RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Olympics - who needs them?
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 7082
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/25/18 3:27 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Randy wrote:
This is your favorite logic error - false equivalence. Of the many criticisms of the Olympics lack of public interest may be the only one common to both.

The NEA is not associated with tyrants or flag waving, crass commercialism, use of performance enhancing drugs, spending billions to host 2 week long events, displacing people from their homes etc. Further, the amounts of money spent pale in comparison to those spend on the Olympics. If the NEA spent a billion dollars carving Trump's face on a mountain, and commissioned artists to do US Flag painting it would probably be funded much better.

No. The NEA example was directed toward only your last post which was solely focused on popularity. It was not meant to make any claim greater than that. Plus, if we want to compare popularity it is false to suggest there is a lack of public interest in the Olympics. It is still enjoyed by billions around the globe.

And the original point was that none of that is inherent to the Olympics. While it can happen, and the IOC can and should be better, not every country has these issues. And if not every country has the issues it means the problem is not with the Olympics themselves but rather the way some countries handle them. So your suggestion is that because of these countries abusing the games we should punish a billion people around the world who enjoy them (especially smaller countries that are historical medal favorites like the Netherlands and the Scandinavian counties in the Winter Olympics).

The false equivalency here is associating a national pride and a national identity surrounding a sporting event with military expansion and jingoism. The types of nationalism that each of these create are not the same and equating the two with some tenuous link is faulty logic. As I pointed out earlier, taking pride in your country is not an .uk inherently bad thing. In fact, it is a great thing. Many people are proud of and think their country the greatest in the world and yet live in places that are not "nationalistic" is the other sense.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
calbearman76



Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 3126
Location: Carson City


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/25/18 8:55 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I am becoming ambivalent about the Olympics. There was a time when it meant something to me, not as a patriotic activity but just as athletic competition. Sort of a Wide World of Sports ultra. This year I only watched two events, the men's and women's gold medal hockey games. Both were exciting games and I enjoyed them quite a bit, but as good as they were I wasn't nearly as excited for them as I was before the Miracle on Ice in 1980 or after the NHL players started playing. I usually enjoy curling and alpine skiing but I wasn't interested this time around. And one of my favorite events, ski jumping, I never even knew when it was.

I believe the spectacle of the games has overtaken the competition. That combined with the problems of extreme cost, political turmoil and performance drugs (when the spectacle of performance drugs invades curling there is a problem) it may be time to greatly modify the concept of the Olympics.

The best alternative may be to break up the Olympics. Keep the name, but run the various sports throughout the year. There is no competitive reason why water polo and soccer have to be scheduled at the same time as boxing or track and field. The logistics would be much easier and the cost of putting on a part of the games would allow smaller countries to still host, particularly in those sports where they have specific interest (e.g., team handball, biathlon, weightlifting).


scullyfu



Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 8530
Location: Niagara Falls


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/26/18 7:30 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

since we 'cut the cord' we don't have any access to the Olympics. at first I was kinda bummed, but I got over it. Wink I would've liked to have seen some of the events, but my world didn't end because I didn't.



_________________
i'll always bleed Storm green.
Randy



Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 8654



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/01/18 8:47 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Apparently, cities are no longer are willing to spend the tons of money needed to host the Olympics. The IOC is having a hard time finding bidders.

https://www.vox.com/world/2018/2/23/17008910/2018-winter-olympics-host-stadiums-cost-pyeongchang


CamrnCrz1974



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 17184
Location: Phoenix


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/01/18 4:09 pm    ::: Re: Olympics - who needs them? Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
Personally I love the Olympics and enjoy seeing these athletes in the other sports have their turn in the spotlight. And I love their stories. The perfect example out there is the South Korean women's curling team.


X____________________


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin