Blue Crab Boulevard

A Bridge (Game) Too Far

There is a report today about those unnecessary controversies that are popping up frequently these days. A member of a woman’s bridge team, after winning a competition in China, held up a sign that read, “We did not vote for Bush.” The women on the team are paid professionals and some of them make their entire livelihood from playing tournaments. Now the organization that the team plays for is looking to sanction the women, rather forcefully, over their behavior.

In the genteel world of bridge, disputes are usually handled quietly and rarely involve issues of national policy. But in a fight reminiscent of the brouhaha over an anti-Bush statement by Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks in 2003, a team of women who represented the United States at the world bridge championships in Shanghai last month is facing sanctions, including a yearlong ban from competition, for a spur-of-the-moment protest.

At issue is a crudely lettered sign, scribbled on the back of a menu, that was held up at an awards dinner and read, “We did not vote for Bush.”

By e-mail, angry bridge players have accused the women of “treason” and “sedition.”

“This isn’t a free-speech issue,” said Jan Martel, president of the United States Bridge Federation, the nonprofit group that selects teams for international tournaments. “There isn’t any question that private organizations can control the speech of people who represent them.”

Not so, said Danny Kleinman, a professional bridge player, teacher and columnist. “If the U.S.B.F. wants to impose conditions of membership that involve curtailment of free speech, then it cannot claim to represent our country in international competition,” he said by e-mail.

Ms. Martel said the action by the team, which had won the Venice Cup, the women’s title, at the Shanghai event, could cost the federation corporate sponsors.

The players have been stunned by the reaction to what they saw as a spontaneous gesture, “a moment of levity,” said Gail Greenberg, the team’s nonplaying captain and winner of 11 world championships.

You can read the whole, tiresome article for yourself by following the link. The Times is correct about one thing here: the situation is reminiscent of the Dixie Chick brouhaha. It is a pointless gesture made in a foreign venue by paid employees. In that respect, it is an unforced error on the part of the bridge team.

The fact is, whether you particularly like it or not, that the right to free speech has never guaranteed a right to freedom from consequences. If you do not think that is true, try telling the President of the company you work for some of that person’s personal shortcomings. Alternatively, walk up to a police officer and tell him about a crime you just committed. Silly examples but you get the point. Additionally, there is no First Amendment issue because the government is not involved. (Congress shall make no law…)

It seems that everything these days is politicized. It is becoming tedious in the extreme. I see both sides on this one but the team used, frankly, bad judgment in turning a bridge competition into a political venue. They made another bad choice when they did not consider the location that they were in – China is not exactly a hotbed of real democracy. The United States Bridge Federation may be making the entire matter worse by turning the team into martyrs. (Check the howling outrage from the left on Memeorandum.)

Another day, another pointless controversy.

News, World news | Gaius November 14, 2007

By John, November 14, 2007 @ 3:02 pm

Absolutely agree on the tedious.
By Mockinbird, November 14, 2007 @ 3:18 pm

The politics of identity is to the left. People who have conservative views as to politics
have more important things to do almost all of the time. Left wingers who feel a little unimportant let everyone know their politcs:Dixie Chicks, Bridge clubs and of course, college students. It’s just wannabee narcissism. Just ignore it. We have more important things to be concerned with.
By sam, November 14, 2007 @ 3:30 pm

On the other hand, I have heard from people that have traveled overseas that they as Americans encounter hostility from locals until they say something like the bridge players did. The instance I heard about was in New Zealand. So maybe they were just trying to defuse the unpleasant actions of others. Not that I agree with what they did . . .
By Jon Swift, November 14, 2007 @ 3:42 pm

It certainly was poor judgment to do what they did in China. Unfortunately, the Chinese people might get the idea that it is OK to criticize your leaders. They need to learn that free speech has its limits just as the people of Pakistan are learning now.
By Gaius, November 14, 2007 @ 3:48 pm

Come on, Jon. Not everything has to be political. Not every activity should be an excuse to sound off about your political beliefs.

And it is not a free speech issue.