Anglophone Africa in the Olympic Movement: the confirmation of a British wager? (1948-1962)

Pascal Charitas
{"title":"Anglophone Africa in the Olympic Movement: the confirmation of a British wager? (1948-1962)","authors":"Pascal Charitas","doi":"10.1017/s0305862x00019142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Research topic, framework for analysis and archives In July 2010 I discovered the National Archives (Kew, London) while working on a dual project: my doctoral thesis, and a grant awarded by the Olympic Studies Centre in Lausanne, Switzerland. My goal was to conduct a comparative historical analysis of the administrative and political colonial situations of the United Kingdom and France. I wanted to understand their influence on the integration of the former British and French colonies into the Olympic movement between the end of the Second World War (1945) and the hosting of the Olympic Games in London (1948) on the one hand, and colonial independence in Africa in the 1960s on the other, reflected at the IOC by the creation of the Committee for International Olympic Aid (CIOA) to help the new countries in the Third World. Political and cultural conditions of an Olympic black Africa emerging from the British Empire Sports were a part of the colonizing process, and have remained in most colonized countries following independence. Given the presence of neo-colonial relationships, however, there is clearly no unambiguous division between colonialism and postcolonialism, and it can be argued that postcolonialism is something that has yet to be achieved, that is, indeed, a scenario for the future. Indeed, the international governing bodies of sports are often still intent on a colonizing mission.1 Between the wars, the United Kingdom (UK) helped open the way to the universalisation of sport arising from its colonial empire. The British Empire Games (1930)2 drew their logic from British imperialist ideology, and shine a light on the constitution of National Olympic Committees (NOCs) in British colonial countries such as Egypt (1911), South Africa (1912) and Southern Rhodesia (1934). While others, with a smaller proportion of settlers, did not have the opportunity to create NOCs, the administration of the British colonial territories that accessed the Olympic Movement was based on self- government and a high settler presence. The fact that the British Empire Games were only open to the self-governing white dominions (Canada, Australia and New Zealand), and the creation of NOCs in colonial enclaves with a high proportion of British settlers, encouraged the creation in response of the Pan-Indian Games in New Delhi (1934). After the Second World War, according to John Darwin (2006), both the French and the British colonial empires entered their \"second colonial occupation\" or \"fourth colonial empire\" phase3, taking action to advance the colonies through economic and social development plans4 based on the capitalist model and the principles of the United Nations. British and French colonial strategies after 1945 aimed to take account of the new geopolitical order and to respond to indigenous peoples' demand for self-government. British members of the IOC in August 1947 were not in favour of increased autonomy for African sport or the organisation of African Games. They feared that sporting organisations in their African and Asian colonies would signify independence from the Empire and the Commonwealth, following the example of India and Pakistan. The British members of the IOC followed the conservatism of the British colonial doctrine of \"indirect rule\".5 In this context, the Olympic integration of the former imperial colonies would become an area of competition and control for the IOC, with an active role played by the British Foreign Office.6 The UK gained a head start by hosting the 1948 Olympics in London7. The choice of England's capital was firstly a symbol of resistance to the Nazi invader and a sign of economic renewal, involving the reconstruction of a country and of Europe8. Secondly, the rebirth of the Olympics in a western country historically linked to the United States of America reaffirmed the Olympic Games through the development of sport according to the capitalist model, confronting the Soviet Spartakiads and their anti-bourgeois and anti-Olympic ideology. …","PeriodicalId":89063,"journal":{"name":"African research & documentation","volume":"1 1","pages":"35"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African research & documentation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305862x00019142","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction: Research topic, framework for analysis and archives In July 2010 I discovered the National Archives (Kew, London) while working on a dual project: my doctoral thesis, and a grant awarded by the Olympic Studies Centre in Lausanne, Switzerland. My goal was to conduct a comparative historical analysis of the administrative and political colonial situations of the United Kingdom and France. I wanted to understand their influence on the integration of the former British and French colonies into the Olympic movement between the end of the Second World War (1945) and the hosting of the Olympic Games in London (1948) on the one hand, and colonial independence in Africa in the 1960s on the other, reflected at the IOC by the creation of the Committee for International Olympic Aid (CIOA) to help the new countries in the Third World. Political and cultural conditions of an Olympic black Africa emerging from the British Empire Sports were a part of the colonizing process, and have remained in most colonized countries following independence. Given the presence of neo-colonial relationships, however, there is clearly no unambiguous division between colonialism and postcolonialism, and it can be argued that postcolonialism is something that has yet to be achieved, that is, indeed, a scenario for the future. Indeed, the international governing bodies of sports are often still intent on a colonizing mission.1 Between the wars, the United Kingdom (UK) helped open the way to the universalisation of sport arising from its colonial empire. The British Empire Games (1930)2 drew their logic from British imperialist ideology, and shine a light on the constitution of National Olympic Committees (NOCs) in British colonial countries such as Egypt (1911), South Africa (1912) and Southern Rhodesia (1934). While others, with a smaller proportion of settlers, did not have the opportunity to create NOCs, the administration of the British colonial territories that accessed the Olympic Movement was based on self- government and a high settler presence. The fact that the British Empire Games were only open to the self-governing white dominions (Canada, Australia and New Zealand), and the creation of NOCs in colonial enclaves with a high proportion of British settlers, encouraged the creation in response of the Pan-Indian Games in New Delhi (1934). After the Second World War, according to John Darwin (2006), both the French and the British colonial empires entered their "second colonial occupation" or "fourth colonial empire" phase3, taking action to advance the colonies through economic and social development plans4 based on the capitalist model and the principles of the United Nations. British and French colonial strategies after 1945 aimed to take account of the new geopolitical order and to respond to indigenous peoples' demand for self-government. British members of the IOC in August 1947 were not in favour of increased autonomy for African sport or the organisation of African Games. They feared that sporting organisations in their African and Asian colonies would signify independence from the Empire and the Commonwealth, following the example of India and Pakistan. The British members of the IOC followed the conservatism of the British colonial doctrine of "indirect rule".5 In this context, the Olympic integration of the former imperial colonies would become an area of competition and control for the IOC, with an active role played by the British Foreign Office.6 The UK gained a head start by hosting the 1948 Olympics in London7. The choice of England's capital was firstly a symbol of resistance to the Nazi invader and a sign of economic renewal, involving the reconstruction of a country and of Europe8. Secondly, the rebirth of the Olympics in a western country historically linked to the United States of America reaffirmed the Olympic Games through the development of sport according to the capitalist model, confronting the Soviet Spartakiads and their anti-bourgeois and anti-Olympic ideology. …
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
奥林匹克运动中的英语非洲:英国人的一个赌注的确认?(1948 - 1962)
2010年7月,我在从事一个双重项目时发现了国家档案馆(伦敦邱园):我的博士论文,以及瑞士洛桑奥林匹克研究中心授予的赠款。我的目标是对英国和法国的行政和政治殖民局势进行比较历史分析。第二次世界大战结束后(1945年)到伦敦奥运会的举办(1948年),以及20世纪60年代非洲殖民地的独立,一方面,我想了解它们对前英法殖民地融入奥林匹克运动的影响,另一方面,国际奥林匹克援助委员会(CIOA)的成立反映在国际奥委会上,以帮助第三世界的新国家。体育是殖民过程的一部分,并且在大多数殖民国家独立后仍然存在。然而,鉴于新殖民主义关系的存在,殖民主义和后殖民主义之间显然没有明确的区分,可以说后殖民主义是尚未实现的事情,也就是说,确实是未来的场景。事实上,国际体育管理机构往往仍在一心一意地执行殖民任务在两次世界大战之间,英国(UK)帮助打开了从其殖民帝国兴起的体育普及的道路。大英帝国运动会(1930年)从大英帝国的意识形态中汲取了其逻辑,并借鉴了英国殖民国家(如埃及(1911年)、南非(1912年)和南罗得西亚(1934年))国家奥委会的章程。而其他移民比例较小的国家没有机会创建国家奥委会,英国殖民领土的管理进入奥林匹克运动是基于自治和大量移民的存在。大英帝国运动会只对白人自治领地(加拿大、澳大利亚和新西兰)开放,以及在英国殖民者占很大比例的殖民地飞地建立国家奥委会的事实,鼓励了在新德里举办泛印度运动会(1934年)。根据约翰·达尔文(2006)的说法,第二次世界大战后,法国和英国的殖民帝国都进入了“第二次殖民占领”或“第四殖民帝国”阶段,根据资本主义模式和联合国原则采取行动,通过经济和社会发展计划来推进殖民地。1945年后,英法两国的殖民战略旨在考虑到新的地缘政治秩序,并回应土著人民对自治的要求。1947年8月,国际奥委会的英国成员不赞成增加非洲体育运动的自主权,也不赞成组织非洲运动会。他们担心,非洲和亚洲殖民地的体育组织将意味着效仿印度和巴基斯坦,从大英帝国和英联邦独立出来。国际奥委会的英国成员遵循了英国殖民主义“间接统治”的保守主义在这种背景下,前帝国殖民地的奥林匹克整合将成为国际奥委会竞争和控制的领域,英国外交部发挥了积极作用。英国在1948年伦敦奥运会上取得了良好的开端。选择英国的首都首先是抵抗纳粹侵略者的象征,也是经济复兴的标志,包括一个国家和欧洲的重建。其次,奥运会在一个与美国有历史联系的西方国家的重生,通过按资本主义模式发展体育运动,与苏联斯巴达克人及其反资产阶级和反奥林匹克思想形成鲜明对比,重申了奥运会的重要性。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Digital Archives in a Changing Rwanda African Street Literature and the Future of Literary Form Annotated Maps: Charting Research Through Technology Looking for Africa: Sources in London Archives at London Metropolitan Archives (LMA) Tackling Africa: the resourceful Mrs J. Theodore Bent
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1