Author’s note, from Feb. 9, 2018:
The Olympics started today, and I made sure to watch the opening ceremony. It was a surreal mix of avant-garde artistic mysticism, flashing lights, extravagant costumes and political intrigue. As the athletes walked out the political context of these games in South Korea became so much clearer.
The logo for the 2018 Winter Olympic Games in PyeongChang, South Korea.
The Russian Olympic team was banned due to a massive state-sponsored doping controversy. There were still a good 200 Russian athletes who were cleared of any wrongdoing, so they were allowed to compete – under the Olympic flag, and as “The Olympic Athletes from Russia”. If any of the athletes win a medal, they are not able to play the Russian anthem or raise the Russian flag. Despite this, there were hundreds of Russian fans in attendance waving Russian flags. Nationalism always finds a way.
And of course there’s the giant elephant in the room – North Korea. In a grand gesture of inclusivity, the Korean Teams walked out together as a “Unified Korea”. This was quite controversial, as many people in South Korean society do not favour unification – they feel quite distinct now. The broadcast announcers made sure to mention that the Demilitarized Zone was only 100 kilometers away. Mike Pence was in attendance, and so was the sister of Kim Jong Un. The organizers had to ensure they were seated far apart given the tension between the two nations at the moment. It seems a far cry from de Coubertin’s ideals.
Writing back in 1945, George Orwell had a few things to say about sports and competition.
“Sport, is war minus the shooting. And how could it be otherwise? I am always amazed when I hear people saying that sport creates goodwill between the nations, and that if only the common peoples of the world could meet one another at football or cricket, they would have no inclination to meet on the battlefield. Even if one didn’t know from concrete examples (the 1936 Olympic Games, for instance) that international sporting contests lead to orgies of hatred, one could deduce it from general principles.”
This seems a far cry from de Coubertin’s ideals. The Olympics are still an event of tremendous global importance, rivalled only by the World Cup. The Olympics tap into something fundamentally universal: we can all run, jump and swim, regardless of background.
If you strip away all the baggage from the last hundred years, the Olympic philosophy still holds: building a peaceful and better world by educating youth through sport practised without discrimination of any kind, in a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play.
However, the people in charge of administering the Olympics have displayed little care for these principles. Competing nationalistic interests have eroded the spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play. From Communist-era state-sponsored doping to the Western financially-fuelled response, fair play has been thrown out the window. And that does not even touch the innumerate other controversies that have dogged the Olympics.
President Lee Myung-bak and members of the PyeongChang Bidding Committee cheer with residents after Pyeongchang was selected to host the 2018 Winter Olympic Games. (Photo by Korean Culture and Information Service)
Take a boxing match from 1988 for example. The judges ruled in favour of the Korean boxer even though it was incontrovertibly clear the American had won. Three of the judges eventually admitted they were bribed by the Korean Olympic Team. The prestige of victory outweighs all other considerations.
In many ways, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) is a microcosm for the world. It is an international partnership hindered by nationalism. The parallels with the United Nations are quite striking. Both organizations idealistically aim to bring people and nations together around common goals, but both have been constantly subverted by nationalistic political considerations.
The organizers had to ensure they were seated far apart given the tension between the two nations at the moment. It seems a far cry from de Coubertin’s ideals.
But here’s the thing: the Olympics are ours. We are the athletes, we are the consumers. I’ll never forget Sidney Crosby’s game-winning goal in Vancouver. I’ll never forget my jaw dropping as Usain Bolt pulled away in Beijing. There was something truly magical about Penny Oleksiak’s performance in Rio. Many Americans will never forget the Miracle on Ice.
The Olympics do bring us together as one for a few weeks of the year.
Perhaps it is best we recall one of de Coubertin’s points: the competition itself is more important than winning. This commitment to total victory – emphasized by the motto, “faster, higher, stronger,” has led us to rampant use of performance-enhancing drugs, corruption, exploitation and rent-seeking behaviour. The (mostly) men in charge of the IOC have used their positions to enrich themselves. The (mostly) men in charge of national governments have used the Olympics as propaganda tools. But the journey is more important than the destination.
We should continue to support our athletes, but we should also hold our own National Olympic Committees accountable to the original Olympic ideals.
We should applaud the IOC for banning Russia from the 2018 Winter Games. They flouted fair play. We should also criticize the IOC for allowing Russia to compete at the 2016 games, despite clear evidence of doping. We should also make sure our athletes here in the West are clean and fair.
The Olympics still have so much to offer the world. Let’s not lose sight of that.
By Rashid Mohiddin
Rashid Mohiddin is Chief Executive with Pressed Magazine, a society and culture magazine in Toronto, Ontario.
This is the fourth article in #OlympicOpinions, an Opinions takeover week that explores everything about the Olympics.
Please note that opinions expressed are the author’s own. They do not necessarily reflect the views and values of The Blank Page.
