ON LEGACY:
What follows is my"working paper"for the CON(Counter Olympic Network)"futures"meeting at LARC(London Action Resources Centre)on Saturday 22nd September 3-6pm.Apologies for glitches/editing errors.
.I dont think that there is a clearly articulated view of legacy anywhere.that spells out simply and clearly what it is intended to be.I think the LOGOC(Lodnon Olympic Games Organisng Committee) view is rhetorical and has only begun to be is fleshed out in the face of demand for legacy..I believe a lot of the"promises"are literally empty.Too many promises made so far have already been broken.In turn,I think some commentators along with some of the general public have been swept along in their own understandable euphoria. I suspect that like a soap bubble "Legacy"reflects all the light of peoples hopes but is also empty of content.I also believe that the bubble is highly likely to burst very quickly and at any moment. Much as I would like these ideas to carry substance i suspect that the hopes placed in the booing of politicians,alongside the apparent shift in public attitudes to disability,to foreigness,to a new optimism about"britain"or "britishness" are misplaced.
Emotions are very real but they need to be undeprinned and bolstered by material conditions and real change in order to be sustained.I doubt when measured against a previous outpouring of feelings amongst some sections of the population during the mourning of the "princess diana",that it will last or bear fruit. I do however acknowledge that those were much darker and more negative feelings.History is also against the advocates of legacy.Rational commentary indicates that only in Barcelona was "legacy" marginally significant but that it may actually have had more to do with a wider developmental approach in Catalan/Spanish society at the time than the Olympics themselves.However,even that is now rendered rather irrelevant by the toll of crisis and austerity in spain.
I am not a miserablist or a"Job's comforter",and i would not wish CON to project that outlook.Indeed,i think CON has a strong future in taking popular hopes for"legacy"seriously at face value as a starting point. It can then apply some critical tools to assess the development and the reality of that legacy agenda.CON is by its very nature well placed to take a cool,critical,forensic and demanding look at legacy.So the next section of these notes flesh out an outline of what a critical approach to legacy might look like.These issues might be grouped in the followiing way,although i recognise that these cannot be hard categories and they will inevitably overlap.where possible i indicate examples,a working definition and possible lines of enquiry:-
1.Sport:What will the"transmission belt"for encouraging interest in right through to full participation in olympics and other high level competition?How would programmes be operated and controlled?Need for long term futures,democratic control and innovation.Legacy may need to support"new"sports and initiatives,which would not neccesserally"fit"established ways of doing things:urban golf or free running operate radically differently to more established sports,and might replicate the histories of earlier new sports.
2.Funding and economic issues:This applies to everything.Funding sources,continuity,control.Relationship to and impact on or from the wider economy.
impact on or by the wider economy.Local,and working class initiatives are often"hand to mouth".
3.Social policy issues:impact on housing,community development,local and wider democracy,control and accountability.immigration/racism.implications for employment.impact on health,transport and other services.environmental issues.concern that one policy area should not be held ransom to others.eg clearance of populations,infrastructure,architecture to make way for green issues,road or rail development....leyton marshes.
3.Corporate sponsorship issues-see ICON.These may have specific impacts in the UK or UK experience may have particular impact elsewhere.This is an area where CON and ICON would be drawn particularly close together.
4.Militarisation,security,surveillance,policing:"practics runs",experimentation and testing of policies.
"softening up"of populations.Social and ethnic cleansing.the"no lose/win strategy"-the fact that there was no major incident is used to justify the security issues.had there been an incident,it would be used to justify security etc.The glaring failure of G4S appears to have no consequences for the company,which needs continued exposure!The functionality of failure-eg.even if cases against say CM/critical mass 182 fall and fail,it enabled the police to"demobilise"/control activism and impose surveillance on newly criminalised groups.This has wider impacts on both new and older layers of activists.Our own example would be the impact of police presence on our ability to choose a venue for this meeting.Implications for wider civil liberties.Liason with"defend the right to protest",GBC/green black cross.in this and other contexts-the importance of (re-)skilling communities to represent/defend/act for themselves(i am also involved in "casework skills"for activists in another context-but liaison may be useful here too)-we no longer have access to services/processes which were developed inthe 1970s but have been closed down since.
5.Media and culture:failure of cultural olympics,apart from key opening/closing events.increasing control and development of media and cultural functioning,as social control or"safety valve"-"bread and circuses",distraction,dilution of social responses eg booing of politicians,direction of attitudes to foreigness,disability.The controversy of the cultural aspects.
6.Other,residual and international issues:There is probably lots i have left out.i have intentionally not considered more international issues,which i believe Gail Cheser will address more directly in the context of ICON,elsewhere.
.
Some general points: I suggest as a general approach that we might focus on collecting,publishing,highlighting,researching and writing about these issues from a critical perspective that demands public accountability of those who would seem to think they have unquestioned control(LOGOC and central goverment).I think we need to call and keep them to account at the level of principle,detail and to the letter,NOT the "spirit" of legacy,or else antyhting more elusive will escape our grasp.Vaguaries only serve the interests of those in power,influence,control and"money".We cannot uncritically accept only their own standards and values.Whilst the ideas and values of a society are largely those of the dominant group-we cannot leave this uncontested.I am very well aware that in the scheme of things we are going to be a very small voice but that is no reason to be silent.We can,in our approach attempt to continue to"punch above our weight".
The liaison with the many organisations and campaigns that have constituted CON to date,might be emcouraged to continue to enhance the ongoing work of CON and ICON as well as the constituent parts of the loose coalition that is CON in mutual and cross-support.We should seek to extend such liason,good relationships with,new raltionships with and simply talk to others.This has been a unique feature of CON to date.We might draw onthis unique experience to develop more and wider opportunities from time to time such as real or imagined award ceremonies,commemorative events,flashpoints.We might hold an annual event in relation to either our own or the wider olympics agenda.This could take the form of an annual meting/conference and/or "educational" events.The winter olmypics at Socchi in 2014 and indeed at Rio in 2016 provide obvious opportunities,which might link local to international events,and be placed in some specific relation to those events.eg.linking the fate of Pussy Riot to the Socchi Games to something more local.Im sure we can trawl through a"calendar"imaginatively Other evets will i am sure present themselves for appropriate mobilisations.We can seek to create a variety of press release opprotunities and in working with campaigns/organisations like DPAC and UK Uncut we might stage other public actions/events-which may or may not be mass mobilisations.I am aware that we have made prior commitments to a presence on and activity in or around the TUC Demonstration on 20th October and the student mobilisation in November 212.In addition to physical presence with the banner this might include the publication of a bulletin/newssheet on"Legacy"and indeed other material focussed insome other way.( a collection of material bringing criticism of/resistance to the IOC/olympics(bids)might be valauable to"build our case"intellectually/ideaologically)
Whilst i do not wish to privelege my own idea,i would like to briefly mention the idea which led me to go from critical comment to seeking to find and work with CON myself.allies and assistance.In spring 2011,i began to imagine and propose "Not The Olympics"events.My fantasy was to stage several evensts consisting of say dangerous/alternative/collaborative/non-olympic games/sports ,alongside educational/agit-prop events("tiffin"/afternoon tea:showing say the Ayrton Senna documentary,archive material from 1948,documentary about Mexico 1968) and ending in a rock gig.I even dreamed of a pyramid stage in lee valley olympic park, and beyond.Whilst that came to nought i wondered if it still might be possible to promote such an event or more,perhaps to drawer our achivements together with hopes and plans for the future in some kind of alternative celebration and fund raiser for our and related causes.I am of course aware of issues of"shelf life".
A last throw of the dice:Alongside the formal organisational conection of CON to ICON,in which i believe the latter will concentrate on corporate sponsorship,the IOC and the wider international dimension itself,in addition there might be a useful purpose served in trying to make a very real internationalist connection with both Socci and Rio in 2014 and 2016 respectively.That purpose might be served in sending oberver/solidarity delagations to those places or even organsising some sort of "alternative games"........i will not develop these ideas further here,except to say that they offer further opportunity to raise a critical voice/profile in a manner not entirely determined by the IOC/Olympics movement itself.I am also aware that there are other debates to be had about alternative ways of organising the games,which might even include a permanent home in Greece/Athens/Mount Olympus/Marathon which might actually contribute to the regrowth of the Greek Economy,and might be a real internationalist project?!
The mechanics of it:If during the Olympics period CON has been some kind of movement,then its very loosensess and openness has been amongst its strengths. Its seems to have developed into a unique coalition. I hope it can maintain and strengthen its unsual configuration but i am realistic that it is unlikly to remain a movement,let alone a mass movement- as circumstances simply change.Yet beng realistic does not require CON should shut down.I would recommend that we seek to maintain the strengths of this very special coalition and keep formal strcutures to a bare minimum.Whilst i do not know the ogins of MENA/middle east north africa solidarity which has a very different history,it may be that CON would now emulate it. I also take the view that the time between now and the next Olypmics in 2016 to demonstrate to ourselves that the idea is viable.I would hope that CON can use its unique place at a the apex/fulcrum/crossroads in time and space to self consciously linking the past,present and future alongside making the geo-political link(mexico city,barcelona,athens etc to london to socchi and rio)in building a wider international movement.We cannot uarantee that CON lasts the course.Here i nod to the pessimists and those who adhere to other perspectives.
I think any structure to carry CON forward should be simple and minimal and minimalist.Beyond the basic formal positions,perhaps a small international secretariat makes sense.Otherwise CON should continue to drawer in interested parties as and when it can..We should seek to be visible,active and co-operative with others/partners wherever possible,but otherwise seek to keep meetings to the minimum to be effective and accountable,without requiring disproportionate comitment to organisation over activity.This wil require considerable trust-we seem to have both trust and goodwill.( I would also urge that any international secretariat,likely to orginate in CON as the british section of ICON,should seek to legitimate its role in ICON in order not to simply inhabit a position due to habit,which could lead to other difficulties).A conference of CON/ICON in approximately a years time might also provide a further focus for public actvity,alongside facilitating accountability.I am aware that in addition the international calendar offers further opportunities for raising the CON profile,again independently of the IOC/Olympics agenda.
lost
21/09/12d7
No comments:
Post a Comment