I personally think it's a bad idea to mix sport and politics. We already had it in 1980 and 1984 - it did not bring any good to anybody. Don't like Russian laws or Putin? There are other ways to say that. Sportsmen should not be involved in this type of stuff.
As Russian I feel obligated to say that it is already mixed by Putin: Olympiad steamrolled human lives, destroyed infrastructure and environment and corrupted all related people and companies. And this is why many people in Russia will boycott it.
(1) I think so. If I were an Olympic athlete and the Olympic games were in some strange (for me) country where it was prohibited to talk about my particular sexual orientation in the presence of children. Would I care? Probably not, I would go there to compete, not to talk about my sexuality.
(2) Unlike in the US, a lot of Olympic sports (boxing, figure skating) specifically focus on NON-professionals (i.e. people who don't earn money doing what they are doing).
> I personally think it's a bad idea to mix sport and politics. We already had it in 1980 and 1984
As soon as there is big money involved (which is definitely the case with the Olympic Games), sports and politics are always mixed. Countries have to spend billions in order to make the games happen. This is not just a few people doing sports for just the sports.
The New Zealand government sent a rugby team to South Africa with no Maori players as per the host request. This outrageous request fueled the quest for equality here. Likewise, the international reaction to South African teams that toured helped fuel the opposition to apartheid (and it is interesting the New Zealand's Prime Minister can no longer remember his stance on the racist South African team visit to NZ, as he is currently representing NZ at Mandela's funeral).
I don't think it is fair to boycott the Olympics and rob the dreams of the participants who worked so hard to qualify.
If you have something to prove, then prove it at the Olympics. Use it as an opportunity to change people's perceptions.
Could you imagine what was going through Adolf Hitler's mind when he saw Jeese Owens during the 1936 Olympics? Or, back in the US, where racism was commonplace and African-Americans were treated as "inferior".
Interesting fact about Jeese Owens: He was never acknowledged for his achievements until President Dwight Eisenhower.
The fact you use Jesse Owen's example is a bit ironic, since he was actually much better treated in Germany than in the United States where racial segregation was still the norm. By his own account: "Hitler didn't snub me – it was FDR who snubbed me. The president didn't even send me a telegram."
(Not making a point, just remarking.)
> Could you imagine what was going through Adolf Hitler's mind when he saw Jeese Owens during the 1936 Olympics?
For the curious, we actually know what Hitler's reaction was. This is how Albert Speer, who was in the box with him at the time, described it:
"He was highly annoyed by the series of triumphs by the marvelous colored American runner, Jesse Owens. People whose antecedents came from the jungle were primitive, Hitler said with a shrug; their physiques were stronger than those of civilized whites and hence should be excluded from future games." [Inside the Third Reich, 1970]
He was treated normally (i.e. like hosts are expected to treat any foreign athletes) because Germany didn’t want to destroy its image. I mean, Germany almost snubbed Jesse Owens outright by not allowing any Blacks or Jews to participate, but after threats of boycott walked back on that (though did not change its mind, as is obvious from the quote you provided).
The nature of the relationship between Hitler and Jesse Owens is quite different from the relationship between FDR and Jesse Owens.
Points of comparison would either be a hypothetical successful German Black athlete and how Hitler would treat that person (not allow him or her to participate is the answer to that) or a hypothetical successful non-US black athlete and how FDR would treat that person.
As is quite obvious from your quote, Hitler still perceived Jesse Owens (and black people in general) as sub-human and was very outspoken about that. There is racist ideology oozing out of that statement. It’s consistent with everything else he has said about race.
FDR was obviously also racist, no question about that, but there is a difference between Hitler’s and FDR’s racism.
Jesse Owens’ own focus was very understandably on his own and others’ Blacks troubles they were facing in racist segregated America at the time.
I don't know about Hitler, but casual Russian nationalism and homophobia is not based on the sense of superiority; quite contrary, it's about fear that Russian language/culture/ethnicity/state disappears as others will outnumber us demographicaly or all our children become gays.
I mean the guy won't show up in Russia himself. It does not mean that German athletes won't compete. I think you maybe misunderstanding this situation.
Excellent point. Since the Ancient Olympics, the Games were a period of truce. Any ongoing conflict was suspended. It was almost the only time where any disputes would be postponed for a later time.
And we're talking about an actual war, not some political disagreement. Those athletes would probably try to kill each other the next month or so.
It's really sad that people take advantage of such a great event to gain attention for different causes, even if those causes are right. It happens every single time.
Countries will always have disagreement no matter what. Save those for a later time. Not the Olympics.
Perhaps with ancient Olympics - the modern games have been cancelled by wars a few times (depends how you count, are winter games counted?), have had heaps of boycotts (how do you count boycotts? By country, by issue? By year?) and have been attacked a few times - the Atlanta, Salt Lake and Munich games. I don't think you could call the modern Olympics a period of truce, it's more of a lightning rod for current issues.
At the moment, nobody really wants to disrupt this summer's World Cup in Brazil by threatening drastic measures like withdrawing from FIFA. After that, who knows.
There will be a lot more noise from fans, for sure. I don't know whether that will translate into action at a national level. The sport really doesn't need such a bloated and corrupt governing body, and if you get just a few of the major nations from Europe and South America agreeing to go another way, FIFA could quickly collapse.
I would hate to be an athlete who's trained their entire life for this event, only to have it so tainted by russia's appalling actions. As a fan, I'm still looking for an appropriate reaction
He does not really "boycott" the Olympics, he simply will not attend them in his function as head of state, which anyway is not strictly demanded by protocol. In addition, in his public statement he does not officially state that he will not attend the games because of human right violations by Russia, although one could certainly interpret it this way. Within the current relationship between Germany and Russia, which is neither particularly friendly nor hostile, this is still the strongest statement he can make without causing an affront. In fact, Gauck never officially visited Russia in his function as head of state since his election.
I had a poke around but lack the Google-fu to find the "propaganda" law in question. I would really be curious to see the law as written and what it entails.
Please note I don't want to see analysis of the law (as everything I saw while searching seemed biased), I want to see what it actually says. I want to see the other side of the argument before I cast any personal judgement over this.
Please note I am not homophobic, or against non-traditional relationships, I just want to hear the other side of the argument, especially when it would appear based on what I saw that the majority of Russians agreed with it.
I found and article [1] that features an English translation of the law.
"Here is what Article 6.21 actually says:
Propaganda is the act of distributing information among minors that 1) is aimed at the creating nontraditional sexual attitudes, 2) makes nontraditional sexual relations attractive, 3) equates the social value of traditional and nontraditional sexual relations, or 4) creates an interest in nontraditional sexual relations.
If you’re Russian. Individuals engaging in such propaganda can be fined 4,000 to 5,000 rubles (120-150 USD), public officials are subject to fines of 40,000 to 50,000 rubles (1,200-1,500 USD), and registered organizations can be either fined (800,000-1,000,000 rubles or 24,000-30,000 USD) or sanctioned to stop operations for 90 days. If you engage in the said propaganda in the media or on the internet, the sliding scale of fines shifts: for individuals, 50,000 to 100,000 rubles; for public officials, 100,000 to 200,000 rubles, and for organizations, from one million rubles or a 90-day suspension.
If you’re an alien. Foreign citizens or stateless persons engaging in propaganda are subject to a fine of 4,000 to 5,000 rubles, or they can be deported from the Russian Federation and/or serve 15 days in jail. If a foreigner uses the media or the internet to engage in propaganda, the fines increase to 50,000-100,000 rubles or a 15-day detention with subsequent deportation from Russia."
I think that this says that advocating for equality is a crime. Scary.
I found that too, but it seems to be lifting portions of the text. I want to see the whole thing. Preferably in Russian with a side by side English translation (I will run it through some converters just to check).
I can see how advocating for equality can be listed as a crime based on what's listed there though. Its interesting that the word "propaganda" is used which leaves a fair amount of room for interpretation. Point 3 is the sore point it seems, although I can see why its in there as you would not want to equate child-adult relationships which this would prevent. It all hangs on the word "nontraditional"
I find the organisation fine interesting. Could you use this to fine Focus Features for distributing the film "The Kids Are All Right" in Russia?
EDIT - The linked article actually points out that the key words are propaganda and nontraditional. I still want to see the whole law though as those should be defined somewhere.
On one hand, it seems like a good thing to do. But to be consistent, he should boycott other olympics or international sport events. Russia is not the only country where human rights are severely abused.
In Germany the president is the head of state, but is not involved in running the government. Sort of like an elected king, he's there for ceremonies and signing federal laws.
I live in Germany and I wouldn't have been able to name him.