Hey, there! Log in / Register
Boston ranking high in Olympics thinking because we can lock down an entire city like nobody's business
By adamg on Sat, 11/15/2014 - 12:47pm
Dave Zirin at the Nation reports on Boston's efforts to get the 2024 Olympics - and on efforts to block that:
I spoke with someone connected to the International Olympic Committee who told me that Boston has rocketed to the top of their consideration list because of how the city was able to shut itself down after the Boston Marathon bombing. Few things expose the disturbing thought processes of the IOC quite like this logic. The post-marathon paralysis of police and surveillance and the frightening exercise of total power that was whipped out as quickly and lethally as a switchblade would become the Olympic-norm for three weeks. ... A city that brands itself as a cradle of liberty would be defined by drones, thousands of new cameras and a level of military hardware that - based upon what I saw in Rio for the World Cup - has to be seen in order to be believed.
Via the Dig.
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
The post-marathon paralysis
This is such an overtop combo of incorrect info, speculation presented as fact, and hyperbole that I can only assume it came from the Digg. And oh look, it came from the Digg.
The paralysis and frightening exercise of total power? You mean when the cops REQUESTED people to stay inside, and stopped zero people who didn't comply?
And this WOULD be the norm during the Olympics? You couldn't possibly know that.
Seriously, this is low level journalism. I'm surprised they didn't also say the IOC are going to release Bat Boy in the city too.
Do you work in the city?
During the lockdown, the shuttering of buildings and businesses was not voluntary. Not in any meaningful way.
The inability to take the T into the city or out of it was certainly not voluntary.
One day in a bizarro situation was bad enough. Three weeks would be an economic nightmare for all but the profiteers who are pushing this money-sucking scheme.
If you've developed the
If you've developed the technology to see into the future and know for a fact that we'll have three weeks of shut down, you should be telling investors and not posting on a message board.
They closed a lot more than
They closed a lot more than the T: the harbor road tunnels, the airport, all Amtrak service north of NYC, ...
Considering I drove to
Considering I drove to Winthrop from Waltham via 90 that morning, if they closed the tunnels at all it was only for a short time.
OK, then
Couple the response to the 2004 DNC (you remember: Shutting down 93 and the Orange Line and all that) with surface-to-air missiles on rooftops, plus all the heightened security we did get after the Marathon.
And keep in mind that Boston is promoting the idea of the city as Olympics venue, where all the places us normal people normally go will be off limits for the duration (and probably some time beforehand), as opposed to some carved out giant OIympics campus off a freeway ramp like LA could provide.
So you've seen the plan for
So you've seen the plan for the Olympics already? It hasn't even been released. You're complaining about something that may never even exist.
So -- you advise waiting until it does exist
At which point, it will be too late, and the IOC no-complaints rules will be in effect, so we won't be allowed to complain.
That article has nothing
That article has nothing about a supposed "IOC no-complaints rule."
The quote actually comes from The Nation
Reading a little more carefully reveals that The Dig was actually quoting from The Nation.
But attacking the publication does not address the argument against the Olympics in Boston. Are there sufficient benefits to outweigh the cost? That of course requires asking what are the costs? Mr. Zirin offers as costs the tangible element of deficits with the implicit question of who will pay for the deficits. But his main point is that the Olympics will turn Boston into greater spycam city than it already is. At least in downtown areas it is hard to go anywhere without a camera watching every corner.
While living in a spycam city can be seen as making law enforcement easier since criminals can now be caught on camera it still raises the question whether an individual has a right to anonymity when in a public space. We've already sacrificed much of the public space to the privatization created by cell phone conversations that turn sidewalks, buses and subways (and even cabs) into private living rooms. Are we willing to sacrifice the public space to the private interests of the people who profit from the Olympics as well?
Whether or not to sponsor the Olympics here boils down to whether will we, the people who do the most to maintain by living in Boston will derive benefit that exceeds the cost?
What is the Olympics today anyway? Is it really about celebrating human excellence? Or is it a place for governments to use athletes to demonstrate nationalistic virility?
Having the experience of working near the Democratic Convention, seeing how much local police has evolved into a militaristic style of organization, the idea of a city on a constant heightened alert for potential terrorism, more so than today, does not appeal to me. High profits for politically connected builders (i.e., more money for political contributions) does not appeal to me. More security theater at T stops - possibly every T stop every day during the Olympics does not appeal to me. Parts of the city closed to me - a tax payer and citizen of the city - during the Olympics does not appeal to me.
The cost of the Olympics - besides the monetary cost - does not appeal to me.
no means no....
Unless it means yes, I guess...
That much is clear, my dear.
That much is clear, my dear.
"Heavens to Murgatroyd!"
As Snagglepuss used to say, "Exit Stage Left" with extreme alacrity
I spoke with someone
The pool boy for the secretary of the personal scheduler of the IOC's vice president's mistress is never a reliable source.
Speaking of Sports
Someone oughta clue them in on how the city reacts when a sports team wins a championship. Generally the police are able to disperse the riots after only a single car is flipped.
Hyperbole doesn't help
I am adamantly against having the Olympics in Boston too, but I prefer to use more rational arguments rather than fear-mongering. For one easy example, the MBTA can't handle every-day commuting with out a couple of serious delay-causing breakdowns each week. We need some serious work on our day-to-day infrastructure before we can even entertain the notion of such an event.
Boston was not "locked down" after the bombing. There was a voluntary shelter-in-place order, and many people chose to follow the request. It was one day, and there was a legitimate reason to keep out of law enforcement's way on that day. Only in the wildest masturbatory dreams of those interested in bringing the Olympics to Boston would such a thing be possible for the better part of a month, and I'm willing to bet the author completely misunderstood what he was told.
Lockdown
Technically you're right about the voluntary nature of the "shelter-in-place" order (or should I say "suggestion"?). But I think you underestimate the impact of shutting down public transportation. A lot of people rely on public transportation to get into, out of, and around the city. Shutting down the T effectively shuts down their ability to get to work -- and, not insignificantly, their ability to get paid if they're non-salaried. Also, when business owners are "asked" by government and law enforcement to shut down, for a lot of people -- even if they could get to work -- there was no work to get to that day. That sounds like a lock-down to me. And remember, until the suspect was apprehended in Watertown that night, no one had any idea how long the lock-down was going to last.
I was lucky enough to be within walking distance of work, so I was able to get in. There were other pedestrians out and about, and some street traffic, though much less than normal. And some smaller businesses did open (coffee shops, convenience stores) for at least part of the day. But the atmosphere was very tense and restrictive. And the order, or advisory, or suggestion, or whatever you choose to call it, was pretty coercive, in my opinion.
For the LOVE OF GOD
And all else holy and otherwise - NOLYMPICS!
Think about it - we have to shut down one of the most important subway stops in the city for two years essentially to replace the tile on the walls and they want us to build an Olympic infrastructure in less than 10 years? Any IOC member who thinks we can pull that off needs their head examined.
Plus what all youse guys said above.
Gov't Center
They're doing much more than replacing the tiles. They have to raise the floor to accommodate disabled persons use of the Green Line. They have to install a single elevator that will reach both lines. This will require relocating the current stairs and escalators.They're re-wiring the whole place. New lighting. New and more (I hope) turnstiles.
I'm opposed to the Olympics coming here also, but we have to make the arguments solid.
Wonderful
Now multiply that by a million. So it will take 2 million years to prepare for the Olympics in Boston - not 10. Solid.
Lets be honest here.... They
Lets be honest here.... They are also changing the light bulbs to cost saving LEDs.
ffs
I spent the day with someone extremely ill, who we thought would have to go to the hospital at any moment. Fortunately he didn't.
But in the course of that day, I had to go to two different drugstores-- both open, both with other customers-- and also had to make arrangements in case we needed to take my boyfriend to a hospital or to a doctor's office. Laughed w/ the hospital personnel that this could be the fastest ambulance ride in the history of Boston, if it came to that. The doctor's office was open & his doctor-- who lives in Arlington-- was there. Our local 7-11 was open, and possibly the grocery store but I didn't check. A construction company worked on a house on my street from early morning until the mid- afternoon. The biggest possible inconvenience we faced was the lack of public transit-- with the T down, I would have walked home to JP or cabbed from Longwood if he had to be admitted to the hospital-- the cabs started running around 10-11 AM that day.
I chose to stay at home as much as I could, to be with my partner & to comply with the mayor's request, but had no problem taking care of what I needed. I got to spend most of the day on Twitter in yoga pants with an ear cocked to NECN & WBUR, just like a lot of the city. My phone service was spotty but my phone service was also cheap, so I can't say that was because of the police activity. And the regularly helicopter overflights were unnerving but that was about it.
And when the boyfriend was stable, the stay-in-place request lifted, and I went out for an overdue beer, I found out that my local bar had been open for hours, at least since mid-afternoon if not earlier. I probably would have stopped there earlier, had I known.
A police state, it was not.