- I think maybe we should actually just have a permanent location for the Olympics. I don't see why we let some ghost village get built somewhere every four years, it's super wasteful and not compatible with how we want to celebrate our humanity. So pick a place, maybe in Greece, but definitely somewhere near snow and water. Build facilities that can be a destination for elite sportspeople permanently. It grows its own culture and economy.
- The Olympics really is for rich people. Football is secondary. Running is legit open to poorer people, but most of the sports are only competitive for upper middle class people who even then need to struggle for funding, and need to spend a fair bit of their youth practicing. I just think of UK independent school students when I look at most of the sports, you need that level of opportunity in your life to have a chance. Then again I'm not against it if it's their own time and money that's spent, I just think of the Olympics as something other than a broad cut of the world's people taking part in an idealistic contest.
Having permanent location will kill the very business model of Olympics, which is to allow participating entities to drain ridiculous amounts of money from the next location and to ensure the well-being of the Olympics selection committee through the kickbacks and bribes.
Saying it as someone who had to have to endure Olympics stuffed down their throat as a “lucky winner,” only to be shafted with extra taxes for several years to pay for all that fun, unity and celebration of sportsmanship.
Olympic Games as they exist now are corrupted to the core. It might be just easier to fork the venue than to clean it up.
You're right of course, it's become a weird international boondoggle benefiting old suited men across the globe.
It could actually be a good thing for some billionaire to do: get your name in history, make a difference to a non-essential area (sports/arts), have a town built the way you like it.
"which is to allow participating entities to drain ridiculous amounts of money from the next location"
Almost - it's the local government stealing money from tax base of local citizens though. The IOC and Olympics itself is not getting rich, other than as individuals via bribery but that is small change compared to the local graft.
And it's fine tbh, it's not like poor people are the apex of humanity and the only ones who should have a say in what desires should be satisfied by taxes they mostly are not the ones paying.
However, I think sport in general is not followed by the richest members of society even if, as you pointed out, the most muscular specimens selected by this organization might be. It's as if the richest people were putting on a show to glue the busybodies to a colored shiny screen so that they can be a bit distracted and less disappointed with either the cards they were dealt with or the choices they made in a fully free and equalitarian society.
At least, I come from a family like you describe, "middle class people", which may be a large and vague category of humans, and we've always found sport and especially the daily gossiping around it, quite beneath us (my direct ancestry line has PhDs all the way back to the 19th century, but we don't own vast rent-producing resources so I suppose we're not "upper class" by your categorization rules). While my friends of less wealthy families, quite independently of their education level, would proudly display their vast international knowledge of sport teams, match results and behind the door gossips and feel utter pity at my inability to follow or even listen for more than 5 minutes.
-> The Olympics really is BY rich people. But I really disagree it's FOR them.
-> I also liked you proposed Greece, I'd even propose Rome, who managed to refine the games (not olympics) as a political distraction to a degree well beyond what the politicians proposing their city host the Olympics would ever dream of. A noble goal to reach for them, I suppose. As long as they throw "rich people" to the lions this time, it may work even better.
> And it's fine tbh, it's not like poor people are the apex of humanity and the only ones who should have a say in what desires should be satisfied by taxes they mostly are not the ones paying.
In a flawed, private-property based economy, taxes can be one of two things. Either they're an expropriation to benefit a tiny elite (as in feudal regimes), or they're a wealth-redistribution mechanism to fund free healthcare, schooling, roads.. In a democracy, the latter is supposed to be true, although we all know it's a scam and money is redirected to the elite and to their watchdogs keeping their privileges safe (police/military).
Money concerns aside, poor people are those negatively affected by Olympics, so it's only fair they get a say. Whose housing and neighborhood green spaces are being torn down to make place for swimming pools and other useless pieces of junk? Poor people's! Whose rents are driving up like crazy because Olympics are a useful piece in the sick game of gentrification? Poor people's!
Fuck the Olympics. Let's just not do that. From Rio to Beijing to Athens to London, they've only made everything worse for most people, while allowing a corrupt elite to divert public money right into their pockets. How could anyone defend THIS?
I'm not really sure what's the point of your comment. You're just saying things from the arrogant (I'm so superior because I don't care for sports, did I tell you I'm rich and my ancestors all have PhDs?) to the insulting (it's okay that poor people can't participate, it's not like they're the apex of humanity).
Poor nations of the world send tons of athletes you've never heard of, and some nations carve out a niche and do really well.
Of course, money will always be a factor but it's not 'class within a nation' that's the issue, it's really nation v. nation.
Also, the current version of the Olympics was a little bit of a club for the elite have friendly competitions among gentleman of the elite, i.e. amateurs, not some 'pursuit of the absolute best'.
Instead of having the Olympics in 'one spot' they could simply tone it down and use existing hotels and facilities.
No reason that instead of Toronto you have 'Southern Ontario' for example. And keep the same sports co-located so that athletes don't have to be on transport 5 hours a day.
The requirements for size of opening ceremonies are rubbish as well. You can use a mid-size stadium and that's that.
Finally, recognize that the Olympics are a huge graft opportunity for countries to pilfer tax dollars. They can build '$500M stadiums' that only cost '$100M' where $350M is a kickback to Putin, $50M goes into developer pockets ... the stadium may nor may not get finished ...
While the article emphasizes differences between then and now, I tend to see them as similarities. Once again our greek ancestors feel so close and familiar. We think we're on top of human history, but these people have been there, culturally, 2000 years ago!
The Olympics are just weird. All these sports normally nobody gives a shit about but because of nationalism countries compete for medals. Olympic spirit my ass.
My own country is rich enough that we can pay for a few hundred boys and girls doing gymnastics all day. But that means it isn't even a fair competition! Money buys medals.
>nationalism countries compete for medals. Olympic spirit my ass.
If i remember correctly i read some interpretation of ancient Olympics as substitution/sublimation of wars between the city-states. Just look at how the Olympic winners were met by their cities - like triumphant commanders who win battles and wars. In that sense channeling of that nationalistic craze and aggression into a competition is the original Olympic spirit. Humans are vicious/tribalistic/xenophobic/etc. and not emphatic/cooperative/etc. - thus our attempt to see Olympics as the games of the latter may be kind of misguided as it is really the games of the former.
Humans are both. Empathic and cooperative with their tribe, vicious and xenophobic towards other tribes. It's a perfectly cromulent survival strategy. Organized groups larger than some 200 members are a very modern thing.
It's also extremely expensive to train for any of these sports, in figure skating in the US you pay hundreds of euros every month for coaching and access to an ice rink only to a have a tiny tiny chance to be selected as one of ~5 competitors max. That doesn't include the mandatory very expensive costumes etc.
20 comments
[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 58.4 ms ] thread- I think maybe we should actually just have a permanent location for the Olympics. I don't see why we let some ghost village get built somewhere every four years, it's super wasteful and not compatible with how we want to celebrate our humanity. So pick a place, maybe in Greece, but definitely somewhere near snow and water. Build facilities that can be a destination for elite sportspeople permanently. It grows its own culture and economy.
- The Olympics really is for rich people. Football is secondary. Running is legit open to poorer people, but most of the sports are only competitive for upper middle class people who even then need to struggle for funding, and need to spend a fair bit of their youth practicing. I just think of UK independent school students when I look at most of the sports, you need that level of opportunity in your life to have a chance. Then again I'm not against it if it's their own time and money that's spent, I just think of the Olympics as something other than a broad cut of the world's people taking part in an idealistic contest.
Saying it as someone who had to have to endure Olympics stuffed down their throat as a “lucky winner,” only to be shafted with extra taxes for several years to pay for all that fun, unity and celebration of sportsmanship.
Olympic Games as they exist now are corrupted to the core. It might be just easier to fork the venue than to clean it up.
It could actually be a good thing for some billionaire to do: get your name in history, make a difference to a non-essential area (sports/arts), have a town built the way you like it.
Almost - it's the local government stealing money from tax base of local citizens though. The IOC and Olympics itself is not getting rich, other than as individuals via bribery but that is small change compared to the local graft.
However, I think sport in general is not followed by the richest members of society even if, as you pointed out, the most muscular specimens selected by this organization might be. It's as if the richest people were putting on a show to glue the busybodies to a colored shiny screen so that they can be a bit distracted and less disappointed with either the cards they were dealt with or the choices they made in a fully free and equalitarian society.
At least, I come from a family like you describe, "middle class people", which may be a large and vague category of humans, and we've always found sport and especially the daily gossiping around it, quite beneath us (my direct ancestry line has PhDs all the way back to the 19th century, but we don't own vast rent-producing resources so I suppose we're not "upper class" by your categorization rules). While my friends of less wealthy families, quite independently of their education level, would proudly display their vast international knowledge of sport teams, match results and behind the door gossips and feel utter pity at my inability to follow or even listen for more than 5 minutes.
-> The Olympics really is BY rich people. But I really disagree it's FOR them.
-> I also liked you proposed Greece, I'd even propose Rome, who managed to refine the games (not olympics) as a political distraction to a degree well beyond what the politicians proposing their city host the Olympics would ever dream of. A noble goal to reach for them, I suppose. As long as they throw "rich people" to the lions this time, it may work even better.
In a flawed, private-property based economy, taxes can be one of two things. Either they're an expropriation to benefit a tiny elite (as in feudal regimes), or they're a wealth-redistribution mechanism to fund free healthcare, schooling, roads.. In a democracy, the latter is supposed to be true, although we all know it's a scam and money is redirected to the elite and to their watchdogs keeping their privileges safe (police/military).
Money concerns aside, poor people are those negatively affected by Olympics, so it's only fair they get a say. Whose housing and neighborhood green spaces are being torn down to make place for swimming pools and other useless pieces of junk? Poor people's! Whose rents are driving up like crazy because Olympics are a useful piece in the sick game of gentrification? Poor people's!
Fuck the Olympics. Let's just not do that. From Rio to Beijing to Athens to London, they've only made everything worse for most people, while allowing a corrupt elite to divert public money right into their pockets. How could anyone defend THIS?
Like I say, I'm not sure what your point is.
just like the real ones...
Of course, money will always be a factor but it's not 'class within a nation' that's the issue, it's really nation v. nation.
Also, the current version of the Olympics was a little bit of a club for the elite have friendly competitions among gentleman of the elite, i.e. amateurs, not some 'pursuit of the absolute best'.
Instead of having the Olympics in 'one spot' they could simply tone it down and use existing hotels and facilities.
No reason that instead of Toronto you have 'Southern Ontario' for example. And keep the same sports co-located so that athletes don't have to be on transport 5 hours a day.
The requirements for size of opening ceremonies are rubbish as well. You can use a mid-size stadium and that's that.
Finally, recognize that the Olympics are a huge graft opportunity for countries to pilfer tax dollars. They can build '$500M stadiums' that only cost '$100M' where $350M is a kickback to Putin, $50M goes into developer pockets ... the stadium may nor may not get finished ...
My own country is rich enough that we can pay for a few hundred boys and girls doing gymnastics all day. But that means it isn't even a fair competition! Money buys medals.
If i remember correctly i read some interpretation of ancient Olympics as substitution/sublimation of wars between the city-states. Just look at how the Olympic winners were met by their cities - like triumphant commanders who win battles and wars. In that sense channeling of that nationalistic craze and aggression into a competition is the original Olympic spirit. Humans are vicious/tribalistic/xenophobic/etc. and not emphatic/cooperative/etc. - thus our attempt to see Olympics as the games of the latter may be kind of misguided as it is really the games of the former.
Not exactly an unknown show.