The Normalization Playbook Returns
The receipts speak for themselves: FIRST INSTANCE: The 1936 Berlin Olympics. Following the annexation of Saarland in 1935, Nazi Germany utilized the Olympic Games to project an image of a modern, peaceful nation, despite mounting evidence of aggressive expansionism and systematic human rights abuses. This was amplified by the International Olympic Committee's (IOC) decision to proceed with the
games, lending international legitimacy to the regime at a critical juncture. The head of the US Olympic Committee, Avery Brundage, notably opposed boycotts, arguing politics should not interfere with sports. REPETITIONS: South Africa and Apartheid. Despite UN resolutions and international calls for boycotts, sporting bodies faced persistent pressure to maintain engagement with apartheid South
Africa throughout the 1960s and 70s. While some international federations, like FIFA in 1976, eventually implemented bans due to widespread public and governmental pressure, initial decisions were often reticent, reflecting a tendency to prioritize 'sporting neutrality' over moral or political condemnation (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2023). This protracted engagement prolonged the regime's
international acceptance. REPETITIONS: Beijing 2008 and 2022 Olympics. Critics pointed to the selection of Beijing for the 2008 Summer Olympics and 2022 Winter Olympics as instances where human rights concerns (e.g., Tibet, Xinjiang genocide allegations) were ostensibly secondary to economic and geopolitical considerations. The IOC's decisions were framed as opportunities for 'engagement' over