International Olympic Committee Racist?

October 2, 2002 1:03 AM

International Olympic Committee Racist? A whole group of people have been banned from ever participating in the Olympics just because of their genes!

That's right, the entire Nietzschean race has been banned for so called "cell doping". Yes, banned just because they are different. Just because they're "not human" and "unnatural". They are even trying to figure out how to eliminate the Nietzschean race by doing labratory tests on human subjects!

A spokesman even said, "New medical technologies may pose new challenges in the fight against doping but we, together with the scientific and medical communities, are ready to meet those challenges." Remember, doping is just their word for a cutural practice they think is wrong! How can one culture judge another in such a biased manner?

Are you going to let this genocide happen to an entire race? Write a letter to your congressman, member of parliament or other representative demanding that your country withdraw from the Olympics!
posted by nyxxxx (26 comments total)

Pop quiz: Which is sillier?

(a) banning something that's currently impossible anyway
(b) confusing reality with a fictional television program
posted by jjg at 1:15 AM on October 2, 2002

Wow. The future is now, dude. Well, I've got to go. I've got to call BellSouth about this 300 Galakto-Credit phone bill they sent me!
posted by sklero at 1:44 AM on October 2, 2002

That's right, the entire Nietzschean race has been banned for so called "cell doping". Yes, banned just because they are different. wtf. I guess that the first link provides enough material without this latter wander into some science fiction la-la land.

This was going to happen sooner or later anyway. (Although I was quite looking forward to the Red Dwarf inspired G.E. Soccer Goalkeepers. 18' wide by 8' high, etc)
posted by seanyboy at 1:45 AM on October 2, 2002

Don't worry, the genetic reincarnation of Drago-Museveni will save the Nietzschean people.
posted by Skwirl at 1:54 AM on October 2, 2002

Unless the Magog eat him first.
posted by bargle at 2:34 AM on October 2, 2002

I, for one, welcome our new Nietzsh...

nevermind.
posted by mmoncur at 3:09 AM on October 2, 2002

My father used to run in fairly serious competitions (not sure what level he was at, but it was pretty good) and at the time the governing bodies were seriously considering having seperate sports events for athletes taking drugs.

Several times he'd run in a race and be pretty certain that he was one of very few who hadn't taken some sort of performance enhancing drug.

Takes the fun out of sports really.
posted by ralawrence at 3:14 AM on October 2, 2002

This is very reminiscent of the gambling world. Any non-random advantage is considered cheating. In gambling that makes sense, but in the larger world of human abilities, including sport, such a limitation could really hold people back. Is there a real difference, in the moral sense, between a person who has extreme athletic abilities by chance and one who has them by design? If there is, does that mean that things that happen by accident are more valuable than things that happen on purpose? Perhaps the difference is availability--it could be argued that any human could train to become an athlete, but gene manipulation would only be available to a few--that I could understand. People have argued with me that the Olympics represent human potential, and they do, but not necessarily individual potential. Olympians have an advantage athletically (I know it's not all, or even mostly genetic, they train like hell, but I think it is naive to think that there is no natural ability in the equation at that level), not anyone can just decide to be an Olympian. Does it make all that much difference if that advantage is the result of chance?
posted by Nothing at 3:19 AM on October 2, 2002

No replicants can compete, either...if this sort of legislation continues, I'll have go to an off-world colony just to get one of Tyrell's upcoming Nexus-6 models.
posted by Smart Dalek at 3:39 AM on October 2, 2002

i bent my wooky.
posted by quonsar at 4:32 AM on October 2, 2002

The thing is, how would they tell, a genetically engineered person should be indsitinguishable from a normal one. Unless of course genetic designers leave their signatures in each cell ala Blade Rummer
posted by PenDevil at 5:06 AM on October 2, 2002

But wait! What about the Commonwealth Games? In the Commonwealth, there is room for everyone, even Nietzscheans.
posted by Darth Vader at 5:59 AM on October 2, 2002

*sigh*

Nietzsche would have dismissed a technologically-enhanced individual or race as the bourgeois and unfortunate "last man", rather than the Messianic ubermensch. The ubermensch sets himself apart by the creation ex nihilo of autonomous value systems, not through technology like genetic engineering. Nietzsche had many technologies available at his time, but ignored them when giving the example of his ubermensch.
posted by goethean at 6:06 AM on October 2, 2002

Actually, jjg, the question at hand is: What is sillier?

(a) Posting a real news story with an extended sarcastic commentary that obscures any of the real issues involved under the rubric of discrimination;
(b) Building up your completely sarcastic, light-hearted commentary by equating the issue with genocide, which does not actually involve discrimination but the actual killing of people.

Did I say silly? I meant sad.
posted by dhartung at 6:23 AM on October 2, 2002

However, in a related story, the IOC said its OK for the Minbari to compete in the games. A spokesperson for Babylon 5 stated that they were pleased with the wisdom of the IOC decision, and looked forward to welcoming them to Athens in 2004.

Sorry, I just could not help myself...LOL! I had to throw in my favorite sci-fi series in there!
posted by jasonbondshow at 7:00 AM on October 2, 2002

Nothing: If you allow athletes to use drugs to overcome deficits in talent or training, what is the point of competition? For example, in stead of running the marathon, why not just drive a car?
posted by originalname37 at 7:19 AM on October 2, 2002

Nietzsche had many technologies available at his time, but ignored them when giving the example of his ubermensch.

...Which is why he died of syphilis.
posted by Smart Dalek at 7:53 AM on October 2, 2002

heh.
posted by goethean at 8:01 AM on October 2, 2002

If you allow athletes to use drugs to overcome deficits in talent or training, what is the point of competition? For example, in stead of running the marathon, why not just drive a car?

that's what car races are for - so you could have enhanced and non-enhanced human races. But taking steroids doesn't mean the athletes can stop training and just watch TV and eat popcorn and then go beat everyone else without losing their breath. They still have to train like hell; the steroids just allow them to keep training longer than their body would have allowed before. Like using caffeine to finish writing that paper - you still have to do the work, but you have a boost. People opposed to drug use don't get that boost, though they take vitamins etc to try to get a sort of mini-boost - that ends up being about the strength and effectiveness of a substance. It's a difficult question, but one we'll have to address soon ...
posted by mdn at 8:31 AM on October 2, 2002

One of the funniest skits from '90s SNL was the "All-drug Olympics."
posted by goethean at 8:49 AM on October 2, 2002

I just thought it would be more fun to do it that way rather than the normal "found this on yahoo, via plastic" kind of way.

I was going to say "uber-mensch" but realized decided silly links to a silly tv show would be funnier.

But isn't it racism to say the genetically enhanced can't participate? It's like Gattaca in reverse.
posted by nyxxxx at 9:49 AM on October 2, 2002

i bent my wooky.-- quonsar

"My cat's breath smells like cat food."


So, these Nietzscheans...you say they vibrate?
posted by dejah420 at 9:56 AM on October 2, 2002

holy shit. what is wrong with you?
posted by Satapher at 12:19 PM on October 2, 2002

Sorry, I wasn't talking about drugs. I don't think my arguments apply to drugs. Drugs are temporary performance boosters, I was speaking of increasing athletic potential, if such a thing is quantifiable.
posted by Nothing at 12:55 PM on October 2, 2002

'Nietzsche is a bore'

-ghost of plato
posted by clavdivs at 1:27 PM on October 2, 2002

Way to tell it, goethean. Hey, ever been to Weimar? Goethe and Nietzsche and Schiller, all in one place. Heaven in my book.

The Nietzscheans are just a ridiculous concept. I was entertaining the idea that the writer might know what he's talking about, but after seeing their goofy leather outfits, I've lost all hope. And what, they were created on Ayn Rand station? Give me a fucking break. Mr. Robert Hewitt Wolfe obviously learned in his "Philosophy for High-school Atheists" class... Although I'm sure Richard Dawkins fainted when he found out.
posted by tweebiscuit at 7:35 PM on October 2, 2002