If making a political statement is that important to you, then the obvious solution is that you trot off somewhere else to make it, rather than attend an Olympic event. You are very free to make that choice. The Olympic Games weren't set up to act as your personal soap box you know.
[i]Nothing[/i] was set up as my personal soap box. But if I want to demonstrate, the best place to do it is where it will get publicity. It's not up to you or anyone else to tell me where I'm allowed to do this.
And although Carlos & Smith were banned from the 1968 Olympics (incidentally, the IOC president at the time was a well-known Nazi sympathiser - check this if you don't believe me), they're now mentioned slightly more warmly on the IOC's own website: "Over and above winning medals, the black American athletes made names for themselves by an act of racial protest. During the medal presentation ceremony, Tommie Smith and John Carlos, gold and bronze medal winners in the 200m, raised a black-gloved fist and hung their heads when their country’s national anthem was played. In doing this, they were protesting against racial segregation in the United States."
I'm not saying that I want to wear a political T-shirt, I'm saying that it's Britain, I'm a citizen, I might choose to. I have the right to paint my face blue and sing in Norwegian in the High Street. It doesn't mean it's a good idea, but it would be my right. And I can see no reason that I'm not allowed to wear clothing that some G4S drone might object to. How about a T-shirt saying "The Olympics are a spectacular waste of money" - what d'you think my chances of wearing that at the Games are? Slim to none, I'd say. But it's not overtly political, and even if it were, it's just my opinion. Why should I give that up?
So where do you draw the line? And why is it that you seem determined that we should give up our rights, for which people have died, to make sure there's undemanding and safe TV?
Dennis Leary had it about right:" I'm into freedom of speech and freedom of choice. Okay? I [i]want[/i] to smoke Cuban cigars the size of Cincinnati in the nonsmoking section. I [i]want[/i] to run through the streets naked with green Jell-O all over my body reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I might suddenly feel the [i]need[/i] to. Okay, pal?"
I can see a man with a gun(army squadie)having no difficulty in stopping a visitor taking in botles of pop.
But it may be different for a teenager, in a green vest, on 8.50 an hour, working in his first job, to say no to an aggressive visitor.
And although Carlos & Smith were banned from the 1968 Olympics (incidentally, the IOC president at the time was a well-known Nazi sympathiser - check this if you don't believe me), they're now mentioned slightly more warmly on the IOC's own website:
Didn't the IOC ban South Africa from competing over apartheid?
Surely that's political interference regardless of the worthiness of the cause?
And why is it that you seem determined that we should give up our rights, for which people have died
Calm down ffs. You're getting a tad hysterical again. No one is stripping your rights which people have died for.
You just can't use the Olympic Games to make your own political statement through the use of banners or clothing. I'm not sure why you think it's ever been different. Or why this represents a serious setback for countries which have hosted the Olympic Games. It's just an international sporting event, not an exercise in democracy.
Surely that's political interference regardless of the worthiness of the cause?
Only if you think that discriminating against people based on the colour of their skin is a legitimate political opinion. Most people don't, and see it for it is - just discrimination.
The Olympic Games are supposedly designed to promote peace and friendliness between nations, an indisputable political aspiration. But obviously the often elusive issue of "commonsense" is what needs to be applied here. It's partisan political statements such as "Independence for the Basque country" or calling for the abolition of the monarchy which is what is being targeted. It's not necessary and the Olympics doesn't need it.
Only if you think that discriminating against people based on the colour of their skin is a legitimate political opinion. Most people don't, and see it for it is - just discrimination.
So were Smith and Carlos right or wrong to use the world stage to make their protest in Mexico City? I believe they were absolutely justified; what's your take?
Interested in your PoV here Ernie, particularly in the purity of the Olympic idea that you are/appear to be expressing. To an extent, I sympathise with what you are saying. But then nation states use Olympic Games (and other events such as the SA apartheid boycotts etc) to make very visible political statements (eg US and USSR boycotts) and this is applauded while restricting individuals from having the same basic right (not nec the same countries). Intriguing but not consistent?
If someones wearing a t shirt that says "brits out of afghanistan" i would imagine the producers would not show it on the tv any road, ok, they have wide shots of the crowd but does anyone reckon they'd be able to pick it out? it'd be the size of a stamp.
But its gonna piss it down any way so they'll have their cagools on.
Interested in your PoV here Ernie
I'm not sure why you should be, I would say that it's by far the most prevalent point of view, ie, most people, I would have thought, feel the Olympic Games shouldn't be used/exploited/hijacked by people who have their own political agendas.
If there is a "political" position to be taken by the Olympic Games, eg, the promotion of racial harmony, equality, etc, then that should be decided by the International Olympic Committee, not self-appointed individuals.
In the case of South Africa under Apartheid it was very clear that racism went to the very heart of sport under Apartheid, which made it utterly incompatible with the spirit of international sporting events.
WunUndred.
If there is a "political" position to be taken by the Olympic Games, eg, the promotion of racial harmony, equality, etc, then that should be decided by the International Olympic Committee, not self-appointed individuals.
So Carlos and Smith were wrong, correct?
At the risk of making myself very unpopular:
If there is a "political" position to be taken by the Olympic Games, eg, the promotion of racial harmony, equality, etc, then that should be decided by the International Olympic Committee, not self-appointed individuals.So Carlos and Smith were wrong, correct?
This is pretty much bear baiting now.
To be consistent with his previous points he has to say "Yes they were wrong" but then its just gonna give people ammo to go "you can't say that" cos it was a case of racial discrimination and as soon as race comes into it then the hysteria starts and all rationality goes out the window.
Edit- not that i was popular before
I hadn't bothered answering dabble because it happened in 1968, it's not topical, and I really can't be arsed to argue the pros and cons of the Black Panthers, Malcolm X, the Nation of Islam, etc. Of course they were wrong, they were making a political statement.
ernie_lynch - Member
Interested in your PoV here Ernie
I'm not sure why you should be,
Sorry, if a bit of pleasantness is unwelcome???? But apart from the obvious exception, STW had seemed to have taken on a more pleasant atmosphere lately - just keeping it up. But if rudeness if preferred..... 😉
(The Olympics is the scene for so many political statements that its hard to draw a line at times)
Of course they were wrong, they were making a political statement.
And this is where I end my involvement. Ernie's entitled to a view, my view differs, and that's not going to change.
If we don't challenge, then things just stay the same. And although I'm not at all sure that people wearing T-shirts with political slogans at the Olympics would make much difference, it's worth a shot if that's the way you want to get your message across. It may not be in accordance with the Olympian ideals, but then the modern games (professional athletes, huge sponsorship) aren't exactly what de Coubertin had in mind either.
teamhurtmore I honestly don't know what your on about, still never mind.
If we don't challenge, then things just stay the same.
Well challenge stuff then. Why do you think the Olympics should be the vehicle to do that ?
