2016

Today's the big day, the day the IOC will decide which city will host the 2016 Summer Olympics. So I thought I'd weigh in.

According to Game Bids, a site that tracks Olympic bids, Rio is still ahead of the three other candidate cities, despite a last minute boost for Chicago, due to President Obama's decision to head to Copenhagen and campaign for his hometown. Nevertheless, things are tense in Brazil. Officials from Brazil lodged a complaint with the IOC when a representative from Madrid made public comments critical of Rio, and Globo attacked The New Yorker for publishing an article about gang violence in Rio just days before the big decision. (Globo, the largest media conglomerate in Brazil, is also one of the country's greatest fear mongerers, especially when it comes to violent crime, especially in Rio. They're such hypocrites.) (By the way, I read the article in question, since my mom has a subscription to the magazine, and it was by far one of the best and most comprehensive pieces I've ever read about crime in Rio and infinitely better than most things I've read on the subject in any Globo publication.) (Ok, I'll stop with the parenthesis.)

In any event, I have mixed feelings about the whole thing. As an American, I could care less if the Olympics are hosted here, and my sense is that many Americans share this sentiment. We have a lot of other things to worry about, and we've hosted it quite a few times. Our national pride is pretty much in the toilet with the exception of the waning glow of Obama's election, but the Olympics aren't going to fix that. As for Chicago, the city is split in terms of support, and someone started a website called "Chicagoans for Rio 2016," to show that some from the Windy City oppose the games because they will cost the city a fortune, even though the city has a huge deficit.

This, however, is a good reason for Rio not to host the games. Though awash in money, Rio does not exactly have the best track record in terms of allocating resources wisely, and between the millions and millions available, too many reais go to the wrong places, or go nowhere at all, straight to the pockets of politicians. Public works projects, many of which will be necessary for the World Cup alone, are often likely opportunities for money to go missing. But more importantly, funding would likely be diverted from areas in need, like education and health, to go towards things like building stadiums and hotels.

The main reason Rio should get the games is purely symbolic. It would be the first Olympics hosted in South America, and would officially validate all of the strides Brazil has taken towards modernization and development. It would give Brazilians the ego boost they desperately need, a kind of vindication to help them see themselves as equals to the rest of the world, a welcome and well-deserved respite from the ubiquitous inferiority complex that so many seem to (mistakenly) have.

But pride is often Brazil's Achilles heel, especially in foreign affairs, and pride doesn't feed hungry kids or build hospitals. While some of the infrastructure necessary for the games would be more than welcome, especially an extended subway line, there's no telling if anything will be finished in time (the Metro was supposed to have been extended to Barra for the 2007 PanAm Games; it still hasn't even made it to Ipanema.)

I suppose that my personal take is that I'm not rooting for Rio or Chicago. The financial resources necessary to fund the games are taking away from areas where it is in much greater need, and while I'll be happy for Cariocas if they get the games (which at this point is looking likely), I'll be a little worried, too.

Comments

[twitter.com/AndrewComings]

Very good analysis, especially the last three paragraphs. Brazil's dramatic swings between debilitating inferiority complexes and equally debilitating overconfidence have long fascinated me. If you have ever had to sit through one of Galvão Bueno's sportscasts you have seen an example of both at the same time.

[Daniela]

Como carioca, eu concordo totalmente que o Rio não tem condições de hospedar uma olimpíada. O Pan tumultou absurdamente a cidade. E depois desses eventos, os bandidos ainda tem que "recuperar os prejuízos".
Viajo em novembro para NY e descobri seu site fazendo buscas na net e amei! Você é uma americana com uma visão totalmente diferente do Brasil!

bjs

[Carlos]

Rachel,

Thanks for this post. Before anything, welcome back to America.

I wrote in the past here; you never replied to me directly (haha...) but I have immensely enjoyed your blog. It's extremely thought-provoking and insightful, as you are an American who understands Brazil well (Rio at least anyway) and who has a good grasp of the realities of Brazilian 'ways' of doing things.

I agree with what you said about the corruption of Rio politicians. I was opposed to the 2014 World Cup being held in Brazil and am opposed to the 2016 Olympics being awarded to Rio. I do want Brazil to join the world's "elite" of nations, but it has a long way to go. Corruption, bribery, high crime, rampant poverty, lack of infrastructure and basic services are just a few reasons why Rio shouldn't get the games.

I just browsed through some of your earlier posts about street sights, the poverty you saw, the cops demanding bribes (in checks)... disheartening.

Brazil has made huge strides from the inflation-ridden military dictatorship of my childhood nearly 30 years ago, and as wonderful as that is, it still has a long way to go before it's ready to host the Summer Olympiad.

I'm against Chicago in part because the USA has already hosted the Summer (and Winter) Olympics a few times, and because Chicago as you said is awash in debt and it's also a city with high crime statistics. My vote is for Tokyo.

[Roger Penguino]

Summarizes my feelings on the matter very well, specially about the need to reallocate those funds to areas of actual need. Sure, well executed Olympics can serve as a long term ego boost which the Barcelona Olympics seem to embody, but more often it just becomes an opportunity for debt and personal reallocation of funds. Since moving to Atlanta almost ten years ago very few relevant vestiges remain of the 1996 games. On the city landscape remains an Olympic park and a stadium now used by a baseball team, on the city and it's people there is more ambiguity rather than a sense that things were changed for the better. When you cross the state line into Georgia a welcome sign still celebrates the fact the capital hosted the games. Nonetheless area residents, including myself, just wish the subway went more places, schools were better and crime had remained low. Been rooting for Rio, and Brazil too, just hope the games are something that truly changes the city and the country for more than just one summer.

[Liesl78]

Great post! Is there a way I can read the New Yorker article? Is it for subscribers-only?

[Grace]

Great post RG! Your analysis is spot on. I also have mixed feelings about it. I am proud of Rio getting it as a Brazilian, but I see potential problems. And wouldn't it be nice if Sean Goldman was returned to his father?

[mallory elise]

yay they announced!! Rio!! wooo! World Cup and Olympics back-to-back, yay Brazil!!

[Erik]

Unfortunately, Rio has been chosen. I cant see this being a good thing. All the money that will flow in now will further increase corruption of politicians and general contractors. Money will not be used to help the poor in the favelas, money will be used to hide them.

[Ernest Barteldes]

Rio won. Now let's see how that plays out with the World Cup and Olympic combo...

[Thiago Varela]

Não se preocupe. O retorno econômico para a cidade é muito maior e acaba afetando áreas carentes, como saúde e educação. Só em empregos, são previstos 2 milhões. 110 mil por ano até 2016, e 130 mil por ano entre 2016 e 2027. Graças às Olímpiadas, o Rio também deixará de perder 12 bilhões de reais por ano em função dos congestionamentos (previsto só com a obra do corredor expresso metropolitano da Av. Brasil, que já está sendo licitada) e ainda participará com mais de 50% dos ganhos econômicos calculados em 51 bilhões de doláres até 2027.

São mais benefícios do que prejuízos, e aqui no Brasil, as coisas só andam se houver uma meta clara, como você bem sabe. Sem Copa do Mundo e Olímpiadas para impulsionar, certos projetos nunca sairiam do papel.

[Jolly]

congratulations to Rio but I personally wished Tokyo had won! I hate their argument of "oh the olympics was never held in south america waah". Well guess why not? because there are several much better (as in safety, infrastructure, etc) places!

If you want to be chosen then be it on merit instead of playing the"coitadinho" card!

WELCOME TO CONGO!!!

[Adroaldo Becker]

Mas...apesar dos prós e contras, deu RIO para a Primeira Olimpíada da America Latina.

Claro que serão desviados recursos suficientes para fazer 10 Olimpíadas.
Claro que depois de tudo, o Rio será tão igual como ficou nos Jogos do PAN, e que nada vai mudar no Rio.
As "Balas Perdidas" continuarão tão perdidas como sempre foram, assim como o dinheiro público será perdido para a corrupção que só cresce e enriquece só os políticos de sempre.
Quando muito o Brasil conquistará 3 ou 4 medalhas...e nem imagino de ouro.

A única certeza é que a Corrupção triunfará como sempre triunfou, gloriosa e farta quando envolve-se altas verbas públicas, em gastos sem nenhum controle, num curto espaço de tempo.
Ainda mais agora, em pleno apogeu da maior corrução, escândalos e mentiras que o Brasil já viu.

Que venha 2016, afinal quem aqui se importará se não tivermos escolas ou hospitais melhores, já que é certo que a 1a.Olimpíada da AL, vai dar um bom samba?

[Jolly]

The Economist wrote an article about it. the link below, dont forget to read the comments for some real gems!

http://www.economist.com/world/americas/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14576023&source=features_box_main

[brazinglish]

tô contigo 100%.

O Rio jura que 'ganhou', mas na verdade, as outras cidades perderam por opção (com exceção de Madri).
Agora a festa do analfabetismo e da (falta de) saúde pública vai ser ainda maior, e o pior é que o povão vai pra praia comemorar, achando que assistir aos jogos é de graça.

Isso vai ser ótimo em termos de turismo criminal.
A malandragem do Rio agora tem alguns anos pra treinar e voltar com os clássicos arrastões de Copacabana no fim da década de 80/início da de 90.

Obviamente, os EUA vão levar as medalhas de ouro, a imprensa vai ser imparcial quando falar que as festas de abertura e encerramento deixaram a desejar, e o brasileiro Homer Simpson que se acha melhor que todo mundo vai ter uma desculpa, como sempre, pra tudo isso (provavelmente "inveja", "olho gordo" ou qualquer outra coisa bem sem sentido).

[Jolly]

Checkout this Argentinian blog post about Brazil!

http://blogs.lanacion.com.ar/ciencia-maldita/international-geographic/no-somos-brasil-por-suerte/

[Rodrigo Sirico]

This time I'm not with you (although I don't comment regularly, I do read you from times to times). Will corruption in Brazil change anything without the Olympics? Will social issues or violence change in anyway without the Olympics?

So the Olympics in Rio has much more to offer, that's my point of view.

By the way, I'm not being ironic, but you're really right when you say we brazilians need an "ego boost". The Olympics could help a lot with that.

You've already said on a later post that you're going to "desabafar" about the Rio 2016 situation. My advice, as a brazilian who deals with Rio city every day (since I was born), is to you to take a breath.

Relax, imagine yourself and Eli at Maracanã seven years in advance for the openning ceremony. Enjoy the good things about the Olympics in Rio. And wonder a few good things that actually are going to happen in this period.

That's how I use to do. At least this has kept me wise up to now. We will all be in a journey to madness if we let every single wrong thing in Rio affect us directly.

Thank's for listening (reading, in fact). Rodrigo.