By Michael Truscello
The Olympic torch relay was invented by the Nazis at the 1936 Olympics in Berlin, to demonstrate an ancient Aryan lineage with the Third Reich, proof of a warrior culture and foreshadow of the domination of Europe. The contemporary “Olympic Movement” trots out a similar set of symbols, but now backed by corporate logos and the promise of a portable “state of exception,” to use the term articulated by Nazi political theorist Carl Schmitt.
Anarchists in Canada, especially those whose primary concern is class struggle, may not see much value in protesting the 2010 Olympic Games in Vancouver. Why so much fanfare for the Olympics, a one-off event, while barely a whimper from radical groups over the installation of the HST in Ontario and BC — a tax grab that punishes the poor forever?
The Olympics are a corporate affair that invades host cities such as Vancouver causing gentrification, environmental devastation, and the repeal of civil liberties. The mechanism by which the Olympics accomplish these deeds is akin to what Schmitt, and later Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben, called the “state of exception.”
Agamben writes,
Quote:
“The entire Third Reich can be considered a state of exception that lasted twelve years. In this sense, modern totalitarianism can be defined as the establishment, by means of the state of exception, of a legal civil war that allows for the physical elimination not only of political adversaries but of entire categories of citizens who for some reason cannot be integrated into the political system.”
The Olympics do not require a specific regime for the imposition of their particular state of exception. The Olympics make this state (in both senses of the word, as a form of being and as an entity of governance) a portable affair, mobile authoritarianism and branded nationalism in the guise of goodwill and amateur competition.
The Olympics produce in host cities, especially after 9-11, the impetus for exceptionalism: developers are handed blank cheques by politicians, to ensure dormant projects are completed in time for the Games; homeless people are ushered into buses or fined for panhandling or simply lying on the street, to improve the city’s image before the Games; natural settings previously protected by municipal or provincial laws are gutted, to provide services and infrastructure such as rails and roads for the Games; civil liberties are repealed and surveillance apparatuses installed, to provide security and an image of unanimous support for the Games.
The Olympics become the excuse for imposing authoritarian excesses that would not be tolerated, or at least would be subjected to greater scrutiny, under normal circumstances. Of course, one might argue these impositions are fairly localized. However, even localized changes of this kind can become precedents for other cities, provinces, or countries.
Consider the impact the Olympics have on the “hearts and minds” of people around the world, the propaganda value of trumpeting corporate-sponsored “amateur” competition that represents international goodwill by inspiring breathless nationalism.
Consider the fortress mentality that arises in the host city and spreads throughout the country, as Canadians hold their breath in anticipation of the ghost of terrorism. One border guard in BC tried to protect the fortress by interrogating Amy Goodman, a journalist with Democracy Now!, as she tried to enter Canada to give a talk that, much to the guard’s chagrin, was not about the Olympics. The lunacy spread to Burnaby-Lougheed Liberal MLA Harry Bloy, who referred to Olympic protesters as “terrorists” with “limited intelligence.”
Will the dozens of closed-circuit video cameras being installed in Vancouver be removed when the Games are over? How about the intelligence gathered on activists by CSIS? Will it be destroyed with one final application of the torch? How about the cost overruns, already estimated in the billions? Will Canadians, especially British Columbians, receive a rebate from corporations? What about the abuses of Aboriginal Peoples’ rights?
Sadly, the state of exception rarely relinquishes that which was obtained during its exceptional moment. Those excluded by the Olympic Games are the same “categories of citizens” on whose behalf anarchists must continue to struggle — even after the five ring circus leaves town.
Michael Truscello is an assistant professor in the department of communication studies at Wilfrid Laurier University. His fields of expertise include: Software Studies, Rhetoric of Science and Technology, Alternative Media, and Postanarchism. His publications have appeared in journals such as Postmodern Culture, Technical Communication Quarterly, and Text Technology. His forthcoming publications include a contribution to The Postanarchism Reader from Pluto Press, to be published in 2010. He is currently developing a book-length study of science and technology in the anarchist tradition.
