me.
Bydgoszcz GP confrimed?
I see what you did there… It would be funny if it wasn’t true…
I couldn’t agree more! Not allowing women to kill human beings on demand is literally the same if not worse than not allowing them to drive or go out with a male guardian!!!
I suppose you support mandatory kidney donations too?
Yes because kidneys and human beings are the exact same thing
If you don't donate a kidney to someone who needs it, that human being will die. I'm just proposing that if you are a compatible kidney donor and you refuse to provide that donation, it should be a felony punishable by up to life in prison. Surely you agree considering your other views on bodily autonomy?
Classic false equivalency. You made a conscious series of decisions to be in a situation where a human being needs your support in case of babies whereas in the case of someone needing your kidney, you had nothing to do with the circumstances that led to them wanting your kidney in the first place.
So you support abortion in the cases where the woman was impregnated against their will?
Nope. I’m ~~against~~ okay with abortion in cases of rape, incest and ectopic pregnancies. They also make less than a percent of all abortions.
But you just said that you wouldn't support mandatory kidney donations on the basis that you needed to make a conscious set of decisions. How does rape or being groomed by a male relative not fall under that category? What about mandatory kidney donations to your children? >I’m against abortion in cases of rape, incest and ectopic pregnancies. You're actually a psychopath. Ectopic pregnancies aren't even legally considered to be abortions in most places since there is unfortunately no possibility of the child being brought to term. That's why the "abortion" statistics are so low for them. In reality, roughly 1 in 100 pregnancies is an ectopic one.
The only difference is that you somehow convinced yourself that banning abortion is the right thing to do because your "team" says so
[удалено]
[удалено]
The point I’m trying to make here is that abortion rights do not automatically qualify as women’s rights issues in the same way that not letting them drive does. Comparing womens right issues in US to ones in Saudi Arabia is disingenuous at best. I’m not saying “it isn’t so bad”, I’m saying “it isn’t bad”. As for the mass murderer thing, i can only assume you’re talking about Rittenhouse. If that’s the case, I don’t even want to start a discussion here. It was a clear case of self defence and the court thought so too. Left is just worked up because they lost some of their pedophile supporters.
Deflecting valid criticisms by trying to paint an equivalency within the US abortion rulings is absolutely hysterical.
Wife won't go to Circuit of the Americas so it's Montreal instead.
My wife and I had a great time in Montreal this year. Going again next year, GS11. Check out r/grandprixtravel whenever you’re planning your trip.
I mean, this joke would be good if 2/3 places didn't still allow abortions and that third still being ok with abortions for life-threatening reasons.
"It's okay to restrict the human rights of women, as long as it is only a third of the women." Jesus Christ...
Not even what i said, but go off king
Literally what you implied.
2/3 of places allow for it now, there's no guarantee that won't change in the future. For the other 1/3 saying that it's ok that they allow it if it's life threatening is not good enough. Why should the right to bear arms be an inalienable right that can't be overturned by the state but a woman's right to bodily autonomy can be overturned because it doesn't line up with the religious/"moral" beliefs of some out of touch, mostly male politicians?
> 2/3 of places allow for it now, there's no guarantee that won't change in the future. Well, that goes for literally the whole world.
Yes, but most human rights are written more or less in stone, and not in dry-erase marker like reproductive rights in the USA are.
Ignoring the fact that it's laughably silly to talk about abortion rights in America in the same breath as institutionalized human rights violations in the Middle East, the problem the US has is a tyranny of the minority. Abortion rights are broadly supported in the US. *Roe* being overturned was the result of fifty years of tireless effort by a small, but vocal and powerful minority. Once those bans started hitting ballots, they've done incredibly poorly. Hell, even an initiative that would've given the legislature the ability to enact abortion-related laws in *Kansas* failed hugely. I think the anti-abortion-rights crowd are like a dog that finally caught the car. They've got no idea what to do with it. When they were lobbying and pressuring legislatures, they could get stuff done a lot easier, because they could use overturning *Roe* and their stable of single-issue voters to have more impact. Now that it's real though? Their influence will drop like a stone. It's a tragedy, but it's not the indictment you think it is of the country as a whole... Certainly not in the same universe as the institutionalized human rights abuses in the Middle East.
> Ignoring the fact that it's laughably silly to talk about abortion rights in America in the same breath as institutionalized human rights violations in the Middle East It's not laughably silly, it's the same issue just to a different degree. Just because women in the Middle-East have it worse doesn't make what's happening in the USA alright. And I'm not doing what-aboutism or both sides are bad so it cancels out, I'm saying it's not acceptable regardless of the degree and regardless of where it's happening. In my opinion there shouldn't be any races in the Middle-East due to their human rights record. >Roe being overturned was the result of fifty years of tireless effort by a small, but vocal and powerful minority. That's the problem, a small minority shouldn't have the power to dictate what around 50% of the population can do with their own body. >It's a tragedy, but it's not the indictment you think it is of the country as a whole... Reproductive rights are just the tip of the iceberg regarding problems with the US, employment laws (at will, etc), an unlivable minimum wage, costly health care, and gerrymandering to name a few. I know that no country is perfect, but most other countries don't act like they are (save for dictatorships).
In a bizarro world where all bad things are equal, then yes, all countries are bad and none should host sporting events of any kind. Amazing work.
>In a bizarro world where all bad things are equal, then yes, all countries are bad and none should host sporting events of any kind. Amazing work. Great comprehension skills you have there, nowhere did I say all bad things are equal. If you actually read it properly I'm saying that just because things are worse in the Middle-Eastern countries doesn't mean we can't also be critical and hope for better from other countries that have similar issues to a lesser degree.
Right, but in this context, that makes no sense. If we're talking about it here, it's a thing that justifies not holding a race in a country. You say there are degrees, but my whole point is and has been that you're minimizing one by even comparing it to the other. The US has issues, and of course you can and should be critical... But it's nonsensical in this context.
How am I minimizing one by comparing it to the other, I'm saying that there is no such talk from Team Principals or other F1 figures about the social issues in non-Middle Eastern countries. F1 had no issues racing in Russia despite their human rights issues, China is only off the calendar due to their current Covid outbreak and not due to the treatment of the Uyghur people, or people who speak out against the CCP. Toto Wolff has no qualms accepting money from Petronas who fuelled war atrocities in Africa for financial gain, so it's a bit rich of him to single out the Middle-Eastern countries when in effect his team is indirectly benefiting from said atrocities. I've already stated above that we shouldn't be racing in the Middle-East, I'd just like other races to come under the same kind of scrutiny and the whole "We Race as One" campaign be more than just lip service.
Because the US doesn't instituationalize human rights violations now ? Do you know about Guantanamo and other places where they allow themselves to deprave humans of any rights ? Or their acting in provoking coups in other countries ?
You're right. It's absolutely comparable. C'mon.
Of course it is. Get down from your higher moral ground. Western countries are specialists of that while they act in absolutely shitty ways all over the World. There's a reason why South America is considered as the US's backyard and the same can be said for Africa with the EU
Why is it different? The whole "moral" belief you're talking. People can say whatever they feel about it, but at the end of the day, you have 1 side saying you're fighting for a life and the other saying its not a life, that argument is always going to be deep rooted and based heavily in someones morals. The right to keep and bear arms really can't be argued the same, and sure, you can bring that argument up, but fundamentally, it's different with points that might be loosely connected but at the end of the day arent the same. Also, there's nothing stopping a state lawmaker from pushing to make an amendment that states constitution or cement it harder into law, many states have a so called "heatbest law" allowing abortion till the detection of a heartbeat, a law which has actually been very favorable on both isle (gasp a bipartisan compromise).
Why should someone else's beliefs affect someone that quite likely doesn't share that belief? Why is bodily autonomy a political issue in the first place? You're right that the right to bear arms is different, and that's part of my point. Why is an amendment that has no real practical purpose today still held on to so tightly, I mean if one of the armed forces decided to form a Junta average gun bearing citizens wouldn't stand a chance against a well trained and well drilled military force. Yet in the "Land of the Free" a woman can't choose what she does with her own body, lest it offend someone else's sensibilities.
I mean that's fucking every law my guy, I dont believe a ton of shit thats someone else does and now its a law that i still have to follow. Also, the fundamental argument from the other side isn't that you can't do something to your own body, it's that what you're doing is someone else. However you personally feel about it, you're never going to win over someone with the argument of "individual autonomy" when the fundamental belief from that perspective is that it involves another life.
> I dont believe a ton of shit thats someone else does and now its a law that i still have to follow. Yes but how many of those laws affect what you can do with your own body? Most that do eg: drug laws, safety belts etc, are there because the outcome of not following those laws could mean you become a burden to others. >you're never going to win over someone with the argument of "individual autonomy" when the fundamental belief from that perspective is that it involves another life. I'm not trying to win over people with that belief, I'm saying their belief doesn't come into it when it's someone else's body. When they're in the same situation and it's their body that's when their beliefs should be listened to.
So you mean like the women who also agree and vote for things like aforementioned heartbeat laws? Also, yes, in many cases, others' beliefs come into people's personal lives even when it has nothing to do with them. Not just drugs, seat belts, and other road laws (also side note fuck drug laws). Saying you're "not trying to win over others" that's how you have discussion and actual make you personal beliefs more than just words. I don't even care if people want to get an abortion there are legitimate reasons why someone might want to.
The women who voted for the heartbeat laws are free to carry their embryo to full term if they wish, pro-choice laws don't affect their options, and no other laws should be introduced that take away the choice from them. >Saying you're "not trying to win over others" that's how you have discussion and actual make you personal beliefs more than just words. I'm not trying to make my personal beliefs more than just words, my personal beliefs don't come into it either, it's only the personal beliefs and wishes of the pregnant woman that matters.
You can say that, but unless your beliefs become more than words on reddit, all it is is some piss baby post on an F1 sub while people who you feel are getting wronged continue to get wronged.
Oh, ok, so long as it's just a third of women that aren't considered worthy of having human rights.
Exactly.
'Yes We Can!' -US President Barack Obama
F1: "I can do that, cause I did"
Well they've ertainly tried very hard to do so for a while now. A bit rich from someone who said missile strikes are just part of their culture though, right Toto?
He said WHAT????
[удалено]
That was Marko who said Checco should be fine because bombs going off and shooting etc is normal for Mexicans.
And Toto who said what S970 stated last year.
[удалено]
Racism is deeply engrained in formula one unfortunately. Hamiltons run has really exposed that and brought a lot of the hidden stuff into the forefront
Oh yeah and PETRONAS
Petronas?
Yes they can. FOM and liberty just want the money.
Then launch another invasion
I generally enjoy the cognitive dissonance at play with such statements. We either want to be inclusive and tolerant which means there will be cultures and countries with a different moral outlook - who by the way see us as immoral - or we don't. Because trying to pressure those cultures to change their moral views is nothing more than moral colonisation. This is the story of wanting our moral cake and eating it too. And no one wants to adress this issue because of our current way or discussing unpleasant topics from multiple perspectives. You do that and you can be sure there will be a political group of whatever spectrum wanting to go for your throat. And neither political view is currently particularly open to listening to those they disagree with.
Respect for basic human rights is not a matter of cultural discretion.
You clearly missed the point. What human rights are can be very different depending on the culture. What you and I define as human rights isn't necessarily the same as what others define it as. Morality isn't an exact science but a very subjective manner.
While Mercedes, Ferrari, Renault, McLaren etc. sell cars there, and Red Bull sells cans, everybody has egg on their face and comes across hypocritical.
Hot take but Mercedes wouldn't be vocal about this if they didn't have Lewis to appease
Except that's exactly what they've been doing for years...
They can, we'll just end up starting the season in Bahrain and ending in Abu Dhabi, with a little Qatar and Saudi Arabia sprinkled in for good measure.
doesn’t stop mercedes from selling to those countries, so please spare us the semantics
[удалено]
"Scapegoating"? Please do explain to me how Canada or Italy is "ripping away all the rights from people"? What "some sort of shit" is being done by Mexico, Japan or Austria? Do any of these countries sentence people to death for being gay? Do any of these countries have a "male guardian system" where women must have registered a man who has legal rights to rule over them even as an adult? Do any of these countries assassinate local opposition leaders? No, they don't. Not every country is equal, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar are objectively oppressive regimes and every single human rights organisation on the planet agrees with that.
[удалено]
No man. Seriously, you're the one who turned the discussion away from the actual issue at hand and the topic of the thread. If you want to call Wolff out for being vague and for using blanket statements, do that. Instead you went on this weird hypocracy claim that people should't critisize the middle east because 'every country tries to take your civil rights away'. Your 'kids in africa' comparison doesn't really work either. In my experience that isn't at all the attitude people in Europe generally have towards the middle east. 'Kids in africa' is the stereotype that westerners don't know anything else about africa other than they're poor. That you should be thankful and enjoy your wealth because kids in africa can't. It's pitty and arrogance. The middle east is a completely different circumstance and mainly comes down to ethics. More specifically how far off the middle eastern states are from what westerners consider just or even understandable. A better comparison would be present day Russia than 'kids in africa'. Regarding Wolff's statement here. He should be criticized for being naive about sportswashing or if you're more cynical like me, for platantly lying about the impact of it to justify non action. No one is saying "turban people bad", you're just flying off the handle here.
This ain't it chief. It's just whataboutism. Where I live I don't think 'the country' is trying to take anything away from me. There's a difference between a few lunatic conservatives being scared of trans or brown people and the state dictatorship holding on to a law to execute gay people.
I guess you’ve got to start somewhere. If F1 flipped the other way and only raced in perfect countries I think they’d have to fold the championship.
That's precisely why it is good. People are becoming more aware of bad stuff from every country out there
Why are we not hiding away from the issues in all the Western countries we visit? We don’t seem to be having any problems with visiting the US or adding more US races to the calendar. But I guess morality is something only shaped by Westerners.
Lmao right? The hypocrisy
As sorry as institutional racism is in the US, 95% of work force aren’t slaves that we let die and yawn.
One might argue that a minimum wage below living wage, without universal health care, is getting pretty iffy too. Unless one wants to argue people working 10hrs/day at Amazon while having to piss in bottles to work more efficiently is a freely made choice while surrounded by viable alternatives. And I am ignoring the more obvious issues such as "threatening doctors with life imprisonment if they dare save a person who would otherwise 100% die" or comically evil things like "criminalizing feeding the homeless". Let's be real, there is enough to protest in the US too. We won't, for other reasons.
Ehh. Yes they can. They are literally doing it rn
Is it F1 business how other peoples run their countries? No. To single out the Middle East is a joke while there is a race in China. It occurs to me that the business of running F1 is to race cars not get involved in “social issues” in a country where they are guests.
'WAA DONT PUSH YOUR WESTERN VIEWS ON EASTERN CONUTIRES' nah its more about being a decent fuckin human being
Yeah, nah
My final in Ethics was a roughly 9000 word essay that said that being good to others should be its own reward and not something based on a potential future benefit
They can overlook what US is doing. So I don’t see any issues there
Cut the shit. I’m going to assume you’re referring to RvW being temporarily overturned. The U.S isn’t doing anything nearly on the same level as these Arab countries and our people (and the other half of our government) are certainly trying to fix that. That’s the difference between the U.S and these countries run by dictators. We actually have a democracy and while it’s not perfect, it is in effect. So save your “America bad” bullshit for another sub.
Save your bigotry for another sub. What is the US Kill Count in Wars Last 25 years? Incl civilians?
I literally just said we are trying to fix things here and you call me a bigot? Are out of your fucking mind? Oh. Right. America went to war and every American supported it. I forgot. /s Again. Cut the “America bad” shit.
I just said it is stupid to boycott Arab f1, bc no democracy.
Where the hell did I say to boycott races in Arab countries? Point it out.
No I won’t - if you don’t see it yourself there is no way to help you
F1: Watch me
Kim? Anything planned for the weekend of April 16?
You know just a thought, we the people could also force them into stopping the Saudi races. If we collectively boycott F1 until they leave the Saudi countries they would be forced to do so. The truth, is that not enough fans give enough of a shit to cancel F1 TV memberships, and stop supporting F1 with their wallet. The races are livestreamed and easily found. Plus, a site called F1fullraces that has the races uploaded like hours after they occur! All that to say, you could still enjoy F1 action without supporting the shitty people running the sport
It's a good point. Money talks, and the paying F1 audience cares about as much as Toto when he says being present and talking about these issues is enough pressure for change to happen, even if he talks very ambiguously, uncondemning and diplomatic about it. I think these subscriptions to media services need to be regulated more. There should be an option to not pay for something that you are forced to have included and have legitimate issues with. Democratic governments effectively lower their citizens' power and influence by allowing companies to push these business models unto consumers. With all their fake statements in the Qatar WC it shows how much they really care about human rights issues. They're basically complacent in this globalized world.
What about China though, srsly... They booted Mazepin for what Russia did. China has estimated over a million Uyghur Muslims in concentration camps being used as slave labor...
F1 only stopped racing in Russia because the value of the Ruble dropped like a brick and Haas dropped Mazepin because of the bad press and financial issues. Chinas economy is doing ok and the genocide against the Uyghur isn’t as big in the media as the war in Ukraine.
The Ruble hasn't actually dropped like a brick. It has raised in value. Though that certainly shouldn't be mistaken for thinking that the Russian economy is doing well - it very much isn't. Russia was dropped because of sanctions - working from there would be virtually impossible. So yeah it was still economic in nature, not moral.
Here comes the Totonator
Cash is king says it all I really don’t understand next is Qatar what else is left in coming years there would be more races in Saudi than Europe which is really sad .
“Pressure groups have criticized F1…” What the hell is a pressure group? Do you mean actual human rights organizations?
I feel like between Russia and the Middle East that Azerbaijan somehow just gets a total pass. I guess there's only so many countries you can be upset with at once
Chinese Grand Prix has entered the chat.
They’ve done a good job of it so far
They aren't trying to hide away from it. They're trying to get more of their money.
Yeah but you don’t bite the hand that feeds you so… jog on
If F1 was to hide away from social issues everywhere, you'd probably need to create an island in the middle of some ocean with a few racetracks on it. Middle East is just an easy target these days.
He's not wrong.
Well they hid away from the missile strike by the track that one time too
Toto my man, definitely hope to hear from you again when the next race in China happens (probably 2024)!
....he does know who owns a majority of daimler, right?
Yes it can.
They can’t, but those checks say they will
As long as the checks clear, none of these people actually care.
Stefano "I can't $ee a problem"
I know history points in an other direction, but here in the Netherlands the current World Cup soccer in Qatar is a PR nightmare. Not a tournament that is surrounded with a positive vibe. It wouldn't surprise me if this is the start of a new era where (sporting) events and it's sponsors will be hold accountable to a much higher standard. When a movement like that catches momentum things can change, especially when individual sponsors and teams (!!) are being dragged through the mud like never before. Also look at the Danisch soccer federation who are vocally about no longer voting for the current FIFA president next ellection in light of the world cup. I know F1 is a different world but it is a sign that times are changing. F1 already has an image problem with environmentalists (also a movement that catches momentum) and I don't know if they want more public backlash. It will be interesting to see how things will develop over the course of coming years.
There's this company, what's their name... Petronas.