Let the Games Begin

The Olympics kicked off yesterday with a bang, boom, and a bright shiny torch. Not that there weren't many bumps on the way to Beijing.

It has been one of the more turbulent lead-ups to the world's biggest field-day. Politics, grievances, history, and patriotism have all jumbled together and fallen in a large and inglorious puddle in the road.

What of the Olympics?

I'm sure that we have all read and seen far too much regarding the Olympics and China. It's on the news, in the blogs, and plastered across the TV screens.

Some say that the Olympics should be free of all of this political mumbo-jumbo. It's a global celebration and a way to bring a few days of peace to an often violent world. The wars and conflicts continue elsewhere on the planet, but for a week, in this one place, there is supposed to be friendly competition. It is a time to marvel at the magnificence that is the human body and the human will to succeed and to excel.
But at the same time, are we to gloss over the significant grievances of people groups who, for a brief moment, might be able to grab the spotlight and turn it to their condition? Tibetans and Uighers, along with some other minorities living under Chinese rule, want their voice to be heard. For most, this is their only real opportunity to receive world-wide attention. With the powers of Chinese censorship, it is virtually impossible to get a message out to the rest of the world.

The Olympics has often been used as a political platform in the past, to discomfiture of many. African nations once boycotted the Olympics because of New Zealand's seeming support of Apartheid South Africa. The mass boycotts of the 80 and 84 games was brought on by the Cold War. The 88 olympics in South Korea were boycotted by the North and four other nations. Taiwan once boycotted the games because they wouldn't be allowed to compete under the name of Taiwan.
There was the infamous Munich games and the slaughter of the Israeli athletes. There was the bombing at the Atlanta games.
The 1936 games in Germany were used by the Nazis as propaganda for their regime and thus was widely denounced after the fact.

So, where does that leave us, here?
Do the Olympics function, as Pierre de Coubertin wished, as a movement for peace in the world? Or does this make the Olympics a sort of global Disneyworld, disconnected from reality and made up of plastic trees and plastic smiles?

I know that this will probably get me in trouble with my Chinese friends, but the fact of the matter is that abuses have occurred in China. The Tibetans and Uyghers and other minorities have often been pushed down, sometimes with overwhelming and violent force. The desire for independence from China is not an anarchic or pointlessly separatist movement stemming from some petty dispute. These were nations that were conquered, with people and heritages all their own. Their grievances are deep and real.

But then, is dousing the torch the proper way to express these grievances? Can't the Olympics reflect the spirit of sportsmanship and common humanity as expressed on Christmas day, 1914?

Which is more important, to strive for peace despite conflict, or to defend and uphold the weak and weary?
Or perhaps it's not so black and white? Perhaps there is a way to achieve both?

I'm sure this is all moot to most people around the world. The Games are underway. In two weeks time, they will be over and Tibet and the Uighers will fade into the background once again. What of them?

- Swansong