Patriotism and the Olympics

Catching up on a few old stories of the past few weeks...

The idea of patriotism seems to change in meaning depending on who is in power. When George W. Bush was president, Republicans and conservatives had a very well-defined standard of patriotism. If you were against the war, you were accused of being heartless and not supporting the troops. You were accused of not caring about the people who were fighting and sacrificing their lives for your freedom. Naturally, you can be against a war, but still care about the safety and well-being of the men and women fighting that war. Those things to the Republicans, however, weren't mutually exclusive. If you were for the war, you were pro troops, pro military, pro America. If you were against the war, you were anti troops, anti military, and anti America. If you criticized President Bush, the Republicans accused you of being un-American and unpatriotic. However, now that a Democrat is in the White House, the Republicans have an entirely new definition of patriotism. Now it is considered patriotic to criticize a president. It is patriotic to call the president a failure in spite of the fact that he has been in office for only ten months. Now it's patriotic to shout out and call him a liar. I'm sure the Republicans would think that it would be patriotic to throw a shoe at Obama, but I'm sure they would agree that it would be unpatriotic—and criminal—to throw a shoe at Bush.

Obama's attempt to bring the Olympics to Chicago and the Republican reaction to it is a perfect example of the changing standards of patriotism. Though the geeky and nerdy part of me thinks that it would be cool to keep the Olympics in Greece permanently, I'd be the first to also admit that the Olympics is an international event and the opportunity and privilege to host it should be something that can be shared by all nations. Hosting the Olympics is great event. It gives the host nation a chance to show off its history and culture. And, like the ancient Greek culture from which the Olympics came, the event gives the host an opportunity to welcome guests from foreign nations, to extend open hands, and to build friendships and alliances for years and generations to come. It's a matter of national pride and you would think that any members of any nation would be eager to bring the Olympics to their country. However, when Obama tried to lend his support to bring the Olympics to the United States, Republicans and conservatives were outraged and appalled. Obama was accused of being arrogant and egotistical. He was accused of jetting across the world, when he should have been taking care of issues at home. (As if it were impossible for anyone, let alone a president, to multi-task and think of more than one issue at a time.) When Chicago lost the bid to host the Olympics, Republicans and conservatives cheered and celebrated this "loss" and "failure." How patriotic is that? Your country loses a chance to host the Olympics, and this is some kind of victory? Your country loses the possibility of job creation and a huge economic boom, and this is something worth celebrating? Wasn't this the same political party that would chant USA! USA! at the Republican National Convention?

Current mood: glad it's Friday
Current music: Dead Can Dance and Lisa Gerrard playlist on iTunes
Current drink: vanilla soy milk