The hating game

In what has been a turbulent prelude to the Beijing Olympics, we hear of an American tourist murdered by a Chinese national just a day after the opening ceremony of the 2008 Olympics.

The victim was the father-in-law of the US national volleyball coach and was visiting landmarks in Beijing with his daughter at the time of the attack.

His crime? Probably being an American.

Did we see it coming? We had a clear warning from some parties that the ‘Hate America’ campaign was alive and well. Perhaps not coincidentally, President Bush was in Beijing at the time.

To give this violent incident the benefit of the doubt would be vital. The mantra ‘innocent till proven guilty’ should hold so we refrain ourselves from accusing extremist factions. But of course, this is hard. Given that the Australians athletes has been told to display the Australian flag on articles of clothing when traveling. (Presumably because Aussies are well liked in China and aren’t the real targets of hate groups).

Given the current climate of hate attacks and the auspicious theme of the Olympics – where countries cast aside their differences and unite under the spirit of sports – this is indeed a tragedy that stirs deep feelings.

It’s not the first time we’ve seen hate during a sporting event. Previously, when countries had issues with another (usually hosting nations), they boycotted the event. In 1984, 65 countries did just that at the Moscow Olympic Games for the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan.

Indeed, if 65 countries had refrained from participating for Soviet’s invasion, how are we to expect that less people would feel resentment towards the US for their act of invasion? Add that indignation to the difficulties of a declining global economy which some say is due to the war and we get blood spilling cries of anger.

Bearing in mind that the aforementioned attack could in fact be random, we’re forced to ponder if the nationality-annihilation epidemic has become the norm for some.

Cases has been reported with alarming regularity since 9/11 and more so since the war waged to seek and destroy weapons of mass destruction unearthed little more than dessert sand which were then used to bury the innocent dead.

True, there will be those who rejoice the capture of certain parties but are we singing to the tune of ‘A life for a life?’

Did President Bush unleash a deadly virus when he declared that he was willing to take lives for the lives lost? For it seems the infection has spread globally.

Can the spirit of sports and international unity prevail for the remaining of the games and put a screeching halt to our contempt for differing government policies? While the idea of international friendship and the allure of ethical sportsmanship have always been the ambassador of events such as these, there is little doubt that sports sometimes brings out the less flattering side of us. Countries pour a fortune into winning medals – sometimes not for the glory of raising the standards but as an act of one-upmanship against another country.

Just ask Fidel Castro who pumped millions in sports training – paid for by the working class – just so Cuba could be placed in the top 20 medal earners among the almost 200 countries that participated.

Only this time, pride isn’t the driving force. Anger is.

So by having these Games, are we in fact igniting a spark already fueled by hatred?

Let’s hope international medal chasing isn’t the glorified version of keeping up with the Jones. And that any athletes doing well don’t give the impression that they do so at the expense of a disadvantaged nation.

For while restraining sports to a local level may decrease comparisons and increase security for the short term, we’d lose the positive vibes that true sportsmanship is all about.

The Games must go on.