The London 2012 Olympics - The Politics Discussion

[Jonathan]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

With regard to the geography of the Olympics, as Scott has rightly pointed out, most of the events are centred around London, but there are some in other cities across the country, namely the football, which is taking place in Cardiff, Manchester, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Coventry and Glasgow alongside London. The sailing is taking place in Weymouth and Portland, which is, geographically, the closest to me (although a bit of a pain to get to). Events may be centred around London, but that's why it's called London 2012.

 

[Islander]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

Having been fully immersed in the Torch Relay yesterday and this morning, as it travels all around Berkshire and spent the night at the Mad Stad in Reading - watching it go through Slough, Windsor, Ascot, standing in the Oracle in Reading and watching it pass a couple of meters from me, and listening to BBC Radio Berkshire's excellent coverage - I can honestly say that it's right up near the top of my list of 'awesome events I've seen', not so much for the actual torch itself, but for the whole atmosphere it brings, and how it really seems to have united such a large proportion of the nation.

Yes, there are people who are determined to hate it, dislike what it stands for, dislike the entire Olympic event and everything that surrounds it, but certainly, when it comes to the torch at least, they've well and truly been drowned out by the positivity, sense of pride and community, and just general happiness. It's been lovely

I know this is a bit of a slushy post, but meh. This really is a fantastic thing, in large part for how it has brought people together

 

[Meat Pie]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

If you go to a concert, you're probably going to find a great deal of positivity there because you are surrounded by people who wanted to see that band... : It's hardly reflective to go to an event and make bold claims that the mood of the nation is positive because everyone at that particular event was.

Let alone anything else, I don't see how anyone can forgive an organisation which is completely apathetic about the the suitability of the games' host. Look at The Olympics of 1936 for christ sake!

 

[Martin]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

Well everyone else is, so I decided to finally get in the Olympic spirit.

I went round my neighbours and made the pay £500 for a party none of the are invited to.

 

[Lottie.]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

I'm looking forward to the torch coming to Portsmouth this Sunday... then I'll officially start getting into the mood of the Olympics.
Then roll on the 6th August when I'm travelling up to see the Athletics with my family. Not looking forward to travelling to up there as it'll be really hectic but at least I can say I've been to the Olympics

 

[Jonathan]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

I've been looking forward to the Olympics ever since that Maths lesson in July 2005 when I, along with other students, managed to persuade our teacher to find out who had won the rights to host the Games. The reaction from us was, frankly, amazing. And then it was subdued the following day with the terrorist attacks on London. This is a once-in-a-lifetime thing - I doubt very much that this country will see the Olympics again in my lifetime, although my dad's parents were alive when the Olympics last visited in 1948.

I'll be following the events as closely as possible. Heck, I'm even attending the men's football matches at Wembley on July 29th, and I get to see Team GB! I've been looking forward to this for ages. My first international match, at the Olympics, at Wembley, seeing Team GB play (they're on in the second match, although that's another story). It doesn't get much better than that.

On a serious note, I am aware that former Olympic hosts have come under fire at times for various reasons. My knowledge of history isn't exactly the best, so correct me if I'm wrong. The Games were awarded to Berlin in 1936, and as Meat Pie has rightly pointed out, that is seen as very controversial. Berlin were given the rights to host the Games in 1931 - two years before Hitler came to power. Spain and the USSR chose not to participate, and some athletes did not take part either. Another point to note regarding the Berlin games of 1936 is that racist policies were considered more acceptable then than they are now - for example, the USA still had segregation policies in place, and the Montgomery Bus Boycott didn't happen until 1955.

Next is Moscow 1980. Moscow was boycotted by numerous countries following the USSR's invasion of Afghanistan, although I have my suspicions that Communism in the USSR played its part to an extent. This was responded to in Los Angeles 1984 with the Soviet-led boycott of 16 to 18 countries (sources differ).

Seoul 1988 is a rather interesting one, as North Korea allegedly demanded that half the sports took place there rather than in South Korea. This was unsurprisingly refused, with five countries - including North Korea - boycotting, and two - Albania and the Seychelles - not participating, but not calling their non-participation a 'boycott' in order to avoid sanctions from the IOC (although to me, they pretty much did boycott the Games).

And then we come to Beijing 2008. I wasn't too happy when the Games were awarded to Beijing in 2001, mainly as I wanted Istanbul to get them (at the time, I had family living in Istanbul, although they have since returned to the UK). As I grew older, I became more aware of China's poor record on human rights, and felt that because of this, China did not deserve the Games. In fairness, they did put on a very good Games, but their record on human rights was - and still is - a huge problem for me.

Despite all that, I'm looking forward to London 2012. Roll on the 27th of July!

 

[Meat Pie]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

The Olympics could have quite easily pulled out at any time before going ahead with the 1936 or indeed any of the other games you have mentioned and yet they decided not to. Also, whilst racism was more mainstream in the 1930's, I'm pretty sure that complete dictatorship was not something that was considered acceptable by most democratic countries.

I wish well to everyone who can push all the socio-political issues aside and enjoy the show. I envy the fact that you can do it but I simply cannot overlook moral problems in the name of having a good time.

As the opening gets ever closer, I feel more and more physically sick at the notion of us paying out for a glorified sports day when the normal man on the street increasingly has little to celebrate.

 

[Moley]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

Who are the gridlocked motorways and ridiculous queues at Immigration sponsored by?

 

[GAGrathea]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

One of many reasons I just can't get excited about this.

 

[Scott]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

Seems ridiculous Mags, I agree. However, without the sponsorship the event would not be able to be sold. Chips may seem like a trivial thing, but the money McDonald's pay to sponsor the event is vital for it. I also assume their chips will be all over the Olympic Park should people wish to eat chips instead of whatever else is on offer.

My point? Yes, I can see the stupidity behind such complicated corporate rulings but I also see the necessity.

 

[Adam James]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

To get around the loophole, could then not serve one tiny Scampi Bite free of charge with each portion of chips? Saying that, as much as I find corporate sponsorships intriguing, this one rule really does take the biscuit. :-\

 

[Meat Pie]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

Should chips be sold at an Olympic venue at all? Wouldn't healthier food be more appropriate?

One of the few genuine benefits of the Olympics is that it inspires children to get involved with sport and physical activity and so to be sponsored by one of companies which makes it's money in childhood obesity seems to be very contradictory.

 

[Tim]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

But McDonalds don't sell chips. They are fries, far inferior things

Out of interest who read L2012C and instantly thought of The Swarm?

 

[Islander]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

Should chips be sold at an Olympic venue at all? Wouldn't healthier food be more appropriate?

Is it fair to remove choice for people? Shouldn't people be allowed to make their own decision regarding what they eat?

 

[Meat Pie]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

Perhaps I was a bit reactionary to demand they stop those foods all together, but I certainly think it would be more appropriate for the healthy options to be pushed, and it's really not on for the Olympics to accept sponsorship from Mcdonalds.

 

[Jonathan]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

Whilst that does seem ridiculous, I have to agree with mrbrightside to an extent. Also, I'm questioning the validity of this apparent statement, as there are - in my opinion, at least - numerous grammatical errors (or this could just be me being very picky). Furthermore, as far as I'm aware, it's only been officially reported on the Daily Telegraph's website, and surely if it were true, LOCOG and/or McDonald's would have made an official statement by now regarding it.

EDIT: It seems that LOCOG and McDonald's have now relented, and other retailers will be allowed to sell chips on their own, but only for staff doing rehearsals at the Olympic venues. Whilst this is a bit of a relief, it is rather frustrating, if you ask me.

And Tim - I completely agree. McDonald's do NOT sell 'chips' - they sell 'fries'. They even term them as fries themselves!

 

[GAGrathea]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

I just loathe the corporate-ness of it all; yes I totally understand how essential the funding from these big companies are but I just personally can't get any excitement over an event where everything is going to be dictated by ridiculous corporate guidelines like these... How can one company possibly have a chip/fries monopoly? And at an event which (for a lot of more patriotic types) should be showcasing London and the UK, to have nearly entirely American (or French in the case of EDF ) sponsors with monopolies on foodstuffs just seems a bit...odd.

 

[Jonathan]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

I am actually struggling to think of any British fast food giants other than Little Chef - and that certainly wouldn't do the Olympics much good from a PR point of view. And I'm not sure if they'd want Greggs to sponsor the Olympics either.

 

[Scott]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

The Olympics are global and as such global brands need to be the sponsors of the event. As the Olympics need to stretch around the world, it's no good if all the sponsors are purely British based as they won't be much use in other countries. That's not to say that British companies aren't involved heavily in Olympic and Paralympic sponsorship though - there are plenty involved!

 

[Jonathan]

Re: The London 2012 Olympics Discussion

Oh, of course. For example, they've got British Airways as the official airline, and Cadbury's are involved as well - although, as has been mentioned previously, it may be more beneficial if companies which promoted healthier food were used. One possibility that I've just thought of is Subway, as they have a range of fillings available, with some of them being low-fat 'healthier' options, but the main issue I can see with Subway is that it takes a fair amount of time to actually make the sandwich.