Olympic ideal is elitist nonsense

Shannon Gormley hits the nail on the head when she writes, “The Olympics are not for jocks — they are for nerds. They are a dweeb’s fever dream of liberal internationalism, a peaceful coming together of sovereign states in service of the higher good.”

My only quarrel with Ms. Gormley stems from the fact that she seems to suggest that we have somehow subverted or lost the Olympic ideal. But the Olympic ideal was sheer elitist nonsense from the get-go.

The fact that the Olympic Games were the idea of a pampered aristocrat speaks volumes. Indeed, any nerd worth his salt would be properly impressed by the fact that Baron Pierre de Coubertin won the gold medal for literature at the 1912 Summer Olympics for his poem Ode to Sport. The man was a romantic with an idealized vision of ancient Greece and of the value of sports in education. He believed that men whose education included organized sports would be better fighters in war. In his view, sports were democratic because they crossed class lines. However, as an aristocrat, he didn’t support the actual mingling of classes.

Of course, the real problem with the Olympics is the International Olympic Committee. Avery Brundage was president for over 20 years and several members were on the committee for life. Juan Antonio Samaranch was president for 21 years. He was accused of racism and anti-Semitism, and while he was president the office was accused of nepotism and corruption. Several IOC members were accused of taking bribes from the Salt Lake City bid committee for the hosting of the 2002 Winter Olympics. In 1999, it was reported that the Nagano Olympic bid committee had spent about $14 million to entertain the 62 IOC members and many of their companions.

Now the irony of it all. De Coubertin envisioned the Olympics as a venue for amateur athletes, but he was not particularly clear on the meaning of the word “amateur.” As the decades passed, more and more countries found ingenious ways to get around this. The real scandal is the fact that, according to Olympic rules, the IOC and just about anyone connected to the Olympics can make big money with the Games, but not those most directly involved: the athletes.

Sadly, what we have here is one more example of a cynical older generation taking advantage of the idealism of youth. The only consolation is that at least the lives of the young are not sacrificed as they were in wars up to and including the First World War.

Gene Sauvé, Gatineau