Does national pride inspired by the Olympics benefit our welfare?

Yale Student Roundtable’s first discussion of the year (September 6) began with a round of introductions, which somehow managed to involve a number of squirrel-related stories. Once we moved on to meatier topics, the discussion shifted to the question of “why make a political statement through sports?” The Olympics represents soft (not hard) political power, yet in the recent games China poured vast resources into the endeavor. There was a good deal of discussion on the topic of China’s hosting the Olympics, which included the opinion that China was trying to “create a brand name” and sell China to the world.

We agreed that the political clout available to a host nation could be used for ill or good. In the case of China, the remarkable display of architecture and technology (coupled with the other exciting changes, like less restricted internet) represented attempts to showcase the glory of middle earth. The effect was powerful, judging by the response of nations around the world. But were the Games, for China, an expression of identity as a nation or simply a public relations campaign? Will societal changes from the Olympics persist in the future of the country? Similar questions apply for other medal-factory countries—can a nation justify massive expenditures on athletic training as a means of winning gold?

Another recurrent theme of the evening was the role of sports in nationalism. Some were concerned that nationalism can be detrimental to a nation, potentially masking unfortunate realities behind a façade of pride. Yet positive changes have been wrought with the nationalistic energy inspired by the Olympics. In China, was cultural heritage exhibited in a way that glorified the nation’s long history, or was it a hijacking? Perhaps nationalist sentiment, even when based on false premises, can create happiness that’s valuable for its own sake.

Finally, we dwelled for some time on the distinction of nationalism and patriotism, and the significance of both for the meaning of citizenship. Where do an athlete’s loyalties lie—with himself or his country? As athletes are increasingly free to cross borders in their schooling and training, can we still identify as strongly with our own Olympic teams? Is racial homogeneity important for national identity?

This isn’t by any means a complete account, but please—if you feel we’ve left out something important, add a comment! This is your chance to continue the conversation.