Politics in the Olympics

Let’s go back 40 years, to the 1968 Olympics.

The Vietnam War was still going on and anti-war protests were running rampant all around the world.

The Civil Rights Movement also reached a violent apex: Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated in April and Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated in June.

In October, Mexico City hosted the 1968 Summer Olympics. The games were preceded by the Tlatelolco massacre, where hundreds of unarmed demonstrators and passersby were shot and killed during what was supposed to be a peaceful rally.

Two weeks later (October 16, 1968), THIS happened:

What does this image represent to YOU?

Does it represent Black Power?

Does it represent a domestic political statement unfit for the Olympic Games?

Does it represent “a deliberate and violent breach of the fundamental principles of the Olympic spirit?”

Tommie Smith (center) and John Carlos (right) were prepared to make a silent statement that they knew would not be well received. Sure enough, when they left the podium, most of the fans booed.

Two days later, the International Olympic Committee suspended them from the U.S. team, expelled them from the Olympic games, and sent them home. Once they returned to the U.S., they were subject to constant backlash and criticism. Their families received death threats and they had trouble finding work. And for what?

Tommie Smith: “If I win, I am American, not a black American. But if I did something bad, then they would say I am a Negro. We are black and we are proud of being black.”

But this protest was about more than just black power.

You see the guy on the left? That’s Peter Norman, an Australian who won the silver medal behind Smith. His time of 20.06 seconds still stands as the Australian 200 meter record. When Norman heard what Smith was planning to do during the medal ceremony, he said he wanted to support them because he opposed his government’s “White Australia Policy.” So Norman wore the circular “Olympic Project for Human Rights” badge on the podium, just like Smith and Carlos.

As a result, Australia’s Olympic authorities reprimanded him and the Australian media ostracized him. Despite qualifying 15 times for the 100m and five times for the 200m during 1971-72, the Australian Olympic track team did not pick Norman for the 1972 Summer Olympics.

Norman kept running, but tore his Achilles tendon in 1985, contracted gangrene, and nearly had his leg amputated. Depression and heavy drinking followed. He died on October 3, 2006. His lead pallbearers? Tommie Smith and John Carlos.

Here is a wonderful article on “Norman’s act of great value”.

Smith gets deeply offended by people who say he and Carlos made black power or Black Panther salutes. The issue to him was human rights and that, he says, is what Norman understood. “Peter saw it wasn’t about two black men standing there. It was about two people.” In Smith’s eyes, Norman’s participation took the moment beyond race politics.

To me, the images above represent one of the most poignant sports stories of all-time. Moreover, it represents what life is all about. Smith, Carlos, and Norman overcame hardships to achieve the ultimate success doing something that they loved, yet they weren’t afraid to stand up for what they believed in, despite knowing that they were bound to suffer serious consequences.

Strangers became lifelong friends thru a shared belief that all men are created equal, and if you think their behavior went against the “Olympic spirit,” I suggest you read the official Olympic Charter. More specifically, the first two “Fundamental Principles of Olympism:”

1. Olympism is a philosophy of life, exalting and combining in a balanced whole the qualities of body, will and mind. Blending sport with culture and education, Olympism seeks to create a way of life based on the joy of effort, the educational value of good example and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles.

2. The goal of Olympism is to place sport at the service of the harmonious development of man, with a view to promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity.

Clearly, the charter states that the Olympic Games are about much more than just athletic competition. They also stand for education, ethical principles, harmony, dignity, peace, etc. There’s no denying that politics have been a part of the Olympics for a very long time, and I don’t think that’s ever going to change.

In today’s internet information age, the world is connected like never before. Entire industries have already been turned upside down because of this. Individuals multiply into masses with a snap of a finger, and mass protesters CAN make a difference. Think back to the Tlatelolco Massacre. Hundreds of peaceful protesters were shot dead in Mexico City just days before the Olympics started, but it wasn’t that big of a deal back then. Now it is. People are empowered and their voices are being heard. The world won’t just turn its cheek if hundreds of Tibetan protesters are killed prior to the games this summer.

Frankly, I’m amused at how riled up people are getting over the recent torch protests, because it’s just a precursor of what’s to come from the athletes themselves. A random person protesting is one thing, but a star athlete is another. In today’s dollar green advertising age, we are used to professional athletes saying the right things to secure (and keep) multi-million dollar sponsorship deals. I’m not down with that. I’d like to see more athletes speak their minds without fear of the consequences. And I believe that’s going to happen as we get closer to the opening ceremonies. India’s soccer captain already refused to carry the Olympic torch thru New Delhi later this month. What’s going to happen if a well-known athlete wins gold but refuses to accept the medal or have his/her flag displayed?

Better yet, what’s going to happen if athletes like Tommie Smith, John Carlos, and Peter Norman join forces to stand up for something they believe in?