Not since Marco Polo has anyone
traveled so far up China's Silk Road with such amoral élan. But there
was Jacques Rogge, president of the IOC, knight of the court of King
Leopold's Belgium, three-time Olympian in the grand sport of yachting
- standing astride Beijing at the close of the 2008 Olympic games. In
front of a stunning 90,000 at the Games' closing ceremony, he said,
"Tonight, we come to the end of sixteen glorious days which we will
cherish forever. Through these games, the world learned more about
China, and China learned more about the world."
But what did the world really learn?
From NBC's ratings-rich coverage alone, not all that much. We learned
that China is remarkably beautiful, Michael Phelps can really
swim and Usain Bolt is truly quite fast. Oh, and there are pandas
there. some of whom died in the Sichuan earthquake. We can't forget
about the pandas.
As the Washington Post's veteran
columnist Thomas Boswell wrote in his last missive from Beijing:
"In all my decades at The Post,this is the first event I've covered
at which I was certain that the main point of the exercise was to
co-opt the Western media, including
NBC, with a splendidly pretty, sparsely attended, completely
controlled sports event inside a quasi-military compound. We had little
alternative but to be a conduit for happy-Olympics, progressive-China
propaganda. I suspect it worked."
I applaud Boswell for his honesty, but it is hard to not have contempt
for the aside that "we had little alternative" but to dance the infomercial
shuffle. Boswell and the press made a choice the moment they stepped on China's soil.
They chose not to seek out the near two million people evicted from their
homes to make way for Olympic facilities.
They chose not to report on the Chinese
citizens who tried to register to enter the cordoned off "protest
zones" only to find themselves in police custody. (A shout out here to
all who will find themselves shortly in similar "protest zones"
in Denver and Minneapolis-St. Paul.)
They chose not to report on the Tibetan
citizens removed from their service jobs by state law for the
duration of the games.
They chose not to ask what $42 billion,
the price tag of the games,
could have meant to earthquake ravaged
Sichuan.
They chose to not point out the bizarre
hypocrisy of seeing Michael
Phelps--with full media fanfare--taking
a group of Chinese children to their first meal at McDonalds. (Even
though Phelps famously eats 12,000 calories a day during training,
I can't imagine much of it comes from Mickey D's.)
They chose not to report on the foreign
nationals who as of this
writing, are still being held in
Chinese prisons for daring to
protest. (According to the Associated
Press, the US Embassy pleaded with China to free protestors, gently
suggested, that China could stand to show "greater tolerance
and openness.")
They chose not to ask why George W.
Bush was the first US president to attend the Olympics on foreign soil,
and why the State Department last April took China off its list of
nations that commit human rights violations.
They chose not to ask whether it was a
conflict of interest for
General Electric to both own NBC and be
one of the primary sponsors of the games as well as the supplier of
much of the games' electronic security apparatus, including 300,000
close circuit cameras. All indications are that these cameras will
most likely remain in place once the world has turned its attention
elsewhere.
They chose not to ask and re-ask the
question of why the games were in Beijing in the first place, considering
that Rogge and Beijing organizing committee head Liu Qi both
promised that the Olympics would come alongside significant improvements
in human rights.
As Sophie Richardson of Human Rights
Watch said:
"The reality is that the Chinese
government's hosting of the games has been a catalyst for abuses, leading to
massive forced evictions, a surge in the arrest, detention and
harassment of critics, repeated violations of media freedom, and
increased political repression. Not a single world leader who attended the
games or members of the IOC seized the opportunity to challenge the
Chinese government's behavior in any meaningful way."
The legacy of these games will be in no
short order: China's
dominance, in winning more gold medals
than the US; the aquatic
dominance of Phelps; and the blistering
triumph of Bolt and the
Jamaican sprinters. But we should also
remember the ravaging of a country, sacrificed at the altar of
commercialism and "market
penetration." And we should recall
a mainstream press, derelict in its duty, telling us they had "little
alternative" but to turn this
shandeh into a globalization
infomercial.
Liu Qi called the Olympics "a
grand celebration of sport, of peace and friendship." Not quite. Instead it
was a powerful demonstration of the way the elephants of the east and west
can link trunks and happily trample the suffering grass. England, you're next. And you thought
the blitzkrieg was rough.
First published at thenation.com
Please consider making a donation to keep this site going.