I have started watching the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics and it has not only excited me but it has gotten me thinking. Not only is the Olympics and amazing and interesting display of physical capacity and sportsmanship but also of international capacity and, for the lack of a better phrase, international sportsmanship.
Theories of international relations are put into question with the Olympics in some respects. I am not fully aware of all the politics and governance of the IOC but this international organization is able to form partnerships among countries which create surprisingly successful international events. North Koreans, though tightly controlled, travel to the West and the Chinese welcomed democratic guests by the plane full into their red lines. There are politics in the display of national athletes on the international stage—one possibly of strength—but I think there might be the buds of cosmopolitanism within these international gatherings. Every nation desires gold medals and cheers on their own with pride, which demonstrates the residual nationalism, but the fact that so many nations are able to gather every two years is somewhat remarkable. Many nations meet everyday at offices of the United Nations or in universities world wide but the fact that such national demonstrations take place without large international chaos is just startling. Is sport an international universality that cosmopolitanism can build on?
I would like to suggest the universality of a sport like football (aka soccer) and the World Cup. This game appears to be the most unifying sport with players on all continents (well maybe not Antarctica). Though it is highly nationalistic, the fact that it is a universal game represents areas in the world of agreement. Sport, the World Cup, the Olympics, may be the first steps towards global cosmopolitan governance.
There is one point of critical however that I want to touch on…The Olympics and the World Cup do not demand or enforce participation. They are therefore voluntarily participating. With the ability to not participate means that there is no international enforcement, which is the same issue that the UN and other international organizations run into. However, as there is a universal dimension, it seems to be the most successful.
"With the ability to not participate means that there is no international enforcement, which is the same issue that the UN and other international organizations run into. However, as there is a universal dimension, it seems to be the most successful. "
ReplyDeletei dont really know what you are trying to say here. But nations participate in these tournament mostly for pride and thus nationalism.Fairplay and the institutions responsible for these tournaments are what keeps everything peaceful on the field.
However hooligans have been a major thorn and recently rioters have been present at some matches.