Doping, banks, cyberpanes

Disputes about the future of the Olympic Games, prohibited drugs and sports of high achievements

“This is tearing my heart,” said the Olympic champion, swimmer Michael Felps about the participation of athletes in the doping Olympics and still admitted to the competition.

Felps did not name the names, but it was easy to assume that it was, in particular, about the Russian swimmer of Julia Efimova and the American athletics, Justina Gatlin, against which the American swing of Lilly King spoke out in the Olympics.

Efimova lost King in the final , and their joint press conference is described as a drama. “I am happy for the United States, knowing that I compete clean and do everything right,” King said. Commenting on the moment when she did not congratulate the Russian athlete on the silver medal, King, sitting near Efimova and not looking at her, said: "Be I in Julia, I would not want congratulations from someone who criticized me. But if she wanted congratulations, I apologize." King responded about Gatlin's participation in the Olympics: "I think people caught in doping should not be in the team."

Efimova mentioned Gatlin as a justification why she should have been allowed to participate in games. At the same press conference, she said that she once made a mistake and paid for her a disqualification for a year and a half. The second positive doping sample ( on meldonium ), according to the athlete, is not her fault, since recently forbidden drugs are led away from the body for a long time.

Lilly King and Julia Efimova

Felps later, speaking about athletes convicted of doping, said that sports should take place on "identical for all game fields."

However, Felps himself became the subject of discussion due to mysterious spots on the body. It turned out that these are traces of cans used to restore the body. The Russian media already write : "The effect of such procedures is largely similar to the action of Meldonia, because of which dozens of Russian athletes lost their awards and were disqualified."

A scandal with charges against Russia against the state supported by the state of doping gave rise to a lot of disputes . In Russia, the point of view is popular that everything is used by doping, but the accusations were brought against Russian athletes in order to eliminate strong competitors or completely humiliate the country. It was also said that this is an unacceptable method of collective punishment, to which objections were made: this is done precisely due to support for the use of doping by the state. The Russian team was partially allowed to the Olympics, but later it became known about the complete ban on the participation of Russian athletes in the Paralympics. This gave rise to a new explosion of disputes , in which the most audible argument was that such a punishment is immoral against people with disabilities.

Vladimir Nishukov , a graduate of the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University, researcher of philosophy and sociology of sports and editor of the Russian edition of the book of Allen Guttman "From the Ritual to the Record: the Nature of Modern Sports", considers the struggle with archaic doping, spectacular and suggests that the Paralympians in the near future will be able to win the Olympians and do not need the Olympians and do not need the Olympic and do not need condescension. Nishukov rejected the proposal to consider modern athletes some kind of gladiators who have to win any means, because otherwise they will be without work and often without any suitable education. As for doping, Nishukov speaks of the uncertainty of this concept:

We are faced with doping in our work, and in art, and in sexual life

-You and I have an intuitive understanding of doping as the use of any means to achieve success that are not entirely approved by society. Sociologist John Haberman in the article "50 years of doping use" gives a definition with which any person on the street agrees that doping is not conventional or at least an unusual method of increasing the mental or physical abilities of a person. For example, I traveled with friends in Russia the other day, and it turned out that my friends, husband and wife, doctors, both accept Meldonium. It turns out that the packaging of this drug costs 150 rubles in any Russian pharmacy, only a little differently is called. We encounter doping in everyday understanding constantly-both in working life and in art, when people use some drugs to stimulate themselves, and in sexual life, when people use Viagra, and so on. But if we begin to watch sports legal documentation, then we see that there is not even such a definition that I brought. There is no direct definition in the International Anti -Doping Code, it is authorized there, which reads: "Doping is defined as the commission of one or more violations of the anti -doping rules cited in Articles 2.1, 2.8 of this Code." That is, we literally read that doping is what is called doping within this code.

“But they cannot operate with philosophical concepts.” They probably mean that there is a certain list of drugs that at this moment they consider dishonest.

- Something like that. There is a sport of high achievements - people who are constantly being checked, to whom the commissioners come at night and force them to take tests. On the other hand, there is a huge array of amateur sports, where people are not limited in anything, they can afford anything, any meldonium, and no one will check them. It turns out that athletes who play the sports of the highest achievements find themselves in a very vulnerable position: they cannot afford what ordinary people who do not check can afford.

The fact of the matter is that modern sport is the competition of cyberpunks

-But the doping test is carried out not because someone is trying to protect the health of athletes or from abstract moral principles-we are talking about the fact that they go out to compete against other athletes, and sports suggest an honest game, and people should compete based on the fact that they can train. That is, sport is not one cyberpunk against another cyberpunk, but we do not want to watch competitors. We want to look at competing people who have learned something, achieved something with training, and not with medical means. Therefore, in fact, athletes for a certain set of drugs are checked all over the world, and monitoring is carried out all the time. In Russia, it is claimed, there is a state dishonesty program when athletes use doping, going to competitions with other athletes who do not use it.

Oscar Pistorius (in the center) during a finish at a distance of 100 meters, 2012

- Regarding cyberpunks: on the one hand, yes, we, spectators, go to the sports arena to see people's competitions. And then the Greeks come to mind, which were completely naked compete to show just a naked life, a clean body. But the fact of the matter is that all anti-doping laws are very selective to technologies. They fix attention exclusively at the molecular level of a person, examine only the biochemical composition of blood, urine and so on. But other technological spheres that are implanted directly into the body, for some reason, often bypass. For example, many top -level golfs do operations in their eyes. Or my favorite example is Oscar Pistorius . This is a paralympic who became an Olympic. When he was engaged in the level of paralympiads, no one had any questions, but when he went to compete with healthy athletes, it was a serious discussion, as far as it was right. Because there were researchers, first of all, engineers who said that Oscar Pistorius's prostheses are his advantage in relation to people with legs. No matter how cynically it sounds, it was expressed that it was like attaching an engine to it. And even if his prostheses really did not give him advantages, it can still be assumed that over time, obviously, a prosthesis will be created, which is better than a human leg. And then the competitions of cyberpanks, as you put it, will become a reality. Already today, as we see, athletes are ready to sacrifice health in order to achieve any results. It can be assumed that people will go to cut off their legs and make prostheses that will be better than the human leg. The fact of the matter is that modern sport is the competition of cyberpanks. And even if people say that they are interested in watching how ordinary people compete, no one in Russia watches the games of school football teams, and everyone goes to watch the game "Spartak" - CSKA, because in football people are also pumped.

What makes the sight an honest game or not always honest moments?

- The ethics of sports competition is that people are in the same position, the same rules apply for them, they play honestly. Otherwise, the game turns into something dishonest, and even observe it in a sense insulting, for the audience, not only to participate. It is uninteresting to watch, for example, boxing, where one boxer has metal plates in gloves, because it is a dishonest game. I think the rules for this.

Luis Suarez (left) after the bite of Georgio Kiellini (right)

- Yes, if you idealize, as if we come to watch an honest game. But the problem is that the modern sport itself, which was largely designed by Cuberten, when it came up with modern Olympism, its values are largely contradictory due to the fact that sport is on two imperatives. The first imperative is "faster, higher, stronger", as Kuberten formulated it. And he just refutes the logic of an honest game. And the second imperative - "the main thing is not a victory, but participation" - just adheres to these standard ideas about an honest game. And here you need to ask a question: what makes a spectacle-an honest game or some not always honest moments? For example, my favorite football players are those who violate the rules. My favorite football player is Suarez, who bites. In 2010, during the match with Ghana, he took the ball out of the gate with his hand, and this moment is amazing, I think! This is also why people come to look at sports. Or, for example, Ibragimovich’s behavior on the field is also often behind the line of rules, and this is also a certain charm.

When there are violations against you, you will be indignant

- Why do you like it?

“It seems to me that I don’t like it alone.” Well, why do girls like bad boys? Because you like it. Because this is a sight. In my opinion, the entertainment of sports reaches the maximum not where the rules are respected, but where the athlete goes along the edge. Well, this is primarily in game sports, of course. Even, perhaps, a little violating or slightly without violating the rules, the athlete achieves some result.

- As I understand it, you yourself are playing sports, struggle ...

- Yes, Mixed Fights ( mixed martial arts. - Approx. ) Were practiced for the overall development for a couple of years.

-Well, imagine yourself, who went to battle with some rival. Will you admire during the battle if he goes beyond the rules? And will you go beyond the rules yourself?

-Well, here it is necessary to distinguish the athlete’s position, the position of the viewer, the position of an amateur and the position of a professional. I think this is significant. Of course, when there are violations against you, you will be indignant, especially if the judge does not notice. But for the viewer, this is spectacular, so to speak.

The story with the Paralympicians - most likely, there were even more abuses

- Your attitude to the fact that the Russian Olympic team was allowed with a creak to the Olympics, and the Paralympic team was not allowed at all?

- My personal attitude: we will be honest, not all athletes are clean. And, apparently, in some federations, all this was really done with the consent of the leadership. But, on the other hand, it is obvious that there was some biased attitude from international control organizations, including quite humiliating for athletes who were innocent. Because collective responsibility is something that refers to us to the times of the 30-40s of the last century. It seems to me that the correct response of our sports authorities would not be the boycott of the Olympics, but non -participation in all protocol events, not to go to all these marches and so on. Because it is obvious that a biased attitude was, despite the guilt of some athletes. And the story of the Paralympicians - most likely, there was even more abuse, because it seemed to everyone that in paralympism no one really controls anything, everyone simply looked and rejoice at people, and how they achieve results, all the same. But it turned out that it was not all the same. It was obvious that paralympians of one country could not win 30 gold medals each Olympics and that no one would suspect anything.

“Faster, higher, stronger” and “The main thing is not victory, but participation” is a delayed bomb

- There are many indignant statements of such a plan on blogs, social networks: as these bastards could ban these bastards to paralympics, this is the only joy for them, even if they compete with drugs! But in these reasoning there is a humiliating logic for the Paralympicians, because it implies a condescending attitude towards them. I admire the power of the Paralympic spirit, because in general it is difficult, in Russia, in particular, to live with disabilities, but besides, I realize that these people can do much that an ordinary person cannot do their own body, they are powerful, strong and beautiful. And this logic that they can allow anything, maybe they don’t need it?

Athletes of the Russian national team Aliya Mustafina, Maria Paska and Angelina Melnikova (from left to right)

​

- Yes, that is so. This is in the same logic as the meme "they are children." Like, there are groups of people inside the population, in relation to which you need to behave differently, because they are weaker, stupid, and so on, such an optics can spread to completely different groups, for example, women, to children. And she is really humiliating. Therefore, I would not really perceive these reasoning at all, here it is necessary to commit just such a reduction, and I treated them simply as athletes. And here the logic must act literally “plus or minus”-positive tests or negative tests. And then what I said about that there are two contradictory imperative - “faster, higher, stronger” and “the main thing is not victory, but participation” - this is, in fact, such a bomb of a slow action. We can psychoanalytically interpret this sports situation for each athlete: sports are such a neurosis in which there are two imperatives, and each athlete must constantly experience stress about this, because he, on the one hand, needs to show the maximum result, and here it seems to be good, and on the other hand, he must constantly experience guilt in relation to the sports community and spectators, not to use any means. And this, perhaps, is the most important subversive element of modern sports, which will lead to the fact that Olympism, say, may not become. Because it turns out that along with modern sports and olympism, as its highest embodiment, there are alternative forms of adversarial, in which doping, for example, is completely meaningless, such as some folk fun. For example, in the battle of the "wall on the wall" it does not matter whether doping people use.

- Important!

- Well, no, the nuances there will already be minimal.

Sports Stalinist parades - as if sport, but no competition

- In the battle of the "wall on the wall", the question will be important whether people use customs.

- Just when they begin to use them, the "wall on the wall" stops. My father said that in the Tambov region until the 70s this tradition existed-exactly until they brought, relatively speaking, the first castes there, and this tradition immediately resolved. And folk games and fun is only one of the alternatives. If you start talking about how the sport will develop in the future, whether the Olympic system will collapse, you need to understand that it has always coexisted with alternative forms of organization of sports and other adversarial practices. For example, in Germany, the Turner gymnastics system was very popular, and its ideologists-the liberal nationalists of the 19th century-contrasted it with the British spirit of adversariality. But, oddly enough, when the National Socialists had a choice between Anglo-Saxon Olympism and the authentic German "tourner", the Nazi authorities chose the Anglo-Saxon system to the detriment of the "tourner". Another alternative is the so -called proletarian sport, which opposed recordism. Remember the sports Stalin parades? It is also like a sport, but there is no competition. Athletes build some figures, go, it is beautiful, it is such a synchronous action, a sight, but without adversarial.

There is no connection between the TRP and the Olympic medal at all

– Но состязательность у человека в крови, и человеку интереснее смотреть за состязательностью и борьбой. В современном понимании спорт появился в 19-м веке, когда появилось более-менее обеспеченное городское население, у которого появилось свободное время. Тогда и появился в Англии футбол, люди стали массово заниматься свой досуг упражнениями, и тогда же появился профессиональный спорт. В 20-м веке это превратилось в индустрию. Есть какое-то развитие этого дальше? Сейчас мы видим, что спорт ушел в телевизор для подавляющего большинства людей. Нужен ли сейчас спорт человеку? Есть огромное количество другого досуга. Не выродился ли спорт в одну из форм телевизионного зрелища?

Сдача нормативов ГТО

– Тут нужно понимать, что телевизионное зрелище – вершина айсберга. Мне вообще не нравится речевой оборот "спорт высших достижений", но мы имеем, с одной стороны, спорт высших достижений, а с другой – историю с дворовыми футбольными площадками, фитнес-залами и значками ГТО. И меня всегда поражал современный лозунг: от значка ГТО к олимпийской медали! На самом деле, между значком ГТО, дворовой футбольной площадкой, спортивным залом и олимпийской медалью нет вообще никакой связи. No! Олимпийских чемпионов выращивают в закрытых спортивных сообществах, дети проходят какой-то отбор, часть из них когда-то занимается массовым спортом, но потом во дворе в футбол никто из них не играет. То есть мы имеем, с одной стороны, то, что показывают нам по телевизору, а с другой стороны, массу физических активностей. У меня, например, рядом с домом есть здание, в котором в подвале есть борцовский зал, на первом этаже – продуктовый магазин, а на втором – бар, в котором показывают футбол, и это вся инфраструктура, которая мне нужна. В принципе, такой досуг для современного городского человека важен, но это, конечно, чисто мантра обывательская, что нужно следить за своим телом и так далее. И тот досуг, который зачастую называют спортом, на самом деле спортом не является. То есть фитнес – это не спорт, там нет состязательности. Или дети катаются на скейтборде – это вроде как спорт, но, с другой стороны, это тоже противостоит логике олимпизма. То есть люди зачастую выбирают лично для себя какие-то разновидности телесной активности, которые довольно условно можно назвать спортом. И видимо, это не навязано пропагандой или телевизором, то есть нет связи между тем, что человек смотрит по телевизору матч сборной России, а потом идет кататься на скейтборде. Видимо, люди будут и дальше такими активностями заниматься.

Борьба с допингом – это архаичное явление

Но то, что показывают по телевизору, скорее всего, превратится именно в состязания киберпанков, то есть каких-то постлюдей, на которых будет интересно посмотреть как раз в силу их исключительности и отличности от человека. И здесь ВАДА, Антидопинговый комитет являются таким консервирующим элементом, который сохраняет спорт в его состоянии 19-го века, даже не 20-го. Не только ВАДА, но и Олимпийский комитет: они запрещают, например, женщинам соревноваться с мужчинами, и прочее. ЛГБТ – там вообще целая история, куда им деваться. Детям нельзя участвовать в соревнованиях среди взрослых. Был вопрос с фигуристкой Юлией Липницкой, которой 15 лет было, и многие возмущались, что она участвует во взрослой Олимпиаде, – даже это вызывает вопросы. И борьба с допингом – это архаичное явление, и скорее всего, спорт высших достижений с запретом допинга, жестким разделением состязаний мужчин и женщин сохранится, но будут появляться более зрелищные виды, где будут состязаться люди, условно говоря, с какими-то усовершенствованными протезами, которым будет разрешено принимать все что угодно, и это будет пользоваться, скорее всего, большей популярностью, чем олимпизм.

– Но это все-таки дела отдаленные.

– Не думаю, что такие уж отдаленные. Альтернативы олимпизму существуют и существовали всегда, и я думаю, они будут только популярнее.

В 20-м веке спорт стал манифестацией национальной гордости

– Вы говорите: "Человек смотрит по телевизору матч сборной России, а потом идет кататься на скейтборде". Почему спорт стал местом для выражения патриотических и националистических чувств?

– Это наследие 20-го века. Даже Кубертен предусматривал, что Олимпиада – это состязание именно спортсменов, атлетов, а не стран. И даже сегодня мы видим, что некоторые российские спортсмены могут выступать и выступают под так называемым олимпийским флагом, не от родной спортивной федерации, а именно как свободный агент. То есть, в принципе, как будто до сих пор сохраняется эта опция. Но именно в 20-м веке спорт стал такой манифестацией национальной гордости. Скажем, недавно вышел фильм про ФИФА, и там показано, как логика национальная борется с клубной логикой, как появляется чемпионат мира по футболу, и как изначально профессионалы, представители английских клубов, к этому относятся очень пренебрежительно. То есть в футболе была такая траектория противоборства с клубным профессиональным спортом, национальное противостояние там рассматривалось как противостояние любителей.

Если человек болеет за национальную сборную, это не выставляет его деревенщиной

– Вы совершенно правы в том, что касается государств, в 20-м веке они использовали спорт для демонстрации достижений. И когда мы видим обвинения, что в России именно государство поддерживало использование допинга, это кажется отсылом именно в те времена. Но я хотел поговорить о болельщиках. В современном мире спорт – глобальная вещь. Человек в обычной жизни может в футболе болеть за европейский клуб, а потом яростно болеть за сборную России, которая играет против тех же людей, за которых он болеет в клубных чемпионатах. Почему это сейчас сохраняется в гораздо более глобальном, чем раньше, мире?

Российские фанаты на матче между Россией и Польшей

​

– Это, наверное, связано с тем, что глобальность несколько надоедает, и нужны людям какие-то точки сборки идентичности. В принципе, локальный футбольный клуб – это неплохая точка для ее сборки. И боление за национальную сборную – это тоже элемент самосборки идентичности. Тем более, как говорит мой коллега Олег Кильдюшов, спорт сегодня стал субститутом войны, боевых действий. И это не только в России так происходит, но и в других странах так же воспринимается. Если послушать комментаторов чемпионатов мира, мы там услышим преимущественно военную лексику. Нападение и оборона – это самое простое, но я помню такую метафору, что вот такой-то нападающий "прорывается через защитников, как через противотанковые ежи". В этой логике понятно, что человеку, скорее, со своей армией хочется себя идентифицировать, чем с армией условного противника. Это, на самом деле, и неплохо, если только люди друг друга бить не начинают из-за этого. Если человек болеет за национальную сборную, это не выставляет его деревенщиной или человеком узко мыслящим. Множество профессоров болеют за любимый футбольный клуб и за национальную сборную, а множество не болеет, и это ни тех, ни других не характеризует ни хорошо, ни плохо, – заметил Владимир Нишуков.

Пока готовился этот материал, Майкл Фелпс победил в заплыве на 200 метров баттерфляем, завоевав 20-ю золотую олимпийскую медаль.