
 (CNN)A
 wide ocean of fresh concrete glistened outside the fencing arena in the
 Olympic Village. I was in Rio de Janeiro for the Olympic Test Games, 
three months before the 2016 Summer Olympic Games. 
I
 am honored to be able travel to Rio de Janeiro -- and all over the 
world -- to represent my country and my sport. I feel that I truly am 
the product of the Olympic movement and that my experiences as a 
high-performance athlete have molded me into the best version of myself.
 When I fence with an opponent I feel connected to them without having 
to speak a common language because fencing is a language all its own. 
This and so much more is what fencing -- and the Olympic Movement more 
broadly -- has given me. 
Yet
 as a participant in this incredible global movement, I cannot help but 
wonder if the many fiscal, environmental and social controversies that 
so often surround the Olympic host cities are preventable. And if they 
are, is it ethically responsible to continue business as usual without 
trying to prevent these fiscal, environmental and social detriments? 
But the questionable economics of 
hosting an Olympics are not the only issue -- the World Cup and Olympics
 in Rio have also highlighted social conflict and even violent clashes 
between Brazilian law enforcement and those
 refusing to allow themselves to be evicted from their homes as the 
Olympic Village and World Cup facilities were being built. 
This
 has felt particularly personal to me. For one, Rio is a stop on our 
annual FIE [fencing] World Cup Circuit, so I have spent a lot of time 
there. In addition, the Olympic Village was built in Barra de Tijuca, where my family and I happened to live for a brief time when I was young. 
I
 know I'm not the only one saddened by this turmoil. Fencer Akhnaten 
"Akhi" Spencer-El, who competed in the 2000 Olympics in Sydney, told me:
 "It saddens me as an Olympian and as a longtime part of the US team 
that we're in a way contributing to the suffering of people. It seems 
counter to what the Olympics is all about." 
Or
 as my longtime friend and Rio Olympic Coach Christian Rivera put it: 
"The controversies facing these Games bring the exact opposite of what 
we worked our entire lives for." 
With
 all this in mind, it's time that we as a community address the many 
social, environmental and economic issues that have plagued so many of 
the Olympic host cities for years. And the best way to do so is to learn
 from those host cities that have had some success.
Barcelona's 1992 Summer Olympic Games is a good example. 
The city ended up with a surplus,
 and the Games became a catalyst for longstanding plans to invest in 
city infrastructure. Officials wanted to restructure the city 
post-Franco, and hosting the Olympics was seen as a good opportunity to 
do so. With that in mind, much of the infrastructure expenditure went into improvements and upgrades of existing structures,
 investments that are still paying off. Barcelona now regularly hosts a 
number of international sporting events, including the FIE Women's Epee 
World Cup as part of the FIE World Cup Circuit, in which I compete.
The
 International Olympic Committee website defines the Olympic movement by
 the activities in which it engages, some of which include: "Opposition
 to all forms of commercial exploitation of sport and athletes... 
Raising awareness of environmental problems... Financial and educational
 support for developing countries through the IOC institution Olympic 
Solidarity."
Too often, though,
 the actions of the Olympic community are not meeting these lofty 
standards. So while it might be possible to learn from the individual 
experiences of some host cities, it might be time for a more radical 
solution.
When
 I returned home after the Olympic Test Games, my boyfriend proposed a 
simple idea, but one that would be groundbreaking if it were 
implemented: A permanent site for the Olympics.
Coach Rivera agreed that this could be the best way forward.
"The
 Olympics needs to abandon the idea of circulating the Olympic site and 
go back to the roots of having one location as a home," he told me. "I 
wouldn't be opposed to it returning to Olympia." 
How might this benefit the Games? 
For a start, it would dramatically reduce infrastructure costs, giving future Games a much better chance of being profitable.
In
 addition, by focusing on upgrading existing infrastructure, rather than
 launching whole new projects, a permanent site might help mitigate the 
egregious environmental effects that are associated with constructing 
venues for Summer and Winter Games alike. In doing this, the Games might
 also find themselves less dependent on corporate investment, helping 
them return to their roots and helping meet one of the IOC's definitions
 of the Olympic movement: Opposition to all forms of commercial 
exploitation of sport and athletes 


 
No comments:
Post a Comment