Ah summer......in a year that can be divided by four....it
must mean that it is time for the summer Olympics. I don't have access to cable
or to a satellite dish. I seldom remember that I can watch at least the
highlights via the internet. I am therefore, somewhat insulated from the hyper
nationalism that seems to permeate the airwaves. And I am glad. It is not that
I don't like watching some sports. The volleyball games (if they were
broadcasted) the women's rugby or some of the track and field events could be
entertaining. But what is broadcasted has little or nothing to do with what is
worth watching. It has far more to do with what the producers of such marathons
of over-indulgence think their national audience need to see to maintain
national enthusiasm. It is not surprising therefore, that viewers of an
American, British or Canadian broadcaster might see quite different Olympics. I
appreciate that for the athletes and the people who love them, getting to the
Olympics may be a life time goal. Someone however, needs to remind those who
participate in and those who organize the games that (1) a significant number
of the people living within walking distance of the various venues are dealing
with life threatening issues and have neither the time nor the money to watch
the coverage, never mind attend and (2) except for contributing an incredibly
miniscule portion of my taxes towards supporting Olympic athletes I have done nothing and therefore do not get
the right to feel pride in "how well my country is doing".
I am sure it is exciting to be that young Canadian woman who
has done so well in the pool, or those women from the women's rugby team that
got a medal. I am equally as sure that as they mounted the podium to receive
their medals the furthest thing from their minds were the hundreds of thousands
Brazilians who live a kilometre or less from the venue and who struggle daily
to earn enough money to feed themselves and their families. I am sure it is difficult
to remember as they are having their hot showers that there are families just
down the road who do not have access to running water. It is not their fault
that there is so much poverty in the host country. If they had decided to boycott
the Olympic games - nothing would have changed (although if all of the athletes
boycotted - it might be interesting), the games would have gone on with other athletes.
But surely it says something about a society that orchestrates such an
excessive celebration of nationalism and elitist athletes. I understand the
arguments as to why bringing the Olympics to a region should be good for the
economy and the people (I once had a
wonderful ride from someone who had been part of the Calgary winter Olympic
committee. He was quite eloquent about how much good it had done for the area
and yes the ski jump/bob sled run are still in use for training almost 30 years
later). But it seems to me that more and more, that as the costs go up, the
benefits to the local region go down. It also seems to me the there is an
inverse relationship between the wealth and stability of the country and how
much the games actually benefit the area.
I believe that we should support people who want, at a
personal level, to compete against themselves and others so that they can achieve
their goals. I do not think that we should make such events about nationalism,
nor should we make competing so expensive that athletes from poor nations cannot
compete. The event should not cost so much money that the residents of the host
county are dislocated and at the end of the games are in a worse position
(financially and socially) than they were before. I am not suggesting that we
make those elite international athletes less important or less valued but rather
that we make the residents of the host country equally as important and as valued.
