Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

The Upside to Politics in the Olympic Games

Powerful Essays
3213 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Upside to Politics in the Olympic Games
Adam Ellner
Mr. Lovre
AP American Literature 5
5 Apr. 2013
The Upside to Politics in the Olympic Games Throughout the last hundred years, despite its image as a worldwide sporting phenomenon that rises above the clutches of politics, the Olympic Games has served as a catalyst and a stage for sociopolitical conflict and controversy on both national and global scales. Despite the International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) attempts to limit this infringement of politics into the realm of international sport, several historical examples illustrate positive influences on humanity’s opportunity to enjoy a peaceful, equitable, and competitive Olympic atmosphere for athletes of the world to physically test themselves against their human peers from across the globe. Throughout the Cold War, tensions felt between the Soviet Union and the United States spilled over into the Olympic arena, impacting the Games in largely positive ways. The IOC’s handling of the international situation with Apartheid represented a clear way in which politics were effectively used to better the Olympic Games. Another powerful example of this arose at the 1968 Mexico City Olympics when African American sprinters defied the IOC, using the international stage to protest social injustice in the United States. Relations between the IOC and the Soviet Union were strained from the very beginning. After the Bolsheviks defeated their opponents and created the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in the early 1920’s, the IOC initially refused to officially recognize the new nation (Senn 37). Having been excluded, the Soviets looked on as the victorious Allies celebrated the vanquishment of the despised Germans at the 1920 Antwerp Olympics. Despite the wishes of IOC President Pierre de Coubertin to keep the Games neutral, the Allies persuaded the IOC to ban Germany from the 1920 and 1924 Olympics (World). Left wing socialists and Communists in the Soviet Bloc saw how politicized the 1920 Games was, and loathed the IOC for becoming the toy of the ruling class. Even through the IOC eventually recognized the USSR, Soviet reluctance to join the Olympic Movement lasted all the way until 1951 (Senn 67). Despite the USSR’s earlier stance that the Games should be apolitical, the 1952 Games in Helsinki signaled a new era in which the Olympics became a stage where the unfought battles of the Cold War were played out. Between 1952 and 1972, American Avery Brundage served as the president of the IOC. Brundage was a strong supporter of the Olympic morality and held fast to a firm, idealistic belief that international sport could resolve political, ideological, and ethnic conflicts (Senn 67). He was so dedicated to his job that he contributed $75,000 a year out of his own pocket to do his work, every year for the twenty years he served as president (Senn 67). Brundage was both the link and the buffer between the power politics of the rival Cold War superpowers and the Olympics. The first two Summer Games of Brundage’s term served as prime examples of the manifestation of Cold War politics at the Olympics. At the Finnish government’s specific request for the 1952 Helsinki Games, Brundage and the IOC set up a separate housing complex for Eastern Bloc athletes, off the Olympic Village and away from the other competitors’ housing (Mellbye). Miffed by their isolation, Soviet athletes were even more determined to succeed at the Games; more specifically, they were determined to outshine the American athletes (Mellbye). To the dismay of the Americans, the Soviet athletes did just that, dominating early events, many of which had been won by the US in many previous Games (Senn 102). To further emphasize their rivalry with the US, the Soviet athletes created a running points tally—comparing their results to those of American athletes—and posted it on the wall of their compound for the world to see (Senn 102). Sparked by this direct public comparison, American athletes began to compete harder than ever to keep up with the Soviets. By the time the Games ended, the USSR had accumulated 71 total medals: 22 gold, 30 silver, and 19 bronze, compared to the US total of 76 medals: 40 gold, 19 silver, and 17 bronze (Olympic). According to the Soviet point system, this equated to a dead tie between the US and USSR at 494 points each, but according to the system used by the US, the American athletes won by a margin of 614 points to 532 (Senn 103). The US National Olympic Committee and American press were angered by the Soviet point system because it placed less emphasis on gold medals—which the US garnered more of (Senn 102). Brundage opposed these confrontational point systems all together and appealed that they were “entirely contrary to the rules and spirit of the Olympic Games, which are contests between individuals with no points scored” (Senn 102). There is no doubt that this new incentive for American and Soviet athletes to outcompete each other was fueled by a political motivation to prove the superiority of their country over the other. However, this political influence—that was unwanted by Avery Brundage—greatly raised the level of competition. At the Helsinki Games, many world records were broken and the overall quality of the sport increased dramatically (Bayliss). Four years later, the international conflicts of 1956 threatened to submerge the Olympics in a wave of political controversy as crisis after crisis broke out in the year leading up to the Summer Games in Melbourne. The Hungarian people revolted against their Soviet installed socialist puppet government, prompting the USSR to send tanks into Budapest to quash the revolution (Gill). The resulting struggle ended with the USSR reinstating the unpopular socialist regime, after weeks of violent struggle between the Hungarian rebels and the Soviet military (Gill). To protest the Soviet oppression of the Hungarians, Spain, Switzerland, and the Netherlands all boycotted the 1956 Melbourne Olympics (Gill). Meanwhile, the IOC released an official statement formally recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation (Mellbye). This contentious decision was deplored by Chairman Mao Zedong and the Chinese government, prompting China to begin a long-term boycott of the Olympic Games which lasted all the way until the 1980 Summer Games in Moscow (Mellbye). Also in 1956, Egypt decided to nationalize the Suez canal, closing it off to foreign access. In response, France and Great Britain supported an Israeli ground invasion into Egypt, engaging the Egyptian military as European planes bombed Cairo (Senn 107). The Israeli forces took the Suez Canal by force. Egypt then successfully appealed to its ally, the Soviet Union, as well as the United Nations to force the invaders to relinquish control of the canal (Gill). The Egyptian government was furious when it discovered that the IOC was inviting Israel to the Melbourne Games, demanding that “all countries at war with them be excluded from the Games” (Senn 107). Egypt, Lebanon, and Iraq all boycotted in protest (Mellbye). Despite all of this international contention, the Games ran incredibly smoothly on the most part because every country that was involved in any of the aforementioned conflicts boycotted the Games, except for the Soviet Union and Hungary. The one major unpleasantry that stands out when one looks back on the Melbourne Games is the men’s semifinal water polo match where Hungary played the USSR. With the recent violent Soviet suppression of the Hungarian revolt on all the players’ minds, the match was intense, bordering on violent. Players on both teams taunted, cursed, and spat at each other, brawling under the water (Corwin). Malicious play erupted into full-on violence near the end of the game, when a Soviet player punched Hungarian star Ervin Zador in the face (Corwin). The enormously pro-Hungarian crowd exploded into chaos and charged the pool (Corwin). Fights broke out all around the stands and the Australian security barely kept the crowd at bay on the pool deck as officials prematurely ended the match and named Hungary victorious with a 4-0 lead (Corwin). Multiple witnesses swore there was blood in the water, and from there on out it was labeled the "Blood on the Water" game (Corwin). The only countries embroiled in international conflict to attend the Melbourne Games resulted in the only controversy of the Games. Because most of the other disharmonious nations decided to boycott, the Games was spared the negativity and dissension that those nations would have brought. Instead, the Melbourne Olympics was a huge success, with athletes from around the world coming together to enjoy the spirit of pure competitive sports. The Cold War tensions that caused such an uproar at the Helsinki Games thawed tremendously, with American and Soviet athletes interacting freely in the Olympic Village (Senn 109). Ironically, using Olympic boycotting as a tool for conflicting nations to express dissatisfaction can be beneficial to the success of peaceful international sport. The Melbourne Games demonstrated how these apparently negative political actions can result in a more pure athletic competition without the distraction of political discord. The Olympic Games have also been used as a positive political tool for the world to combat racism and for individuals to call for social equality. The Apartheid regime took hold of South Africa in 1948 with the ascendence of the National Party. This segregationist political party advocated white supremacy, and immediately instated a policy of dividing up South African society into four racial categories: “Black,” “White,” “Coloured,” and “Indian” (International). They legalized and promoted social, economic, and political discrimination, creating a Jim Crow-like atmosphere of oppression and degradation (International). In 1956, the National Party officially banned all interracial sport in South Africa (Senn 119). Within the next few years, other nations began to react by calling for the exclusion of South Africa from the IOC. Norway first brought the issue of Apartheid to the Olympic table in 1958, and soon after, IOC member Konstantin Andrianov spoke for the Soviet Union, proposing “the exclusion of the Union of South Africa from the IOC” (Senn 119). Brundage was reluctant to act because of his philosophical aversion to politics, but he finally gave into international pressure, setting a final deadline of December 31, 1963 for the National Party to “end racial discrimination in South African sport” (Senn 133). The deadline passed with no change in South Africa. In order to uphold the Olympic values of equality in sport, the IOC finally responded by banning South Africa from the 1964 Tokyo Games (Senn 133). Racism and segregation was not to be tolerated inside the supposedly sacred territory of the Olympic Village. However, when the South African National Olympic Committee announced in 1966 that “in principle it would accept the idea of a racially mixed Olympic team,” Brundage was eager to reinstate South Africa into the Olympic family (Senn 134). He appointed Lord Killanin—his eventual successor as the president of the IOC—to lead an investigation to South Africa to judge the validity of its promise (Senn 135). During the trip, no matter how much he tried to solely focus on the conduct of South Africa’s Olympic training system, Killanin found it impossible to ignore the horrific system of Apartheid he saw around him (Senn 135). He and his Nigerian colleague, Sir Ade Ademola, were not permitted to sit together on a public bench or use the same public restroom (Senn 135). In his report to Brundage, Killanin summed up that it would be impossible for the South African National Olympic Committee to “operate in open defiance of its government” by allowing a racially mixed team to be sent to the Olympics (Senn 135). Other African nations were inclined to share Killanin’s view. Twenty-two countries from around Africa banded together to form the Supreme Council for Sport in Africa (SCSA), protesting the IOC’s leniency with South Africa and threatening to boycott the 1968 Mexico City Summer Games if South Africa was invited (Senn 135). The SCSA was created for the purpose of safeguarding racial equality in African sports. By threatening to boycott the Olympics, African nations used politics to stand up against social injustice and demand positive change. So as to avoid a major boycott, the IOC excluded South Africa from the Mexico City Olympics, and in 1970 voted to no longer officially recognize South Africa’s National Olympic Committee (Senn 148). Even the seemingly beneficial political move by the IOC to exclude South Africa from Olympic competition incited further political actions which in fact greatly detracted from the integrity of the Games. The politicization of boycotting as a means of protest soon got out of hand as widespread boycotts threatened the integrity of Olympic competition in Montreal, again in Moscow, and yet again in Los Angeles. The issue of South African sports resurfaced in 1976 during the lead up to the Montreal Summer Olympics of that year. In order to shun South Africa, a wide variety of international sporting federations had banned South Africa from international competition (Senn 166). Contrary to this popular sentiment, New Zealand decided to send its rugby team, nicknamed the “All Blacks,” to tour in South Africa where they played several tests against the “Springboks” (Mellbye). The Supreme Council for Sport in Africa was infuriated by this fraternization, calling for New Zealand’s banishment from the Montreal Olympics (Senn 166). The IOC was unrelenting and somewhat mystified by the nature of the demand. Rugby was not an Olympic sport, so the IOC did not see how it could have any responsibility or obligation to take action (Senn 166). In the end, thirty African countries boycotted the Montreal Games, significantly decreasing the level of quality in many of the track and field events (Mellbye). The boycott didn’t accomplish anything for the benefit of the purity of international sport. On the contrary, it undermined the integrity of the competition. In the aftermath of the Montreal Games, Lord Killanin and the IOC established a new policy of dealing a five year suspension to any National Olympic Committee that “withdrew from the Games for unexplainable reasons” (Senn 174). It is doubtful that Killanin expected the magnitude of the boycotts that would happen within the decade. In response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, the United States led an enormous boycott of 65 countries, leaving only 80 countries sending athletes to the Moscow Summer Games in 1980 (Milestones). This attendance was much down from the 92 countries to send athletes to Montreal, which was subsequently down from 121 at the Munich Olympics in 1972 (Participants). In reaction to the US-led boycott, the Soviet Union staged an Eastern Bloc boycott of the Los Angeles Summer Games in 1984 (Milestones). It appeared as though power politics were taking over the Olympics, soiling the amazing capability of international sport as a means to promote equality and mutual understanding. However, even as the IOC was marred by the political turmoil of Apartheid and the Cold War, one act of protest would shine as a beacon of light, beating back the ignorant darkness to illuminate the plight of black people in America. In 1968, protest movements were sprouting around the world. In the United States, students protested the Vietnam War and African Americans protested against segregation, while students rallied in France and took to the streets in Mexico City, the site of the upcoming Olympics (Senn 138). On the eve of the Games, riots in Mexico City turned violent as mobs clashed with the Mexican military leaving over 250 people dead (Senn 138). In the midst of this global atmosphere of dissent, African American Olympic athletes saw the impending Games as a unique opportunity to make a political statement against racial discrimination in America. Harry Edwards was one such athlete. In 1968, he called for an African American boycott of the Mexico City Olympics “to protest the general condition of blacks in the United States” (Senn 136-137). Following the dogma expressed by Edwards’ daring slogan: “We are not Americans, we are black people,” many African American athletes—including almost the entire American basketball squad—refused to attend the Games (Senn 137). Because many of these athletes were key local and national leaders of the burgeoning Black Power movement, their refusal drew the attention of the world to the plight of African Americans (Zirin). Nevertheless, this valiant rebellion was immensely overshadowed by the actions of the American American athletes that did attend attend the Mexico City Games. Instead of boycotting with the rest of their peers, several African American athletes— including sprinters John Carlos and Tommie Smith—decided to travel to Mexico City on a mission to “[make] a pointed statement there in front of the world” (Zirin). Inspired by their millions of African American supporters, Smith and Carlos respectively won the gold and bronze medals in the 200 meter sprint, fulfilling their goal of favorably representing the blacks of America (Zirin). Then, at their medal ceremony, they courageously made a political statement for the world to see. As the Star-Spangled Banner rang out in triumph, Smith and Carlos took their shoes off and carried them to protest poverty in America (Zirin). They wore beads around their necks to protest lynching (Zirin). Carlos even “directly violated Olympic protocol: unzipping his jacket to represent ‘his working buddies—black and white—back home in New York City’” (Zirin). Finally, they simultaneously raised their black-gloved fists to “show solidarity with the Civil Rights Movement” (Zirin). Brundage was furious and punished them by banning them from the Olympic Village and suspending them from the US Olympic team (Zirin). Tragically, for the rest of their lives, Smith and Carlos had trouble finding work and received countless death threats from people who believed that what they did brought disgrace to the American people (Zirin). Nevertheless, their actions inspired millions of people around the world and sparked progress in the American Civil Rights Movement. As Smith puts it: “We are athletes. Although I am a teacher, but not a politician. We used this stage so the whole world could see the poverty of the black man in America” (Zirin). Throughout the modern Olympic era, the IOC has strived to keep politics out of the Games, with limited success. However, many of these political influences have in fact made for more equitable and honest international sport. Even as Avery Brundage condemned Tommie Smith and John Carlos for their political statement, the closing ceremonies of the 1968 Mexico City Olympics converted into “a great festival when athletes unexpectedly surged onto the field to celebrate” (Senn 142). One Olympic observer wrote: “The Olympic Stadium was now no longer a stage, but a family circle…. The grass of the Olympic Stadium became a dance meadow. The Olympic closing ceremony transformed itself into a folk festival, unorganized, spontaneous, with infectious cheer” (Senn 142).

Works Cited

Bayliss, S., Butler, S., Klaczynski, M., Williams, A., Yip, I., & Lui, J. “Politics: Aspects of the Olympic Games.” Politics: Aspects of the Olympic Games. Imperial College, London, Feb. 2004. Web. 26 Sept. 2012.

Corwin, Miles. “Blood in the Water at the 1956 Olympics.” Smithsonian Magazine. Smithsonian Institution, 01 Aug. 2008. Web. 30 Mar. 2013

Gill, Kathy. “Politics and the Olympics.” about.com. The New York Times, 03 Jan. 2009. Web. 25 Sept. 2012.

“International Boycott of Apartheid Sport.” African National Congress. ANC, 25 May 1971. Web. 30 Mar. 2013.

Mellbye, Anne. “Politics and the Olympics.” Politics Special Reports. Guardian News and Media Limited. 2011. Web. 25 Sept. 2012.

“Milestones: 1977-1980.” Office of the Historian. Bureau of Public Affairs - United States Department of State, n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.

Not Just a Game. Dir. Jeremy Earp. Perf. Dave Zirin. 2010. DVD.

“Olympic Games.” Olympic Games Medals, Results, Sports, Athletes. The Olympic Movement. Web. 25 Nov. 2012.

“Participants in Olympics.” Maps of World. n.p. 31 July 2012. Web. 30 Mar. 2013.

Senn, Alfred. Power, Politics, and the Olympic Games. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1999. Print.

“World War I: Treaties and Reparations.” Holocaust Encyclopedia. United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, 11 May 2012. Web. 30 Mar. 2013.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    The 1952 Olympics were held in Helsinki, Finland. . These games largely reflected on the Cold War. The Soviet Union finally returned to the Games after being away since 1912. But, instead of living in the same Olympic Village with all the other athletes, they set up their own little village for Eastern countries near the Soviet Naval Base. These soviet athletes were followed around by Soviet officials everywhere so they would be able avoid communication with other athletes. The games were dominated by ‘East vs. West’ competition. Bob Mathias, an athlete from the United states, who won the decathlon for the second time, stated: “There were many more pressures on American athletes because of the Russians. . . . They were in a sense the real enemy. You just loved to beat 'em. You just had to beat 'em. . . . This feeling was strong down through the entire team.” 3…

    • 530 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Olympics have shown over the decades that they can be affected by political conflict. However, it seems that this is the point of the Olympics, to illustrate national pride, by competition. Bloodshed should not be the way for pride of one’s country to be shown, but it should be shown through competition, in the words of the founder of the modern Olympic movement, Pierre de Coubertin(1). The games have been used as a weapon for denouncing a country’s sportsmanship, such as in 1956 when Arnold Lunn, a British Olympic team official accused the Nazis of cheating in the 1936 Olympic games that were held in Germany. He went on to allege that the competitors of Germany went onto the course while it was closed to athletes. Though the fact that they were trying so hard to practice, could be an example of the importance placed on the games at the time before war period. This is implied by the statement by Arnold Lunn that victory was the only thing that mattered to the Nazis, and how they achieved it did not matter as long as they did(3). The use of the Olympics to show off one’s country was further demonstrated during the Cold War, when the United States and the Soviet Union were itching to outdo one another. Bob Matthias gives insight through an interview into the United State’s yearning to win over Russia. The competitor told of the spirit of winning throughout the team, even in the athletes that were sure to win for the United States(4). This is a stark contrast to an information guide provided by the Soviet Union regarding the olympics being held in Moscow that year. It tells of seeking peace with the U.S., and how…

    • 1191 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Dbq Olympics Apwh

    • 1089 Words
    • 5 Pages

    During the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, World War I and World War II occurred followed by The Cold War. Countries entered the Olympic Games in hopes of finding peace through friendly competition, while leaving their individual problems behind. In document 1, Pierre de Coubertin, founder of the modern Olympic movement in 1892 thought, “Reduction of the chances of war helps promote peace”. This quote means that when the countries came together for friendly competition at the Olympic Games, wars weren’t taking place. Pierre de Coubertin also believed that the Olympics Games helped promote peace and as founder, he wanted everyone to feel a sense of unity within them. The author of document 6 shares the same belief. The Soviet Union committee believed that, “a consistent and peaceful foreign policy” had a dramatic influence on the 1980 Olympics. The Soviet Union/USSR believed this because in 1980 the pressure on Soviet Union to end the Cold War was increasing. By hosting Olympic Games in 1980, USSR was eager to show their will to come together with the world in a peaceful manner.…

    • 1089 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Olympics with its country strengthening powers also brought some aspects that could cause social controversies. The idea of women participating in the game was not accepted first but as time passed women were allowed to represent for their countries, as shown in document two, the author is trying to help develop the number of women in the Olympics and inspire other female athletes. The women who participated were empowered and filled with confidence in and for their countries which inspired and ignited patriotisms throughout the various countries, supported by document eight. But sometimes the aspect could be used in the wrong ways. As described in document three, some countries would try to win at any cost in order to show their power and supremacy. The success of the teams would sometimes reflect the social values of each county, as supported in document ten.…

    • 462 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Olympics Dbq Analysis

    • 580 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The Olympics are series of events that countries from all around the world come together and compete against each other in. The Olympics have had both bad and positive effects on the world, and its countries. Women, political tensions, and economics are a few factors that have shaped the modern Olympic movement from 1892 to 2002.…

    • 580 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Olympic Games DBQ

    • 602 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Many critics talked highly of the Soviet Union when the Olympic games were to be held in Moscow for the 1980 games. Saying that the Soviet Union “is a beacon of peace, democracy, and social progress.” (Doc 6) But when it came to what they Americans thought, it was far from that. Bob Matthias form the United States, once said “You just loved to beat’em. You just had to beat’em.” (Doc 4) This is because of the long rival that these two countries have had ever since the cold war had started. His perception of the Russians was skewed because he had a long standing with them. He didn’t see them as real competitors. Some countries always went up and down, like Pakistan. There “social values which have shrunk from that of national pride to self-promotion.” (Doc 10) Ali Kabir, a sports writer states that they have lost what has once made them great, and that is work. “The current national team is clueless and has tarnished the country’s name.” For a few countries it was more than national pride, for Japan it was more of a national crusade. They felt that this was a perfect time to come back as a world trade power. (Doc 5) For other countries like Germany, it was also more than just national pride. For Hitler it was a way to show that Germans were superior. He always made protests that always helped the Germans and no one else. (Doc 3) Although he was less concerned about medals, he was more concerned about…

    • 602 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    How do they affect the sport? 4. What can be done to solve it? Gold Medallist Tommie Smith, (center) and Bronze medallist John Carlos (right) showing the raised fist on the podium after the 200m in the 1968 Summer Olympics wearing Olympic Project for Human Rights badges.…

    • 735 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    1936 Berlin Olympics

    • 2950 Words
    • 12 Pages

    his anti-Semitic propaganda, but people were still exposed to his belief of Aryan supremacy. After the…

    • 2950 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Sports and politics intersected when the Soviet troops invaded Afghanistan towards the end of 1979. Political figures such as President Carter called upon the U.S. Olympic Committee to boycott the Games. More than forty countries called off their participation in Moscow's Olympic games in 1980, including Germany and the USA. Ultimately just eighty-one countries participated in the games held in Russia's capital. Not only did this issue effect the 1980 Olympic games, but as well as the 1984 Olympic games. The Soviet Union along with about a dozen allied states, refrained from participating in the sporting event held in Los Angeles, California. The Soviet Union’s “reasoning” behind their lack of involvement was caused by concerns that not enough security was provided for Olympic athletes at the games.…

    • 543 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Many events of The Nazi Olympics surround this sporting festival to make it one of the controversial events in sport history. Not only does Mandell cover the 1936 Olympic Games themselves but he gives insight to the history of the modern games, participation by the United States, the role of the games in the Nazi propaganda efforts and portrays heroes and key figures. Mandell wrote about the intersection of sport and politics and how world leaders set the agenda, not the athletes. The Nazi's used the 1936 Olympic Games as a way to reinforce their political and racial goals. Although they were founded as part of a vision of world peace, the 1936 games became a stage for political disputes.…

    • 608 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Modern Olympics DBQ Essay

    • 1114 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Competitors were vicious and knew how to act when it came to the Olympic games. For example, a 1972 magazine interview with Bob Matthias, (United States competitor in 1952 games) stated that there were many pressures on athletes with the presence of he Soviet Union team, displaying them as the real enemy. The athletes from the US loved to beat them, no matter what sport the Russians were or weren’t strong in. (Doc 4) However during completion, competitors, such as the Germans, brought in their political view of things, thinking that Nazism was better than democracy. The Germans only believed in victory, for all means were justified. Therefore because the Germans believed in victory, they cheated on the Olympic Games in 1936 and practiced on the ski mountain before it was opened, always giving themselves the advantage. (Doc 3) To competitors who maintained victory during the modern Olympic games, they gave themselves and their country confidence. Nothing would separate their love and devotion to their country, even if people openly criticize them about their apparel or spirit for their sport or country. Hassiba…

    • 1114 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Cited: Barney, Robert K.. "Golden egg or fools ' gold? American Olympic commercialism and the IOC." Center of Olympic Studies 123-133.…

    • 718 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The 1972 Olympics took place in Munich Germany and it was an opportunity for Germany to redeem themselves from the last time they held the Olympics. In 1936 the summer Olympics were held in Berlin Germany under the rule of Adolf Hitler. These games were marred because of Hitler's racism and discrimination. The 1972 Olympics was Germany's chance to repaint their image from the violent, hate-filled country of 1936, to a country that cares for all people. Germany wanted to show the world that they were not the militant and intolerant country they were 40 years ago. Therefore, the Olympic village had next to no security. Israeli athletes were extremely emotional because it was their first time returning to Germany after the Holocaust under Hitler. In the opening ceremony of the 1972 games, many of those athletes marched with the Star of David and were seen crying and in an emotional state, but unfortunately many people still carried the same hatred in their hearts. A Palestinian terrorist group called Black September carried out an event that changed the world forever.…

    • 1546 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Best Essays

    From the beginning, controversy has followed the Olympic Games. Indeed, at times it seems as if the Olympic movement would fall apart under its own weight, with several commentators even suggesting that the world would be a better place without the Games. Since…

    • 3327 Words
    • 14 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Better Essays

    You can learn a lot about the world through modern Olympic values such as peace and equality. However,…

    • 1593 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays