News Hit

With yet another set of Olympics having wound down recently, it seems like as good of a time as any to evaluate this international event, what it represents to the global community and its impacts on society.  When researching the games it is not hard to come across reams of testimonials hailing this sporting event as a beacon of hope in an otherwise bleak world; many claim that it not only has the ability to break down barriers between nation-states, thereby fostering cooperation and friendship, but that it also presents numerous economic opportunities which can greatly benefit every country that participates.  However, in recent years it has steadily become easier and easier to come across websites, non-governmental organisations and grass roots campaigns battling against the Olympics.  But why is this?  Mainstream media outlets within Australia are always raving about how good the games are, so why is it that so many groups are now springing up in opposition to this supposedly hallowed institution?

There are a large variety of reasons that opposition to the Olympics (both the “Summer” and “Winter” variants) is growing globally.  Despite the reassurances of everyone involved, the games are in fact not the rosy and glowing harbinger of peace and prosperity that they are made out to be.  The Olympics regularly result in a large number of negative impacts upon the nations in which they are hosted, as well as within the international community in general.  The games, no matter what their original founders and sponsors had hoped for, have effectively become a profiteer’s dream for large multinational companies that have proceeded to squeeze the event for every last dollar they can, no matter what the expense to the environment or human welfare may be.  Due to its competitive nature and the fact that teams are arranged according to membership of individual countries, the Olympics also unfortunately serve as yet another arena for international competition and the dissemination of propaganda by nation-states.  The games are a particularly powerful tool in this respect because they allow for a form of open rivalry that is far more subtle than any kind of outright military or economic antagonism could be.

Most prominently, the Olympics is having a destructive effect upon the international community because of the way in which it has become a cash cow for already rich businesses and corporations.  The monetary advantages of the games for host countries are often touted, but I would like to counter this assumption by pointing out the fact that this is only true for private enterprise.  While public purses (derived from taxes) inevitably pay for the expansions necessary for the games (such as improvements to stadiums, highways and accommodation for athletes), it is conversely the private sector which reaps the benefits.  Private accommodation, restaurants and merchandisers who all cater for the mass influx of tourists and spectators which arrive for the games are private businesses.  Once the games are over, it is up to the taxpayer of the host country to cover the deficits caused by these massive construction costs.  Estimates of the recently completed 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics put the price tag at approximately 7 billion dollars.  What that means in reality is that now there is 7 billion dollars less for Canada to spend on public services such as education, the environment, public works (such as waste disposal or upkeep of roads), the medical system or welfare for disadvantaged members of society (such as the elderly or the disabled).  Considering the recent “global financial crisis” and its continued impact on world economics, large expenditure upon an event which is essentially merely a form of entertainment should be considered as not only reckless but indeed as grossly disturbing.

The rapid industrial expansion necessary to host an event as large as the Olympics inevitably has a massive negative impact on the environment.  In an age where the international community is supposed to be trying to cut down carbon emissions, the Olympics encourages nation-states to instead use heavy machinery en masse to construct and modify the facilities of massive sporting arenas.  The amount of extra carbon that enters the environment and the atmosphere to accommodate these changes is particularly irresponsible when one considers that many facilities erected to host the games are inevitably only for temporary use.  However, the environmental degradation caused by such activities is not limited to something as vague carbon emissions; damage is almost always caused by the usage of natural waterways and snowfields for certain events, a decision which results in the destruction of vegetation and the habitats of native wildlife.  Therefore, while the havoc that the Olympics reek is most noticeable amongst society, it would be foolish to forget the damage such negligence is having every two years up the environment and wildlife which cannot protest or defend itself.

Another marginal group that is almost always affected by the Olympics are indigenous communities.  Often already underrepresented within their native nation-states, the games can often serve to harm these vulnerable groups even further.  In Vancouver for example, large amounts of land set aside for indigenous peoples has been forcefully requisitioned by the government.  This has been done to allow for the construction of new infrastructure (such as massive, otherwise unnecessary expansions of motorways) to cope with the influx of foreign nationals to Canada.  Such development has been done straight over the top of lands previously untouchable by government or private enterprise, but that has cultural significance to members of First Nations (Indigenous Canadian Groups).  Even if this wasn’t enough however, further insult to injury is added through the fact that by loosening laws surrounding formerly protected reservations, large mining and logging companies have also since been able to purchase sections of land for private industrial enterprise.

Finally, the manner in which the Olympics are so commonly hijacked by nation-states for political purposes cannot be overstated.  In truth they have become the perfect arena for international competition; there is no bloodshed, there are clear winners and (as opposed to an invasion) will always have the popular support of every country's citizens.  One merely has to look at the history of previous games to see the political antagonism between North and South Korea, America and Russia during the Cold War and Hitler versus non-Aryans during the reign of Nazi Germany.  However, the most confronting example would have to come from the 1956 Water Polo semi-final between Hungary and Russia.  The event followed the failed Hungarian Revolution, which was brutally crushed by Russia as part of its Cold War policy.  Tensions between the two teams boiled over to the point where violence broke out amongst the players, supposedly resulting in the pool's water turning red from blood.  The Olympics are a propagandists dream, and a few gold medals here or there are perfect fuel to fan the flames of a country’s nationalism.  In the modern world where suspicion and hatred abound, I think that it is safe to say that we hardly need another venue through which nation-states can compete with one another.

While in this article I have raised a number of the more common criticisms levelled against the Olympics, do not be fooled that these are the only arguments out there.  The anti-Olympics faction is one which is made up of many different groups, some small and localised, others globalised, but the truth is that it is a movement that is growing daily.  Therefore, the next time the nation gets swept up in a bout of nationalistic fervour over who has or hasn’t won the latest gold medal in Curling, I would suggest to all people to look into just who is benefitting from “The Five Rings of Exploitation”.