Politics and the Olympic Games

[Libra]

I am all for awareness for people who need help but the games should go on.


your opinion?

 

[sparkchaser]

The games should go on.

 

[beer good]

I'm torn. On the one hand, politics shouldn't interfere with sports. On the other hand, it's foolish to pretend that the Olympics are still about amateurs competing simply for the love of the sport... this is HUGE business, and while that's not a bad thing in and of itself, some part of me wants to remark "Yes, God forbid Coca-Cola and Nike should lose money just because a few billion Chinese are living in a dictatorship."

IMO, China shouldn't have gotten the Olympics in the first place (neither should the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany, for instance). Now that they've got them... *shrug* With any luck, at least it will put more spotlight on the Chinese government.

But hey, at least they've built brand new arenas, so it's not like any athletes will have to compete in arenas where people have been executed.

 

[Sybarite]

... On the other hand, it's foolish to pretend that the Olympics are still about amateurs competing simply for the love of the sport...

And thank goodness for that. Amateurism was an excuse to keep working-class people out of organised and top-class sport.

If you didn't have a private income and could, therefore, afford to dedicate yourself to sport in your copious free time, but had to actually go and earn a living, your chances of getting into sport were remote.

In the UK, rugby is a perfect example. In the 19th century, teams in the north of England were primarily working class. Players had to give up half a day's work – and pay – to play on Saturday afternoons. The northern clubs went down to the game's HQ in the south and asked for 'broken-time payments' – in other words, compensation for the wages lost. This was rejected and a new by-law was entered enshrining amateurism. In 1895, therefore, the northern clubs split to form Rugby League. The rest became known as Rugby Union. Although there has been a slow change of culture since RU eventually became openly professional in 1995 (the word 'shamateurism' had been around for a long time, describing how that code got around its own by-laws), RU is still seen largely as the middle and upper-class code, while RL is the working-class one.

In cricket, we still had a culture of 'gentlemen and players' until the 1960s. The 'gentlemen' were the amateurs and the players were those who couldn't play unless they got paid. It was no coincidence that teams such as Lancashire and Yorkshire, from the industrial north, had more players in their ranks than the likes of Middlesex, based at the home of cricket, Lord's. And the class snobbery of this extended to not allowing the 'players' to change in the pavillion, but in a separate changing room. So a team would take the field with, say (in the case of Yorkshire), one member of the side emerging from the pavillion with 10 Middlesex cricketers, and the rest of the side emerging from the changing room some way away. And it was certainly not easy for working-class cricketers to progress to international honours – regardless of talent – until the last 25 years or so.

Tennis was another example. Athletics too. Rowing too – Steve Redgrave is a rarity as a British oarsman in not having been educated at public school but at an ordinary state school.

Boxing paid – so boxing attracted working-class athletes. Football paid – it's remains essentially a working-class game.

In the US, a lot of sport has been subsidised by the college system, which allowed sports to circumvent charges of professionalism. Athletics is a case in point – what real difference was there between the college system and the system in, sway, the USSR, where many athletes were in the military?

The degree to which commercialism in sport has developed is another matter. But amateurism was often a sham or the result of class snobbery.

Politics and sport have always been bedfellows. Not just in the way I've outlined above, but also in other ways. For instance, school sports were seen in the UK as being a vital way to prepare young men for building and defending the British Empire. Rudyard Kipling was a major exponent of this veiw – tin a tragic twist of irony, his football-playing son was one of the first killed in the Flanders mud in WWI.

Then there was the Cold War proxy war that was drugs in sport. The Bulgarian weightlifters were found by the US team to be taking drugs. So what did the US team do? That's right – they started taking them too. Drugs testing and drugs policies have been tarnished completely by politics in this proxy war.

Politics invaded in sport in terms of keeping women on the sidelines for so long. It was politic in the UK for women to be allowed to play football during WWI, as this entertained people, but after the war, this had to be clamped down on. Women were banned from playing football in any Football Association ground in the UK. That was a political decision, largely to do with the general drive women back into the home after they'd had to do much of the home front work during the war.

There was apartheid South Africa and the sporting boycott.

There were government attempts to use British football fans as guinea pigs for ID cards in the 1980s.

There was the black power salute at the '68 games.

There was Munich '72.

There was the England football team giving a Nazi salute before a game in Berlin in 1938 – by order of the Foreign Office.

Politics and sport have always been bedfellows.

The Chinese government is not particularly pleasant, but perhaps people would suggest boycotting the UK and US teams since the governments of those countries are responsible for an illegal war that has already killed hundreds of thousands of people? What about any Zimbabwean team or one from North Korea? What about the Israeli team or the Iranian one?

 

[joderu95]

With any luck, at least it will put more spotlight on the Chinese government.

But hey, at least they've built brand new arenas, so it's not like any athletes will have to compete in arenas where people have been executed.

It might put the spotlight on the government but it still won't do any good. The Chinese have successfully co-opted capitalism and that gives them a free pass. God forbid they should call in the mountain of notes they hold over our head so it is a bit difficult to leverage their government to improve their human rights policy.

That last part of your quote reminded me of this video I watched when I listened Harry Wu speak about four years ago. He told us of his experience in Chinese political prisons and we watched people get taken out to a field, kneel down in the dirt and get shot in the back of the head en masse. Then the government apparently sends a bill to the executed's family charging them for the bullet.

 

[Sybarite]

... But hey, at least they've built brand new arenas, so it's not like any athletes will have to compete in arenas where people have been executed.

Estadio Chile, anyone?

 

[Samerron]

I believe there should be a threat, but the end of the day the games should go on. After all it is all a political game, a game of implicit messages, a game of POWER!

 

[hockeycop]

I think China's record on human rights should be front and center during the Olympic games.

We shouldn’t single out China though. One thing we shouldn't forget is that western countries exploit the laws in China. When Tycor was going through their lead-paint-in-children’s-toys issue, the CEO (I think he was the CEO) in front of a government panel said they were only following the rules and regulations of the Chinese government. In a rebuttal, the CEO was reminded that Tycor searched the world over to find the country with the most laxed laws so that the cheapest toys could be produced.

During these protests, protesters should also single out corporations that produce goods in China because of the laxed laws that they have. Secondly, protesters should call on foreign companies that produce goods in China to follow the same laws that are in their native countries.

 

[hockeycop]

Another thing. Why does China want to rule Tibet so badly? Is there an oil or gold reserve that I don't know about? I really don't know the history.

 

[Libra]

Anything you pick up today and read a label is "made in China" so why don't big companys stop buying things from China that would give them 200 % gain and give jobs here at home? Money makes the world go round ,thats why and we close our eyes to other things.

 

[Samerron]

U.N. chief to skip Olympic opening
The United Nations secretary general has joined a growing list of high-profile leaders who have indicated they will not attend the Olympic Games' opening ceremony in Beijing, as the troubled torch relay moved to Argentina on Friday.
U.N. chief to skip Beijing ceremony - CNN.com

 

[Libra]

You know when someone puts their nose into someone elses business , nothing good comes from it. Look at Iraq.

Like I said above , I don't like to see anyone suffer, but have you seen whats going on in Africa? The government just sticks its nose where there is something to gain.

Who are we to constantly tell other countries how to govern? They should stop inports with China if they want to make a statement, not ruin the games.

 

[ylris611203]

Tibet is just using the Games to bring attention to it's self and ruin the sports for everyone else.

Those who put Tibet and human rights above the Games won't go, the others will regardless of what excuse they use for being there.

 

[joderu95]

Tibet is just using the Games to bring attention to it's self and ruin the sports for everyone else.

.....and that's not alright? If so, let me go ahead and mock that a little bit.

Pretty damn petty of them huh? To compromise the integrity of the Olympics is unacceptable. I want to watch my morally rigorous sprinters compete without the distraction of some little mountain nation trying to throw off the yoke of Chinese rule.

The games were ruined for me when I was a kid when those female GDR shot-putters were packing Barbasol around in their travel bags.

 

[Sybarite]

... The games were ruined for me when I was a kid when those female GDR shot-putters were packing Barbasol around in their travel bags.

What about the US weightlifters who stuffed themselves with steroids because the Bulgarians did the same?

Did they upset you or didn't you worry about your own athletes taking drugs?

 

[joderu95]

What about the US weightlifters who stuffed themselves with steroids because the Bulgarians did the same?

Did they upset you or didn't you worry about your own athletes taking drugs?

You're right I didn't mention U.S. weightlifters. I didn't mention various sprinters like Marion Jones, Ben Johnson and Justin Gatlin either. Does that mean I condone what they did too? Want me to address each country's individual Olympic transgressions next time? Try to recognize a joke in print or do I need to insert a smiley?

The point is the entire games are less than credible and it is more of a nationalistic parade than anything.

 

[sparkchaser]

The point is the entire games are less than credible and it is more of a nationalistic parade than anything.

Word son. Word.

 

[Libra]

The point is the entire games are less than credible and it is more of a nationalistic parade than anything.

You have made me think with another point of veiw.

What upsets me is that there are a lot of countries, and people suffering that need help and I took it as " why boycott now? why not boycott other countries that are like China? there must be some gain to us right?"

but you have also made me see another point of veiw you right at what you say, athletes are not the athletes from before, everyone is doping up to get a medal and our kids are looking up at these individuals as models.

 

[Sybarite]

You're right I didn't mention U.S. weightlifters. I didn't mention various sprinters like Marion Jones, Ben Johnson and Justin Gatlin either. Does that mean I condone what they did too? Want me to address each country's individual Olympic transgressions next time? Try to recognize a joke in print or do I need to insert a smiley?

Well, at least you recognised that my post was serious, eh? How did you do that, given that I no more used little smiley give-aways than you did?

The point is the entire games are less than credible and it is more of a nationalistic parade than anything.

Politics and sport have always mixed, as I explained at some length earlier. If some people want to maintain a fantasy where they think that only the Cold War or drugs have been added to sport recently, then they're naive. Nationalism isn't a new addition to sport – including the Games – either.

See 1936 if you really need a nice specific example. PS: that was also the Games where the host nation introduced the idea of the Olympic torch.

Drugs are not actually a simple issue – the usual sort of hand-wringing over the issue is another naive one, which partly relies on an ideas that there is (or ever has been) such a thing as a level playing field in sport.

There isn't.

There never has been.

Athletes from the developed world will, generally, have better diets.

Athletes from countries at high altitude will have benefits over those from low altitudes in a number of events.

There's not a sportsperson in the world who has a 'natural' diet. If you examine for one iota of a second the sort of diet that sportsmen and women have to eat, then you'll see that it is not 'normal' – any more than the training that they do is 'normal'. Did you know that a woman at a state of athletic fitness will probably have lost most if not all sign of monthly periods? How 'natural' do you think that that is? Is taking supplements and all sorts of vitamins etc 'natural'? How would that make you a 'natural' athlete?

There's an awful lot of crap talked about drugs in sport. The only thing that should matter is the health of the athletes.

I did some shot putt a few years ago with Essex Ladies (Sally Gunnell's old club). The coach told me that he had to tell the parents of young members (under 16) never to give them a simple cold remedy such as a Lemsip if they had a cold, because, if they had a call the next day for random testing, they'd fail.

That's how completely fücked up the system is – a 16-year-old can't risk taking an over-the-counter cold remedy.

The case in the UK of Diane Modahl showed just how ridiculous the situation is – it's all very well testing athletes for, say, certain hormones, but it would be a really good idea if the testers had the basis science in place first to know just how much of X hormone is actually naturally made in the human body – not just ban people because you make a guess.

And then there's the entire question of who is testing the testers. If anyone seriously imagines that there isn't corruption in the testing system, then they're naive too.

 

[joderu95]

Well, at least you recognised that my post was serious, eh? How did you do that, given that I no more used little smiley give-aways than you did?

Pardom me if I was wrong it just seemed your original quote was a bit defensive. You make my point about Olympics being a nationalistic parade when you say "my own athletes" and referring specifically to "U.S. athletes." I am not interested in disparaging one country's athletes while at the same time promoting American ones. The whole system is crap and like I already mentioned, the U.S. has some of the biggest perpetrators.

Politics and sport have always mixed, as I explained at some length earlier. If some people want to maintain a fantasy where they think that only the Cold War or drugs have been added to sport recently, then they're naive. Nationalism isn't a new addition to sport – including the Games – either.

See 1936 if you really need a nice specific example. PS: that was also the Games where the host nation introduced the idea of the Olympic torch.

Drugs are not actually a simple issue – the usual sort of hand-wringing over the issue is another naive one, which partly relies on an ideas that there is (or ever has been) such a thing as a level playing field in sport.

There isn't.

There never has been.

Athletes from the developed world will, generally, have better diets.

Athletes from countries at high altitude will have benefits over those from low altitudes in a number of events.

There's not a sportsperson in the world who has a 'natural' diet. If you examine for one iota of a second the sort of diet that sportsmen and women have to eat, then you'll see that it is not 'normal' – any more than the training that they do is 'normal'. Did you know that a woman at a state of athletic fitness will probably have lost most if not all sign of monthly periods? How 'natural' do you think that that is? Is taking supplements and all sorts of vitamins etc 'natural'? How would that make you a 'natural' athlete?

There's an awful lot of crap talked about drugs in sport. The only thing that should matter is the health of the athletes.

I did some shot putt a few years ago with Essex Ladies (Sally Gunnell's old club). The coach told me that he had to tell the parents of young members (under 16) never to give them a simple cold remedy such as a Lemsip if they had a cold, because, if they had a call the next day for random testing, they'd fail.

That's how completely fücked up the system is – a 16-year-old can't risk taking an over-the-counter cold remedy.

The case in the UK of Diane Modahl showed just how ridiculous the situation is – it's all very well testing athletes for, say, certain hormones, but it would be a really good idea if the testers had the basis science in place first to know just how much of X hormone is actually naturally made in the human body – not just ban people because you make a guess.

And then there's the entire question of who is testing the testers. If anyone seriously imagines that there isn't corruption in the testing system, then they're naive too.

Wow that is quite the sports diatribe. I'm cynical too but maybe slightly more optimistic (my own paradox). I think we can do better than only ensure the athletes health.

There is a lot in there that I don't dispute one bit. I am less agreeable to your many absolutes like "There isn't. There never has been. There's not a sportsperson in the world who has a 'natural diet.' The only thing that should matter is the health of the athletes." There's some philosophical and semantical issues in there that I see no point in arguing.

I don't think because there is corruption in basically all areas of the games (including the drug testers) that we should give up trying to root out cheating. Modern drugs used for improving an athlete's chances of winning are far more effective today than they were during the Cold War, let alone 70years ago.