the politics of Games

On Sunday the BBC aired the official Olympic hand off between Beijing and London.  But before I can go into any brief recap of the closing ceremonies, let me begin with the tediousness of having to watch London Mayor, Boris Johnson, the IOC President Rogge, and his Chinese compatriot, Liu Qi's attempts to wave the flag without having the material wrap itself impotently and lifelessly around the staff.

And what of Liu Qi's speech, which I was very keen to get my hands on. The 2008 motto 'One dream one world' seems such a farce when we consider the source. Or perhaps it makes a lot of sense coming from a communist regime; when the Chinese government says one dream, then all of its’ people, and the rest of the world, should take note and line up to its' credo.

I had a very hard time not screeching every time I saw the official Olympic tag over the last two weeks. How can a country with so many human rights violations stand dead center on the global stage and proclaim with deadpan sincerity 'one dream one world'. Should China not get its own domestic affairs in order, before asking the global audience over for tea, let alone the Olympics.

A particular favorite passage in Liu Qi's speech was when he uttered that "The Beijing Olympic Games is a testimony of the fact that the world has its trust rested upon China". I am sorry, but I think this would be an oversimplification of the truth, or rather a gross misjudgement of individual sentiment. China should not misjudge the fact that Americans watched the 2008 Olympics in record numbers. Watching does not suggest an awareness of the host's political and social actions. Watching does not equate support, let alone trust. At this point in time, I would rather invest my trust in a dog than the Chinese governmen. China still has a lot more work to do, beyond Pyrotechics, cheerleaders, and lip synch to convince me that they are worthy of my trust.