Progressive Resistance To Nationalism and the 1980 Boycott of the Moscow Olym Pics

Abstract

Early reformers to the Olympic movement proposed subsidies for middle- and lower- class athletes and democratization in the governance and officiating of amateur and Olym pic sport. These reforms have come about. The new reforms called for putting a financial ex pert in charge of the U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC), William Simon, rather than a sports ex pert. With this move came the infusion of corporate money, governmental subsidies, and the subsequent change in the definition of amateurism, Likewise, came an interference with USOC governance autonomy; through threat of rescinding their Congressional charter, ac cusing the USOC of disloyalty to the President, and demanding adherence to the governmen tal boycott for national security reasons. A democratic process for sport meant one-sided pressure by the government. Nationalism became more pronounced under the new reforms. A Citizens Fact Finding Tour from the U.S., Canada, and Puerto Rico visited the Soviet Union in early 1980: the tour was formed to promote Olympic internationalism and answer na tionalistic sentiment. Tour members interviewed high Soviet Olympic and sport officials, private citizens, and gained their response to the Olympics/Afghanistan Boycott. Progressive organizations formed throughout the U.S. during the boycott year to protect athlete's rights, challenge the governmental position on the boycott and assure the autonomy of the U.S. Olympic Committee.