The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Learning the Lessons of the Horrific Beijing Olympics - And How to Reform Future Games
It's too late to boycott. But much can be done to prevent such a travesty from ever happening again. I propose five reforms, and explain how to force their implementation.
The Beijing Winter Olympics have begun. Along with others, I previously made the case for boycotting these games, and explained why a mere "diplomatic boycott" is insufficient. To the list of reasons outlined previously, such as China's horrific genocide against the Uyghurs, I would now add the Chinese government's threats to punish athletes who speak out against its many human rights abuses, and the cruel "zero Covid" policies that have made the Games a "a high-stress and near joyless experience for the athletes and a massive challenge for NBC" and other journalists trying to cover the events.
Sadly, it is likely too late to boycott now. But it's not too late to begin the process of adopting reforms that can prevent similar travesties from recurring in the future. Much can be done to forestall future hosting of the Games by brutal authoritarian regimes, and also eliminate such abuses as wasteful robbing of taxpayers for financing of the Games, and forcible displacement of homes and businesses in order to build Olympic facilities.
It's worth noting that such corruption is a crucial reason why the 2022 Games ended up in Beijing in the first place. As ESPN reports, Oslo, Norway, the initial leading candidate to host the 2022 Winter Games backed out because the Norwegians could not stomache the ridiculous demands of the International Olympic Committee (IOC):
[A]bout six months before the final vote, Oslo backed out. In addition to financial concerns about actually staging the Games, Norwegian politicians (and their constituents) were put off by, among other things, the IOC's alleged demands for perks during the Olympics. The IOC's requirements included an audience with Norway's king and a cocktail party for IOC executives with the Norwegian royal family (paid for by the Norwegian government) as well as "seasonal fruit and cakes" in members' hotel rooms, mandatory smiles for all arriving IOC members from hotel employees, extended hours for hotel bars and service of only Coca-Cola products. The IOC also requested that local schools be canceled during the Games and residents be encouraged to go away on vacation.
"Norway is a rich country, but we don't want to spend money on wrong things, like satisfying the crazy demands from IOC apparatchiks," wrote Frithjof Jacobsen, chief political commentator for the newspaper VG. "These insane demands that they should be treated like the king of Saudi Arabia just won't fly with the Norwegian public."
I summarized the flaws of the Games - and how to address them - in greater detail here and here. Below is an updated list of reforms that combines previous ideas (points 1-3) with additional ones (points 4-5) inspired by the 2022 Winter Games:
1. No public subsidies. Let the games be funded purely by private organizations and sponsors, as was largely the case for the successful 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles. That way, no one has to pay for the games, except those who profit from them and the audience that voluntarily chooses to watch.
2. No forcible displacement of residents, private businesses, or civil society organizations. We can and should hold sports events without kicking innocent people out of their homes.
3. No hosting rights for authoritarian human rights violators. There are plenty of possible Olympic venues that aren't controlled by likes of Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping. Denying these types of rulers hosting rights won't fundamentally alter their regimes. But it will at least damage their image and deny them propaganda victories.
4. There must be full freedom of speech in the Olympic Village and all other Olympic venues. At the very least, athletes, journalists, and spectators should be entirely free to criticize the host government and its policies (or any other government for that matter).
5. There must be no "public health" measures blocking normal human interaction between athletes, members of the media, and residents of the host city. Such measures defeat the whole point of having the Games in a particular city in the first place. If the Games are to be held in a "bubble," that can be done almost anywhere. Moreover, scientific evidence increasingly shows that lockdowns and other similar restrictions on freedom of movement do little to stop the spread of Covid, while causing enormous harm. But if a city really is somehow too disease-ridden to allow normal human interaction, it is also too disease-ridden to host the Games.
The details of some of the above will need to be worked out in greater detail than I can do in a blog post, especially with respect to 4 and 5. For example, it may not be possible to have free speech protections as broad as those of current US First Amendment jurisprudence. But it would likely be fine to have the more limited, but still robust, standards that, for example, the Canadian Supreme Court applies under that country's Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Similarly, some who abhor the Beijing Games might not be willing to go as far as I would with Point 5. Here, too, there is room for reasonable compromise.
How can we force the incredibly corrupt IOC to abide by these constraints? It can easily be achieved, if only the world's liberal democracies show sufficient political will. I explained how here, though I am far from optimistic it will actually happen anytime soon:
[N]one of these ideas are likely to be adopted by the notoriously corrupt International Olympic Committee. Time and again, the IOC has proven that it is willing to tolerate almost any injustice, so long as the organization and its leaders benefit.
But the United States and other liberal democracies can easily force through these reforms simply by making them a condition of future participation in the games. Without the participation of the US and its allies, IOC revenue would plummet, as the value of broadcast rights massively declines.
The question is whether the US and other Western governments have the political will to do what needs to be done. On that score, I am far from optimistic, especially when it comes to the near future.
I would add that the US and other democracies can make these demands more credible by threatening to host alternative Winter and Summer games of their own. This would undermine the objection that boycotts unfairly deprive athletes of the opportunity to compete at the highest level. I suggested a similar strategy to force the IOC to move the 2022 games out of Beijing.
Another possible strategy, suggested by many experts over the years, is to find permanent sites for the Winter and Summer games (both in liberal democracies) and stick to them. This would eliminate the expense of having to choose new sites and build new facilities each time. And, of course, this is how the ancient Greeks organized the original Olympics, which were held at the same site (Olympia) every four years.
It is too late to avert the travesty now unfolding before the eyes of the world in Beijing. But it is not too late to learn from past Olympic mistakes, and make sure they never happen again.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Have the liberal democracies start their own games. Getting rid of China, Russia, and several others would not only fix this, it would make the games more fair (I mean, China following age and drug rules? Really?)
China is the enemy. Democrats are soft on China and collaborators. Instead of sanctions that will hurt the wrong people,identify the oligarchs running the criminal gang that is the ruling Commie party. Sanction them. If they do not learn, kill them and their entire families. To deter.
Given our current authoritarian woke regime and the corporate media, would the US quality for #3?
How about just ditching the olympics? I honestly don't care for them anymore. Too much PED's, corruption, wokism and so on. And the IOC..the ultimate grifters. Screw them all...boycott all olympics
Now you know who Titus PUllo is
He's someone who loves his country
While hating 93% of the people who live in it.
This sounds like a case of projection to me. What part of his comment triggered you into thinking he "hates" the people of his own country?
Conservatives can't stand modern America. They pine for illusory good old days, moaning constantly about all of this damned progress and striving to arrange carve-outs for our vestigial bigots (especially when that intolerance is rooted in old-timey superstition).
There was such a thing: the Goodwill Games. It lost millions of dollars and was eventually discontinued.
Major sporting events that come around infrequently will always cost more than they earn.
The Goodwill Games were just a clone of the Olympics though, they weren't restricted to democracies. Hell the first Goodwill Games were even held in Moscow in 1986
well fair if your not a woman, liberal democracies have shown a willingness to allow men to compete in women's sports all under the guise of equity.
Liberal democracies have chosen to reward China whom attacked the entire world, accidentally or on purpose, and cost millions of lives and trillions of dollars.
The leaders of these democracies do this because they are corrupt and in bed with Chinese Communists, either financially or ideologically.
It wasn't an accident.
They specifically allowed international travel for months while locking down domestic travel. Many of the initial outbreaks were in cities where large numbers of Communist Chinese workers were doing "belt and road" work and frequently traveling back home. The only thing that fits those facts is that they were deliberately infecting the rest of the world to mitigate the economic harm they knew was coming.
Yes, it was all part of their plan to suppress the box office of the MCU films. Thankfully, the American people resisted with Spider-Man!
An excellent set of ideas to start reform of the games.
I would add two:
6. Women's events, if they exist, must exclude transwomen so that they can perform their proper function of enabling meaningful participation by real women.
7. Since all attempts at enforcement of doping rules have resulted in successful cheating by, or unfair favoritism toward, some players or countries, there shall be no rules against doping. Athletes strain their bodies to such extremes already that any additional risk from doping disappears in the noise anyway.
8. The entire list of reforms should apply to similar competitions such as the X Games as well. And points 1 and 7 should apply to for-profit sports. Let fans of all sports pay their own bills.
Some nice ideas. And indeed the Chinese government is an evil of the modern world, even if the multinational media and other companies are too cowed to talk about it much. But sadly I expect business as usual, both for the Olympics and for the more general pandering to Beijing will continue.
In general, I agree with these points, but I do wonder why the IOC, or someone else, should deny the government of a democratic country the right to subsidize the games.
It is entirely possible, IMO, that, 1984 notwithstanding, completely privately financed games would just not be financially feasible. Now, it wouldn't really bother me personally if there were no Olympics, and I'd rather not pay taxes to subsidize them, but lots of people do seem to like the games, so there does have to be some serious discussion of the finances.
The IOC won’t allow the Olympics to be in a country that doesn’t already have preexisting infrastructure. So it’s just too much of a money loser fraught with corruption to do another Athens or Rio. What would probably make the most sense is move the summer games to these dates and just have it in Florida every 4 years using the same infrastructure. Dubai also has perfect weather right now to hold the summer games so you could alter a between Dubai and Florida. The winter games is a little more difficult because Florida can handle all of the tourists every 4 years but would a winter destination want an Olympics every 4 years??
I'm not sure summer games in FL would be such a great idea.
Weather might be a bit of a sticky problem.
I said move the date of the summer games to now—that makes Dubai and Florida the most logical places to have the games. So they could trade off every 4 years. The World Cup moved its date to accommodate Qatar so it isn’t until November this year which actually means we got lucky because hopefully Covid won’t impact it.
One of the biggest things that hurts the financial feasibility is that the IOC takes something like 50% of all gross income, not net. So, host cities are relying almost solely on the tourism aspect, rather than direct income from the games themselves.
If lots of people like the games then lots of people can choose to privately finance them. If that is not the feasible then the games should be scaled back to the point where the people who actually want them can afford to put them on
George W Bush did a victory lap at the 2008 Beijing Olympics after he sold us out to China while lying us into wars to slaughter innocent Muslims and running the economy into the ground. Check out this blast from the past:
Bush brother's divorce reveals sex romps
Neil Bush, younger brother of President Bush, detailed lucrative business deals and admitted to engaging in sex romps with women in Asia in a deposition taken in March as part of his divorce from now ex-wife Sharon Bush.
According to legal documents disclosed Tuesday, Sharon Bush's lawyers questioned Neil Bush closely about the deals, especially a contract with Grace Semiconductor Manufacturing Corp., a firm backed by Jiang Mianheng, the son of former Chinese President Jiang Zemin, that would pay him $2 million in stock over five years.
Marshall Davis Brown, lawyer for Sharon Bush, expressed bewilderment at why Grace would want Bush and at such a high price since he knew little about the semiconductor business.
"You have absolutely no educational background in semiconductors do you?" asked Brown.
"That's correct," Bush, 48, responded in the March 4 deposition, a transcript of which was read by Reuters after the Houston Chronicle first reported on the documents.
Bush (both of them) set the stage for the downfall of our Republic. Bush One needed to dismantle the cold war institutions including the CIA and dissolve Nato. No Gulf War..and no opening up trade with China (Clinton as well). Bush Two one can't even begin to go into the ways he screwed America as well as being a war criminal. The GOP has been dead since Reagan let the neocons/neolibs run the show. Spring 1981..we still have a chance to be a humble republic. Tying the dollar back to gold, shutting down every federal agency created after 1960, cut taxes only if spending is cut, and a defense focused on protecting the western hemisphere not the middle east.
Good effort by Prof. Somin but the Olympics should be ended, immediately. A good idea but now they are so corrupted they no longer fullfill their mission. They have no reason to exist.
Sid vicious hits it out!
Seriously, the problem is the IOC....and they are not giving up their power, and nobody has the power to get rid of them
Surely you jest. Could the USA or any EU country or any other Western civilization meet those requirements? I think not. All of them would fail all 5 criteria in the opinion of some.
The Olympics should go to a permanent home in Greece. No IOC. Let the Greeks integrate it into their economy and culture, and manage it as they see fit, including how often it is held. If they want to have nude wrestling, OK. If they want to exclude women, OK. If they want no TV, OK. Whatever they say, goes.
That or drop the IOC altogether.
I knew an Olympic athlete who hated the four year cycle. Intefered with national championships, too long an interval for top athletes to get many chances, and he had a few rude remarks about Slavery Brundage to boot.
One interesting idea is for Greece to simply announce their own permanent 4 year game cycle, take the name back from the IOC. Just do it, ignore the squealing from the IOC. Build permanent venues. Hold events every year, but only call the four-year ones The Olympics. I bet most of the world would sigh in relief and drop the IOC like a hot potato.
I disagree. Ultimately, this is all driven by money. If someone else comes along and builds a replica games, it doesn't do anything to persuade the athletes to come over. And if they don't, then the public and media attention isn't going to shift over either.
Imagine the XFL had said that they don't like the NFL and its Super Bowl rules (which also include lots of public subsidies). So they were creating their own "Super Bowl." Well, unless you got all the NFL players to switch over, then people would continue to follow the existing Olympics.
On top of that, you've got a lot of money that would continue to push the existing Olympics. You think NBC is going to just go along? You might get ABC/Disney/ESPN to play along, but I don't see that happening.
Also, would the Winter Olympics even be possible in Greece? I don't believe they have the mountains needed for skiing. So you'd need at least one other country to be permanent host (Switzerland maybe?).
Start by dropping that horrific adjective "horrific". What is the difference between "horrific genocide" and the garden-variety unadorned "genocide"?
People throw that adjective in as some kind of way to emphasize their empathy. I've seen "horrific brutal excessive force" and other examples of horrific brutal excess.
Just stop it. Don't use that damned adjective ever again.
For a more substantial critique ...
#1 is unenforceable. Money is fungible.
#2 is almost as unenforceable. Who's going to make the decision on which redevelopment projects are allowed?
#3 also comes down to subjective matters. Who doubts Trump would have been called an authoritarian human rights violator, but not Biden or Obama or Bush #43?
#4 "Full freedom of speech" is a piss-poor definition. Some will say banning hate speech is a necessary component of freedom of speech, some the opposite.
#5 -- really? Good grief, talk about subjective!
All these face one common obstacle -- the IOC. A more corrupt burrocracy is hard to imagine. This article pays lip service to that obstacle, but with a wish list that is about as likely to be honored as the wish list I filled out during boot camp for my first duty station.
A. Who's going to decide any of the 1-5 matters, if not the IOC?
B. What if the IOC actually has people who want to do the right thing, but the hosting government changes positions on 1-5 just a year before the games, when there won't be time to switch gears?
C. Holding alternate games is a waste. How many countries will hold alternate games? Does anyone think they could organize such alternates far enough in advance for proper planning? Athletes and spectators like to plan in advance.
Alternate games misses the point You want to compete against everyone. Team USA's 1980 hockey gold wouldn't mean anything if the Soviets weren't in the tournament.
Especially since there wouldn't be just one alternate game, but several. Politicians so wound up as to host alternate games aren't going to combine with other outraged politicians for a single alternate, and voters who encourage such politicians won't let them compromise.
Your response on #2 misses the point. It's not about who approves redevelopment projects and on what basis.
The point of #2 is don't use eminent domain (or what ever it's called under local law) to confiscate people's property to build Olympic venues. Offer them enough to sell voluntarily or build somewhere else.
"Voluntary"? Government "voluntary" offers are seldom that. It's as subjective as every other point.
I didn't say it was objective. I said your question: "Who's going to make the decision on which redevelopment projects are allowed?" is entirely irrelevant.
"A more corrupt burrocracy (sic) is hard to imagine."
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the United Nations.
It's not too late to not watch the games, so they get horrible ratings.
This. . . .
If the Games aren't profitable, i.e. low viewership, then you bet things will change.
https://standupandspeakoutamerica.com/news-article/ratings-for-beijing-olympics-tank-2022-opening-ceremony-hit-all-time-low-in-tv-viewership/
Amen, I will not watch any part of the Xi Games
Neither will i, but then, the last olympics I watched any of was over 20 years ago...
Mr. Somin neglects one key factor: Who bells the cat?
Each and every person who does not watch.
It's debateable whether the IOC or even the Olympics should exist at all, but I don't agree with refusing to play sport for political reasons. It's just more pointless virtue signalling. No Uyghur will be better off if the Olympics don't happen.
You're rationalizing. "It's okay for me to benefit from evil because my refusal wouldn't prevent the evil from occurring." (N.B. It's not virtue signaling if one actually pays a price rather than merely signals.)
And of course that sort of misses the point anyway. It's not that refusing to participate in the Olympics makes oppressed people better off; it's that credibly threatening to refuse to participate in the Olympics (said credibility requiring follow through if necessary) if people are oppressed can ameliorate said oppression.
Athletes are not 'benefiting from evil'. Or are you suggesting that crimes committed against the Uyghurs are somehow necessary in order for the games to take place at all?
I think cooperating with the Chinese government — including staying silent about said government's crimes committed against the Uighers — is necessary in order for the games to take place.
John Stuart Mills: "Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing."
Albert Einstein: "The world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it."
Edmund Burke: "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."
They're doing better than expected and with all due respect, Ilya, go jump in the lake.
The first two limitations should apply to all stadium and arena projects.
Throwing 5 into this was just a cynical conservative political grievance with little to do with the Olympics specifically, other than being unable to resist a chance to complain that the only covid policy isn't "There is no covid in Ba Sing Se".
Lockdowns in the US and Europe didn't do much to reduce deaths because lockdowns in the US in Europe essentially didn't exist for more than a few weeks in March 2020 in major cities. I'm not suggesting we should have done a lockdown like China, and half assed lockdowns are indeed pointless, but it's a rather obnoxious comparison.
Turned an otherwise good piece about Olympic corruption and potential reform that could be embraced by people of all political alignments into another conservative temper tantrum about being asked to do the bare minimum to not kill others.
To be fair, it's hard to argue with results. China hasn't had a single COVID death since April 2020!
Or what is more accurate, China has not reported a single COVID death since April 2020.
No. That link is not "scientific evidence," and that's not what it shows. That's a non-peer reviewed "meta analysis" of studies that (a) throws out more than 99% of all studies; (b) uses an absurd definition of "lockdown" that does not match what anyone else means by that term; and (c) does not actually show what it claims anyway.
See my extended comment below.
We don't even have freedom of speech in our own country so how do we get to lecture others about its importance? Maybe we should start with telling the Biden administration advocating and rewarding censorship is not OK and do some further introspection about how political dissidents are treated. Then maybe we can go about lecturing China.
". . . and do some further introspection about how political dissidents are treated."
Remember those times you said Democrats need to be shot?
When did I say that? Reminds me of the guy who used to say that I wrote the n- word every time I posted. Never happened.
If you are going to complain about a Democratic administration's ostensible censorship, a right-wing blog that imposes repeated, hypocritical, partisan, viewpoint-driven censorship against liberals and libertarians is the right place for it!
Try to keep your gloves up, clingers. It's barely a sporting contest these days.
(That's Tower of Power backing Huey. Here's the story (starts around 7:15).)
"uses an absurd definition of "lockdown" that does not match what anyone else means by that term; and (c) does not actually show what it claims anyway."
David,
the definition used in the study, the Oxford stringency index, is one that has been tabulated by Oxford for a major part of the pandemic. The criteria used for the score are reasonable one. If you have any argument with any of them, let's discuss their validity and relevance point by point.
That the study is not yet peer reviewed means nothing as it was published as a pre-print at the end of January 2022. One would not expect a peer review to be completed for at least several weeks.
That most of the studies were discarded is not necessarily a negative. I have not examined the list carefully enough to have an informed opinion.
I have done one look today at Italy which has imposed some of the strictest non-pharma interventions of any country in Europe. In that case I find no substantial evidence that stringent control have accomplished much in suppressing either infections, ICU admissions, or fatalities. The stringent measures did not suppress the spread of Omicron.
But don't take my word for it. Do the work yourself. Download today's data set from Our World in Data, choose a couple of countries for comparison, make scatter plots of stringency vs. daily cases, CFR, ICU admission and hospitalizations. Add trendlines and display the correlation coefficient.
Then, if you are ambitious correlate these plots across multiple countries with different non-pharmaceutical practices. At that point you will have an educated opinion of the quality of the study from Johns Hopkins.
This blog post was little more than preening, virtue-signaling. Frankly, I expected better from Professor Somin. His list could have been drawn up by a class of second graders.
"I expected better from Professor Somin."
I didn't.
#1 is wrong as a matter of economics. Tax those who benefit from the presence of the games, just like e.g. funding infrastructure with a levy on those who benefit, as is being more and more commonly done.
"Tax those who benefit from the presence of the games,"
So the national governments, the athletes and the media companies that cover the games.
Not sure how you go about taxing other national governments.
I disagree with the article's belief that we should not host the Olympics in countries guilty of crimes against humanity. If the country allows all athletes to participate and ensures the safety of all athletes and guests (no dissapearing people at the game). Then they should be allowed to host. The entire point of the Olympics is that it's a world competition. The second you put up barriers to that is the second you begin the decline to irrelevance.
That said, we should have a government policy of not providing public funds to the Olympics.
I love the Winter Olympics.
...but I just can't watch this one. Between China's authoritarianism (and ongoing genocide) and the weird views of courses where you can see that there is no snow beyond the actual course (like the Nordic skiing event), I have no desire to watch it.
Ugh. Hard pass. Oh, plus they released another heavily scripted interview with the kidnapped tennis star ... cool, huh?
Meh, I am not that excited about the genocide Games either, loki13. To me, the foolish companies advertising on NBC are basically giving me a target list of companies I will avoid doing business with. I watched a little over the weekend (maybe 3 hours) , cheered Team USA, and politely sat on my hands (so I would not flip a bird at the screen) when Chinese and Russian athletes performed.
The diplomatic boycott is a joke. The IOC is corrupt to the core.
"The IOC is corrupt to the core."
Yep. International sportocrats tend to be like that. IOC, FIFA, etc.
Which sucks, because the Olympics and World Cup are amazing events ... despite the cretins who run it. But between this debacle and the next two World Cups (Qatar and China), it's going to be rough sledding.*
*Coincidentally, that's exactly what someone would say when trying to do winter events in Beijing ... since there's no snow.
Don't get me started on FIFA....
🙂
I won't ... but I just realized that I wrote Qatar and China.
But that's this Olympics and the World Cup. While the upcoming WC is in Qatar (and the last one was in Russia), the next one is the N. American one (US, Canada, Mexico).
And the Olympics are doing the Paris (Summer), Italy (Winter), LA (Summer), Australia (Summer) rotation coming up, so ... that's better.
Perhaps they've learned something about autocratic hosts? I'd like to think so ... but I somehow doubt it.
China's a major constituent and is going to occasionally host big events.
I strongly condemn Communist China's human rights atrocities, but this is a situation where being morally pure just ends up defeating the purpose of what you are trying to do.
If one doesn't believe there's any value in international sports competitions (which I suspect is how Prof. Somin really feels), that's one thing, but this is sort of like the United Nations: if you do believe in the mission, powerful autocratic countries exist and you have to include them or else you can't do what you are trying to accomplish.
I think you can make a case for the Qatar WC being a kind of unforced error- Qatar is a rich country, but not a geopolitically powerful or athletically important one, and it wouldn't have hurt FIFA or international soccer one bit if their bids had been turned down.
But you need big, geopolitical and athletic powers in the competitions for international athletics to make any sense. And that definitely means that the Olympics are occasionally going to go to China (and probably Russia too). And, I might add- us as well. America has a lousy human rights record compared to a lot of countries as well, and yet we are getting to host the Games in 2028.
America has a lousy human rights record compared to a lot of countries as well, and yet we are getting to host the Games in 2028.
I am calling bullshit, name them.
In all of recorded world history, no country has done as much, given as much, sacrificed as much, donated as much as the United States of America for the betterment of humanity. It is not even close, Dilan Esper.
You did take world history in school, right?
Are opioids a human rights issue? How about prisons? Capital punishment? Surveillance? Police brutality?
You gonna name those countries, Dilan Esper?
Still calling bullshit on your ridiculous statement --> America has a lousy human rights record compared to a lot of countries as well, and yet we are getting to host the Games in 2028.
Put your pom poms down. I named numerous issues we suck on
So Dilan, in other words, when challenged to back up your statement; you can't. Not what I expected.
No, I named numerous issues where the US human rights record is appalling. Which backs up my claim that the US human rights record is appalling.
That's the claim I made. You seem intent on arguing about something else, but while you are doing that, we continue to have all the human rights abuses I named.
"But you need big, geopolitical and athletic powers in the competitions for international athletics to make any sense."
Only if you limit the definition of international athletics to government sponsored national teams.
But aside from things like soccer that are explicitly team sports, why is there any need to organize it that way.
For things that are more individual competitions like skiing or gymnastics why does a competition open to any individual athlete from any nation not qualify as international athletics?
Because that creates the organizational principle for international sports
Dilan,
The existence of the IOC is what Catholic theology calls an ocassion of sin. And as we see the worst sinner, such as China, take great advantage of the occasion.
Why should that be the organizational principle for international sports?
Because you need one.
I am absolutely doing a huge-ass package deal when the World Cup is here in 2026. I plan on hitting at least 12-16 games, and getting a quarter/semi final game in the mix.
Already setting aside the money.
Brought to you by the people who concocted the "Russian Olympic Committee" farce of non-punishment.
Yeah, I noticed that too. Talk about rank hypocrisy.
I would the requirement that the Olympics no longer receive special trademark rights. The IOC demands extreme trademark protection, beyond the regular trademark laws of most countries. Canada, for example, had to pass special legislation in 2007 to meet the IOC's demands for the 2010 winter Olympics. The IOC wants to prohibit such things as a long-established restaurant named "Olympic" from using its name or another restaurant from advertising an "Olympic special". Such extreme trademark policies undermine one of the few benefits that the Olympics arguably bring to the host city.
I favor the abolition of the Olympics at least as they are presently organized. They are unnecessary, as there are many other international sports competitions, corrupt, a burden on the host, a golden opportunity for nasty governments to promote themselves, and a venue for jingoism. If they are reformed or replaced, I suggest returning to the policy of the early modern Olympics, which did not require teams to be fielded by nations. Letting non-governmental organizations send teams would reduce jingoism and corruption.
I would omit pandemic restrictions from the list because by the time any fundamental change to the Olympic site selection process has taken place we will have something else to worry about.
Put the Games in Greece. Every year. It'd make them money, remove the need for expensive new arenas every four years, and it'd be a much smoother process.
But less chance of graft, so never gonna happen.
My opinion of the O began it's decades-long plummet when I heard that the former head, Juan Antonio Samaranch--the head of what is, at the end of the day, a business--insisted on being called "Your Excellency." Phewy.
As usual, Somin wants to impose his opinions on everyone else. How did he get on a Libertarian site?
The best solution would be to take the national orientation out of the Olympics, and make it a contest of the best individuals and teams without regard to their national origin. This would bring the Olympics closer to their Greek origin and dramatically reduce their use as a propaganda platform.