Are controversies—ranging from politically-motivated figure skating judges to Grtetzky saying mean words about bad officiating—not reason to be disgusted with this phenomenon we collectively refer to as "the Olympics"? It is amazing what the Olympics have survived. Remarkably, despite continued and massive year-to-year findings of "athletes" using performance-enhancing drugs, people still believe that Olympic events are actually a test of the skill, talent, and physical power of the individual who participate. The idea of a person using drugs and still slipping through the Olympic purification system of this elite network of physicians, chemists, and lab technicians apparently has not occurred to many people.

The events which do not have an arbitrary criterion for being the "best" (e.g. speed) are apparently judged by people who are flagrantly corrupt. And yet the public is soothed by the distribution of four gold medals instead of the usual two. More medals do not change the fact that the system is corrupt and that the Olympics area farce. If the system is corrupt, what is the point? We obviously really cannot know who is the best. And next time, someone else will be the best. Is the point only for dishonest judges to generate an unreliable record of which person representing which country was the best at which game on which hill in which year?

Corruption and drug use aside, it really is not important who can ski down a given hill the fastest, who can skeleton the most precisely, or who can dance on ice the best. These things are just not important to society.

People seem to think that if a certain athlete who wins an event is attributed to a certain country, then that country "wins" too. This is farcical. What is an athlete had a Portuguese parent and an Icelandic parent, and held dual citizenship? Which country would share his/her victory? Is it really important which country is best at luge?

Another glaringly obvious flaw in the Olympics is the expense. Not only are they pointless, but they are also costly. Profit should obviously not fuel any event of this nature, but does society not have any better place to put resources than yet another stadium, ski jump, or village? Are there not more constructive, educational, and affordable ways to create intercultural contact? Yes, there are. Assisting developing nations with creating sustainable infrastructure may be less glamorous than the Olympics, but it is also less of a bullet in the foot.

Of course, mass culture is a culture of fun, and these days patriotism has to be fun too. What better way to show it than to hang out in a smoky bar, glued to a television set, wearing whatever colours are assigned to your country and waving a flag? Just forget that the Olympics are basically one big corporate marketing opportunity.