The hubris of the Olympic Games Paris 2024 just boggles your mind. Why? Because the ideology of inclusion has been somehow married to the ideology of exclusion. On the one hand the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has created and is sponsoring the Refugee Olympic Team made up of 37 athletes (inclusion), on the other hand the same IOC banned Russian and Belorussian sportsmen and sportswomen from taking part (exclusion). To be precise, they can take part as non-Russians and non-Belorussians, with their national anthems and flags prevented from being heard or seen. The few who agreed to participate in the Games have had insult added to injury: they were banned from being present at the opening ceremony. Why?
The Olympic Games Paris 2024 is just yet another instrument in the hands of the West with which to bully disobedient nations and to throw the West’s weight about. It is also a vector for the promotion of the West’s propaganda to the tune of “welcome refugees”. The Olympic Games have long been politicized and weaponized. Still, the current hubris is glaring. The managers of the world know only two principles of governance: the carrot and the stick. All nations are looked upon like they were children. If a child behaves well, he receives a lollipop and is allowed to have fun in the playground; if a child misbehaves, he does not receive a lollipop and is not allowed to have fun in the playground. It is as simple as that.
An aside. Both Vladimir Putin and Alexandr Lukashenko are said to be dictators. For all that, there are some Russian and Belorussian athletes who swallowing their national pride decided to take part in the Olympic Games. Remind me, please, was there ONE sportsman from the USSR taking part in the 1984 Los Angeles Olympic Games when the Soviets decided to boycott the event? Not one? Hm… and still at that time no one dared call Leonid Brezhnev, the then leader of the Soviet Union, a dictator.
The West’s ideologues are adept at reconciling mutually exclusive things. White people are racist and still millions of people of colour keep flocking to white countries to taste the racism at the hands of the white people. Weird, is it not? No religion should be above mockery, criticism and ridicule, and still it is only and exclusively Christianity that is mocked, criticized and ridiculed. A black woman representing France and singing the Marseillaise is all right, but a white woman representing, say, Congo or Kenya, would be equated with the appropriation of these countries’ culture. The world is overpopulated, but somehow Europe is not, because it can – and, indeed, should – absorb millions and millions of immigrants. A Hindu or black leader of a white nation is a mark of progressive blindness to the colour of the skin, but a white leader or – still worse – leaders of South Africa or Nigeria would be renounced as a revival of colonialism and white supremacy. Women have been liberated from the dominance of men, and yet men-turned-women are allowed to compete in female sports events and… naturally dominate female competitors. Inclusion transmutes into exclusion while exclusion morphs into inclusion.
The opening ceremony – this adoration of the ugly, the disgusting, the distasteful – with a beheaded Marie Antoinette speaking to the audience was also part of this inclusiveness-cum-exclusiveness. The Left just love subversiveness and ugliness and deconstruction. Was it not in the name of fraternity that thousands were guillotined during the French Revolution? Was it not in the name of equality that churches and graves were desecrated? Was it not in the name of liberty that dissenters were silenced for ever? Yet, there is some logic in all this. Once you exclude those who do not fit your vision of society, you are left with those who can be perfectly included. Isn’t it a fine Hegelian dialectic of a negative transforming itself into something positive? Isn’t it a fine Marxian dialectic of a reductionist exclusion resulting in an all-encompassing inclusion? There is a method in this madness!
