The 2010 question

Admittedly, I’ve been stalling on writing this post for a while.  Mainly because I’ve wanted to gather as much of a balanced perspective as possible before diving head-first into arguments and looking like a complete doofus.  Make no mistake, this is a very sticky topic and easily among the most prominent covered in the local news.  I speak of course of the 2010 Winter Olympic games (wiki) hosted right here in Vancouver come February. It turns out playing the waiting game on this was a good call and watching the 2016 Olympic bids pan out gives yet another unique perspective on the issue.  Before tackling this beast, I want to state that other than maybe a dozen friends, coworkers and randoms I’ve been fortunate enough to converse with on the matter, my two main sources for local news are the Georgia Straight (wiki) and the considerably more balanced Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC wiki) online.  I should probably also admit outright I’m a direct beneficiary of the Olympics coming to Vancouver.  I somehow landed a very sweet job with NBC Olympics as a runner for their IT department.  It’s easily the biggest opportunity I’ve ever stumbled upon professionally but obviously with that comes a teensy weensy bias.  I think I’ve done a decent job of addressing the issues with my perk out of the picture.  So without further ado, let’s deconstruct this in a concise way without rambling on too long (HA! fat chance).  I can’t cover every topic but I’ll hit what I deem important and the most common issues in the news and opinion.  Let’s take it in reverse of everyone’s favorite spaghetti western, shall we?

The Ugly

To the dismay of many who haven’t lived in or around a city hosting the Olympics, the event isn’t all fun and games when you boil it down to the social and economic stresses stacking on the plate of the host city’s residents.  Probably the biggest and most legitimate concern facing Vancouver this February is the homeless population; a problem which has already been severely exacerbated by the games even before its formal arrival.  Though this city remains progressive on many social service fronts, it also has a huge homelessness issue which in my opinion is largely due to unreasonable living costs, persistent and open illicit drug markets and the shoulder shrug response to the homeless presence.  It’s pretty well accepted by the home-having that the homeless are just a part of the city’s package.  This coupled with a gross lack of mental health institutions and an accepted prostitution situation gives a  handful of East Van neighborhoods (not far from downtown) a pretty bad rap.  And for good reason.  So how does the Olympics play into this trifecta of social issues?  Well we want our streets to look shiny when the cameras show up, right?  In turn, new laws have been quickly and quietly signed and sealed allowing the po po to basically kick people off the streets as needed.  Kick them where?  I have no idea.  I’m not sure anyone has a good idea.  Ordinances regulating those residing under bridges and in parks have within recent weeks been put in place.  The sneaky passage of these laws as an ad-hoc response to our image problem is little more than a bandaid to the real issues and doesn’t offer realistic solutions to the underlying problems at hand.  Let’s dig further.  From an economic standpoint, several low-cost hotels (which are often the only housing solutions for low income residents of the East side) are smartly undergoing drastic changes in hopes of attracting a higher scale crowd during the games.  Good for business but again bad for the needy.  Where exactly will they go?  Especially in light of an East side shelter closing just a couple months ago.  The list goes on and I’m willing to bet that the homeless will be among the hardest affected by the games when the dust settles, yet their voice will be the least heard.  Overall, one could make an argument that if the money going toward the games were spent to improve our own population, we could curtail many of these issues and Vancouver would be rid of some of its worst stains.

Another other issue I’d label as downright ugly is the price to be paid by BC taxpayers. New taxes, including the recently introduced harmonized sales tax (HST), are almost inextricably linked to the perfect storm of the economic crisis and the Olympic games showing up in tandem.  One only needs to look at the budgetary disaster of the Olympic Village to see how the games will directly impact Vancouver residents at the end of the day.  To further tie it back to low income residents, the Village was initially intended to provide social and subsidized housing all the while establishing itself as a model as a green community development.  Those plans were scrapped when the contract exchanged hands and the project suddenly fell in the city’s lap.  Taxes are a central point of contention just about everywhere, so I won’t dwell on it longer than necessary but it’s no secret that the main people footing the bill for the two week event is the tax paying public.  And pay they will for a very long time.

The Bad (sort of)

I label these ’sort of’ caveats because while some people see these issues as central, I and many others have a different takes on them.  These represent the gray area of controversy where different groups fundamentally don’t meet eye to eye.  You’ll see what I mean.

Perhaps the biggest Anti-O movement in the area carries the unambiguous slogan “No Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics on Stolen Native Land.”  Their website is appropriately no2010.com.  I think you can take a pretty decent educated stab at what this group supports and why they stand against the games.  Though I’m very much a sympathizer when it comes to native peoples (see Brandon’s opinion on the carving of ‘great’ white men’s faces into sacred natural beauty), I can’t give this argument any ounce of credence.  Why the cold response?  Because if we’re honest with ourselves, nearly all of us essentially live on someone’s former land which could be technically labeled as ’stolen.’  Vancouver is a relatively new city.  Yes.  The land it resides on was formerly occupied by aboriginal peoples.  Absolutely.  Those facts established, I don’t see how the Olympics specifically encroaches any further on the land than what already happens on a daily basis.  The city of Vancouver goes about building communities, carrying on business and commerce everyday and there’s no squack about the 2 million people currently living on the stolen native land.  So how are the Olympics suddenly crossing the line?  From the aboriginal lens, I see an international event going out of its way to pay respect to the native culture through a myriad of small and big acts.  Perhaps the biggest of these is the logo named Ilanaaq the Inunnguaq (Ilanaaq is the Inuktitut word for friend). The logo is quite elegantly modeled after an Inukshuk, a human-made land mark used by indigenous people of the North American arctic.  Some folks say it’s not an accurate representation of a true Inukshuk and it’s a shameful attempt at accommodation.  I badly want to tell these people to get off their PC high horse so I can punch them square in the nose.  A small exaggeration but you get the gist of my frustration.  No entire population will ever be completely happy with the design, no matter who you try to appease.  Thankfully, wikipedia notes several First Nations and Inuit leaders in support of the games and praising its efforts to give them a piece of the spotlight.  As a supporter of the games, I’m glad this is the argument most rallied around.  It’s the easiest to call out as blatantly stupid and not feel bad about being insensitive.

I’ve already mentioned the ramping up of cops and security in relation to the homeless but what about for the other citizens?  New measures have recently been put into place to curtail protesters and it’s looking ever more likely that protesters will be confined to places out of sight, out of mind, and away from the games’ venues.  Throughout February, Anti-Olympic signs can legally be seized from private property with hefty fines and prison sentences already spelled out for those constructing them.  It’s a shame to see free speech restricted in this manner.  Other new items point to a new web of security cameras being put in place for the games.  I want to say it’s all too Orwellian of a scenario to be a good thing for the citizens of Vancouver.  It’s important to realize that these cameras will remain in use indefinitely following the Olympics.  This issue hasn’t been covered thoroughly enough but I think it could be the beginning of a huge shift in security and public privacy policy in the metro area.  Hyperbole aside, looking at the practical results of crime rates in a place with robust public security like the UK, I remain skeptical whether or not these systems can be a good thing if done properly.  If freedom of speech remains in tact and guaranteed, than why fear the potential of being watched if you don’t intend to do anything malicious?  It’s almost a public service if implemented correctly.  I suspect someone will cut me down on this point.  Still it’s important to your sensible wits about you when people speak of a police-state taking over.  Security MUST be heightened for very good reason.  We need not forget the happenings at the 1996 Atlanta games.  This sort of crazy person still exists in 2009 and you can be sure they have their eyes on something in this city in the coming months.

I could easily throw this final argument in ‘the good’ category but since some see it as evil, it shall occupy the gray space.  I’ve mentioned before that Vancouver sports a pretty decent rapid transit system we customarily know as the Sky Train.  The Olympics sparked an expansion project called the Canada Line to link our main airport in Richmond to downtown Vancouver.  The project was no doubt expensive and I suppose it could have linked elsewhere but, why should it?  Fact.  Every city that has a rapid rail transit system connects with their major airport.  The only surprise with this expansion is why it took so flippin long to get it in the first place.  An Olympic-scale happening shouldn’t have to be the final impetus for such a common sense addition.

The Good

Let’s be honest, from an outside perspective the games look absurdly glamourous.  The image of Sidney’s opera house will forevermore be burned into my brain solely because of the Sidney games.  Each host city gleans for those fleeting weeks as it’s showcased in a way that few will ever have the opportunity.  The Olympics are truly a godsend in this respect.  What better opportunity will a city ever have to flaunt its beautiful surrounding landscape, attractive modern high rises, diversity and greenness than the Olympic games which are broadcast to the entire world?  There is just no comparison.  The Olympics are the ultimate center stage in the land of hawking the awesomeness of your city to the rest of the world.  All of the hubbub of course equates to a dramatic boost for local businesses in both the short term (particularly in hospitality) and in the real estate industry in the longer term.  Likewise, residents with the ability to rent out a fancy living space for the duration of the games will have little problem turning a quick buck on their investment.

This isn’t the first time Vancouver has hosted an international circus of sorts.  Expo 86 was a very different event from the Olympics but it played it’s cards right and is widely regarded as a run away success.  If the Olympics can follow by example, this could be the economic opportunity of the century for this area.  I suspect that uncertain economic factors will ultimately determine the level of success Vancouver will see through the games.  If I had to guess, I’d say the Olympics will provide a much needed economic boon for the area but again the question of how big of a boon is out of anyone’s hands and impossible to predict.

A totally bias and vaguely realistic analysis

Props if you made it this far into the post.  I likely would have turned around screaming (or maybe just clicked a link and forgotten this post ever happened) at the sight of 3000+ words poorly slapped together by a non-writer.  A few things should be said to wrap up the discussion.

If it isn’t already apparent, I am very much in support the Olympic games and mega stoked that it will be supporting me in January through the finest broadcasting company in the world, NBC.  It’s an opportunity beyond my wildest dreams.  But looking past the professional connection to the Olympics, I know for a fact I’d be a supporter regardless.  The Olympics are a cornerstone of the type nationalism and flag waving we should all be proud to get behind.  Gathering the world together in peace to compete for the sake of sport and national comradery cannot possibly be overstated.  I put it right up there with such scientific scrambles as the space race which can inspire entire generations of ambitious scientists.  These are healthy forms of nationalism and we don’t have enough of them.

It’s shocking at first to see how vehemently opposed many are of the games but after a while it becomes normative and easier to see why the message is held so close by so many.  Anti-O sentiment permeates culture through nearly all forms of media with a consistent bad spin simply because that’s how the media works in its persuasive media magic ways.  It would be entirely uninteresting to hear story upon story of how the Olympics will be so wonderful and how we should celebrate its fantastic successes along the way.  It would be impossible to put out positive daily stories about the Olympics unless we want to hear exclusively about heroic tales of how each curling player overcame the impossible to get where they are today.  It isn’t entirely unheard of to catch positive news items interspersed, such as this past week when the medals were unveiled but these stories are the exception.  People are more interested in bitching for the sake of hearing their own voice and creating a stir about something they know can’t and won’t change.

I think after reading my exposition you can understand how seeing the faces of saddened disbelief on scores of Chicagoans was an odd turn of events entirely contrasting what I’ve experienced here.  One can imagine that many of the negative issues discussed aren’t unique to Vancouver and certainly past host cities have dealt with similar circumstances.  Yet, we should acknowledge that none of them have crumbled in the wake of the games (please correct me if I’m wrong).  I guess it’s slightly different given this whole Economic Pooper Thingie but like I say always say, EPT be damned!  I guess I always say that now(?)  Protest and freedom of speech are important but sometimes you have to accept a few bumps in the road and try to make the best of a situation.  Let’s accept the fate we’ve been dealt and move along to make it more pleasant for everyone.  It’s productive to advocate for improvement and pushing toward better goals than to waste time advocating for no games at all.  Your voice means nothing in the latter case.  We have an opportunity here to set a standard for the rest of the world of what the winter games should really look and feel like.  Long live the games and congrats to Rio and all of South America for their first games in what seems like ages.  I cannot wait for this January!

Edit: There seems to be an elephant in the room I’ve ignored.  The environmental impact of the games should be addressed but I have no idea where it fits in this post most appropriately.  Frankly, I’m more ignorant than I should be on the matter.  Eagle Ridge Bluff, a rare natural ecosystem notable for it’s bald eagles, is undergoing a highway expansion which protesters claim will destroy the bluff and precious ecosystem entirely.  I don’t like the sound of the project and can’t say that I’d support it if I knew details but the way I’m seeing opposition presented raises red flags of alarmism.  That specific issue aside, I do have a broad point to throw out there.  With environment at the forefront of so much discussion today, the G-20 paving the way in December, and Vancouver attempting to rebrand itself as the green capital of the world, shouldn’t there be a more conscious effort to make this the greenest games ever put on?  I’m not talking greenwashing here, I want real green practices and policies throughout the Olympics.  As a microcosm of the world, we should make an effort to show environmental leadership through a gathering of our worlds greatest athletes.  And finally, the Georgia Straight which I often accuse of peddling quackery has advocated many a time to cancel the games outright as an environmental statement.  Though it would be an economic disaster, I do consider it the only valid reason to even consider such a bold step.  Try to imagine the impact such an action would convey to the world.  Afterward, try to imagine just how badly Vancouver would drown in economic despair and the hate it would garner for its irrational protest.

Edit again: In my insensitive haste, I didn’t mention a thing about the 2010 Winter Paralympics also held here in March.  It makes me wonder if the police provisions extend into the para games as well.  Hmmmm.  Come to think of it, the paralympics don’t seem to gather the same protest crowd.  And why the hell not!?    That’s it!  I’m getting my signs geared up right after I finish this post!  NO PARALYMPIC GAMES ON STOLEN NATIVE LAND!!1!!!