Is the Olympic spirit really just a costly vanity project?
THE Olympics are well and truly underway, an opportunity for us all to marvel at the spirit, endeavour and mind-blowing capability and resourcefulness of the human soul. The culmination of many months and years of preparation, early mornings and inordinate lengths of time spent in isolation from family and friends is, seemingly, the acceptable price for success in the pursuit of Olympic glory.
But even The Olympics are not immune from scrutiny and aspects of ethical enquiry – especially when it comes to issues such as the host nation’s poverty and the lure of performance enhancing drugs. The latter has long stymied the reputation of the games, while the former raises serious questions about why billions of dollars are channelled into a nation’s coffers while millions of people remain in poverty.
From an Irish perspective, shock was an understatement as news broke of Michael O’Reilly’s provisional suspension from the boxing team for a failed drugs; a shock that packs an even greater punch considering how the lead up to the Games was shrouded in controversy regarding Russian athletes and revelations of widespread performance enhancing drug use in Russia.
The O’Reilly news also comes as a devastating blow to our ‘Olympic psyche’ as our boxers are without question our best medal chances.
Claims that he had undergone 14 tests in 30 months, all drug free, has heightened the disappointment and O’Reilly’s legal representatives have lodged an appeal.
As for the cost of staging the games, one has to seriously consider the pros and cons and whether or not it is ethically and morally prudent to pump billions into economically undernourished countries in the absence of any long-term societal benefits.
The Olympic flame, with its focus on spirit, unity and perseverance in the pursuit of personal achievement, won’t count for much in the flavelas of Rio de Janeiro, and claims that the Olympics are nothing more than a mass vanity project are not without substance.
Such concerns are heightened when one considers the fact that over half-a-billion dollars was spent on a 72,000-capacity stadium in Brazilia for the 2014 World Cup which is now being used as a bus depot.
Development acceleration is often touted as a secondary benefit of hosting the Olympics, owing to the extra employment generated in areas like construction but this has also been met with claims of wage exploitation.
Population displacement has also soured the Games with reports that people have been removed, against their will, from their homes and localities to make room for stadia infrastructure – something which had already intensified since the country staged the World Cup in 2014.
But it’s not just Brazil: Greece in 2004 and Russia’s hosting of the Winter Olympics in 2014, have all resulted in significant economic losses in countries that are far from comfortable for those on the margins of society.
The Olympics is a joyous occasion, of that there can be no doubt and it makes for compulsive viewing.
But while it raises all hopes of competitiveness for the athlete, it’s questionable whether or not it can possibly ever raise all boats economically and socially for the host country.