Olympic Ambivalence

Before the Olympics began, I was pretty set in my mind. Here was a country where communist dictatorship forms an unholy alliance with rampant capitalism. I’m no fan of “freedom of speech”, as an aim above “food, clothing, shelter”, but for a government to keep it’s people without many of the basic freedoms and rights of being alive in the 21st century is pretty unforgivable.

Although deeply flawed, the gamers are the only half-chance of each country of the world being together in peace for the noble aim of friendly yet fierce competition.

China won the games on a raft of promises it never meant to keep. The opportunity for the games to be used as a carrot (“make these changes and the games will come”) was lost, and China made it the most politically charged for decades. Not to mention the abuse they heaped on the ordinary people of Beijing to clear them out of the way lest they look untidy.

So, I was all set to ignore them and hold my own little boycott.

Then, the opening ceremony came and was (apparently) spectacular. The people of China were hailed as welcoming, wanting to talk to and to help all their foreign friends coming to the city. I began to wonder: perhaps the games were for them, and not the authorities. Maybe the people deserve them, even if their government doesn’t. After all, more than most they don’t choose their government.

But then again, what could the games be more than an endorsement of it’s host government? So I don’t know.

The corrupt, corporation-bound ICC are bad enough, and giving it to China is like the final bullet in the head of the pretence that the games have ideals. Maybe it’s time the whole concept was re-thought and then it could become the non-political, peaceful competition that humanity deserves.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2008/aug/09/olympics20081

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/09/olympics2008.china