I did a number of tweets yesterday that weren't universally popular. I began with:
Later I said:
In retrospect I could have made clearer in the second that I was not in any way diminishing the athletes achievement: I am not in the slightest. In the context of the first I would have thought that obvious, but not everyone reads whole timelines. And I'm now assured that the Commonwealth Games velodrome in Manchester is well used, so perhaps I should have chosen another venue for the last, but this is to skirt round the real issue I was seeking to raise.
First, I, like so many, thought the achievement of the UK's athletes was brilliant yesterday. Take nothing from them - and I watched a fair bit of what they did. But, can you already name the rowers, or the long jumper? I can't. Already I'm down to Mo and Jess.
So, given that by mid next week even Mo will be hard for many to recall, let's be realistic: fantastic as yesterday was it was a giant adrenalin rush in which most of us participated pretty passively. Now maybe I am not that good at externally administered adrenalin rushes; I admit that. I tend to create enough such rushes of my own (because despite Twitter's belief that I must be a miserable git there are very good reasons to think otherwise). And what worries me about externally administered adrenalin rushes is that they are short term, pretty artificial, hard to replicate or are addictive, when they become harmful. However viewed they are ultimately therefore either pretty cheap of harmful thrills.
Except that in this case the last thing that the Olympic has been is a cheap thrill. This has been a very expensive thrill indeed. The cost has been, if I recall correctly, about £9 billion to stage these games. Now, of course it can be argued that this has been a Keynesian economic stimulus, but I'd argue of the very worst sort. In their wildest dreams no one can argue that there is a long term yield from this investment to match the spend. Wise stimulus provides just that - hence my commitment to a Green New Deal. This spend is, instead, the equivalent of digging holes and filling most of them in again.
More than that, as Dame Mary Peters pointed out, even the cost of training the athletes has been born by the National Lottery fund, which is, as research has shown, one of the most regressive forms of funding available since those on lower incomes spend disproportionately on Lottery tickets. They are, after all, addictive adrenalin rushes for those denied almost any other form.
The result is that this has Olympics been publicly and regressively funded sport at cost to the UK that has made some people feel very good.
So who are those people who feel good? The athletes and those supporting them are, of course, in that number - but they have that right. After them? They are mostly those with ability to buy into the Olympic dream, and to do that requires resources and, more importantly, a capacity to buy hope.
And that is when my Olympic dream begins to fall apart. Go back to my first tweet because it set the tone for what followed. For far too many in the UK Britain is not a country of great joy today. It is a country of despair. Almost 3 million are unemployed, most wholly involuntarily, although many on the right of politics refuse to accept that. One quarter of those are young people. Add in the many more doing courses being pursued for the sake of it or who have already involuntarily left the work force and you get a picture of despair.
Many (but I accept, not all) of people in this situation can't access the Olympic dream. They can't because they could not afford to in a very literal way. But they can't, more importantly, because they've been told no one believes in them. No employer wants them. And the government is taking the positive, proactive, decision, to both make them and leave them unemployed. Worse it then chastises them for being jobless and uses its best efforts to increase their poverty, both relative and absolute. And staggeringly one quarter of all young people are in this situation - the very people who the Olympic dream should most impact.
Now just note the contrast. Olympic gold medals have not happened by chance. Billions have been poured into the Olympic dream. That was a political choice. It was, I know, a New Labour choice. It is one continued by Blair's heir - Cameron. It is a neoliberal choice to create a myth; a myth of a great nation powering over all and the myth of the elite who have the right to exercise that power. The politicians involved wanted the reflected glory of the myth that they wished to create.
In the process they haven't just spent vast sums on the Olympic venues, although they have with very little real idea as to what the legacy will be. But they also spent vast sums on the athletes, sums that have been taken away from communities and their unsung but vital projects that would benefit the many in this country to instead deliver investment in a few in the hope they might deliver gold to support the politician's myth.
Now, I don't decry the athletes and their efforts: they have been stupendous. And they have been generous in their thanks.
But they have not said - because no one is saying it - thanks to the taxpayer for this. Thanks to the state for not funding all those community halls, small charities, disabled groups, and so on who did not get funding because Lottery money was directed into the Olympics. And none at all are saying thanks for spending on this rather than investing in the millions or so young unemployed people in this country who politicians have chosen to abandon since 2010.
But they should be, because that is what this myth has cost.
Now myths and narratives are valuable. I don't deny it. But I'm entitled to question whether this myth is that valuable.
And I am entitled to ask why the government has chosen to abandon so many to pick on so few.
And I am entitled to ask why we won't invest in all who need to develop their skills with essential support if they too are to achieve their goals in this country. Not Olympic goals, but the reasonable goals of having a job, a home and the ability to support a family for whom there will also be hope.
Because what this Olympics shows is that state spending, which is what has delivered gold medal success (because the Lottery is a wholly state regulated activity and the decision to divert its money to Olympic funding was made by the state) works, and works very well.
But in that case I want it to be available for all. And it isn't. And that's where my Olympic dream ends. Because for most this Olympics is all about the difference between being a favoured one, and someone who is not. It's about being invested in, or being left by the wayside. And in 2012 the difference between the two camps and the decision the state makes on how to divide them and the resources they are allocated could not be starker.
A tiny number have been propelled to greatness in this Olympics by state funding by politicians seeking to capture their success for political gain. And the rest are being told, almost literally, to go to hell. And that makes me very angry.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Let’s face it Dick … you are just a twat
Richard, this article is a hole in one; no-one with an ounce of compassion could disagree with the sentiments you have expressed. For all that, few people will agree will agree with you instantly.
For me, the Olympics are similar to Apple products. Both attract the punters with their feel good sentiments, the former based on the stunning performances of our athletes, the latter with their superb user-friendliness. But both have hidden costs that are so easily overshadowed by positive feelings and which few have the nerve to expose. For the Olympics, you have pointed out how vulnerable people suffer as a result of the redirection of scarce resources; for Apple products, the price to be paid is what I perceive as the iron control Apple exercises over its customers.
I fully expect you to be heavily criticised for your thoughts and Apple devotees would doubtless criticise me for my views on Apple. But it’s surely critical that someone engages their brains, and compassion, to present a view that differs from the crap pedalled by our politicians. Thank you for having the balls to do just that.
I thought I’d let the comment from Murphdye as a contrast
I suspect he thinks the chosen name threatening or amusing
So thanks Nick
Well Mr Murphy, whatever you make write it just might well be worth it in financial terms. There is lots of feel good jingoism floating about the whole of GB just now. I am sure the wonder of it all will make many people north of the border wonder if it really is a good idea for them to go it alone. Andy Murray – that archetypal dour Scot – just might, perhaps unknowingly, make it a clincher for unification today.
Those who already feel good feel better, maybe
But I think your claim absurd
I have to agree that my claim is absurd. But many things are absurd – for example the national grieving for Princess Diana – “you openly grieve or you be ostracised” sort of thing.
If you are a part of something so apparently wonderful and glory filled as the British Olympics 2012, why on earth would you want to break away from its association?
And we haven’t had the closing ceremony yet.
I expect for many years to come, the Olympics will be used to associate just about anything with how well Great Britain does things. On the agenda soon, the Scottish referendum as an example.
If anyone is sick of the Olympics 2012, I think you going to have one heck of a lot of getting used to it, for many years to come.
I wish I could make sense of what you’re trying to say
I don’t think an absurd sports junket organised around the venal whims of the IOC will make that much difference in a referendum.
In fact, it won’t make any difference at all.
The feelgood factor will last about a fortnight, as it always does.
*may* write
On the subject of the Big Lottery this campaign claims the government ‘raided £425 million from Big Lottery Fund for 2012 #Olympics’ If you want it back for communities you can sign their petition here: http://www.biglotteryrefund.org.uk
The PSG endorses your comments Mr Murphy.
£9 billion (going on £15 billion) of largely tax payer’s cash spent in expectation of a magical “legacy” that will never materialize. Far safer to have invested this money directly into schools, hospitals, child poverty and more realistic, accesable and economical (to maintain) sporting facilities.
A tiny fraction (mostly rich ego trippers) will derive an immediate benefit, while the vast majority will be paying-off this UK debt for years to come.
Fleeting international esteem maybe – but esteem is no cure for poverty and hunger.
At the risk of being branded as another ‘miserable git’: excellent post Richard.
Just now on the French evening news, a spectator interviewed after the Murray match commented (something like): ” We’re going through hard times, but it allows us to smile”.
Quite so (I too I find watching compulsive and experience the same rush of adrenelin when the French or – less so, I’m ashamed to realise, – the Brits win a medal). But for how long? Come September, the smile will no doubt be long forgotten, but the hard times will just as surely still be there.
“Opium of the people” springs to mind – though I fully respect your beliefs and realise that may be a bit close to the mark 🙂
Analysing our success in the Olympics does show how an injection of money acts as the vital lubricant. Obviously a considerable amount of latent talent lies just below the surface in our population and it is so frustrating to see that we do not take advantage of these skills when so much is creamed off by a small elite. I wonder if they are afraid that the underdogs will break through and take control?
“It is a neoliberal choice to create a myth; a myth of a great nation powering over all and the myth of the elite who have the right to exercise that power.”
Thanks for writing that. I haven’t been able to put into words why the broadcasters’ constant references to the medal table is leaving such a sour taste in my mouth, but the above sums it up perfectly.
Greg Rutherford’s performance in the long jump was fantastic, and I’m really happy for him. It wouldn’t have been any less of a performance had he achieved it in Barcelona (okay, he was probably 3 years old at the time, but hopefully you know what I mean) but it would have left him in 4th place, behind two of the all time greats of long jumping in Carl Lewis and Mike Powell.
It would still have been the same fine performance, but not winning a medal would have equated failure to those hoping to claim his glory for themselves.
Even just leaving all you said aside, it’s awful that the facilities of past Olympics are wasteland now. Build on it, reserve it for the elite, a shame, but to leave it lying there! Plus, tells you all you need to know about modern China that the velodrome is empty – only the poorest now use bikes.