Olympics Dbq Essay

The documents given all point towards a specific idea: how the olympics affect the world. The method in which the olympics affects the world differs in the various sources, with some speaking on progress in political relations, some speaking on progress socially, and finally others arguing it affects the world as a place for hostile countries to prove their worth to each other competitively.

The documents about political progress are documents 1, 5, 6, and 7. The first, document 1, speaks very specifically on one who believes that the olympics will decrease tension between countries. It argues that the olympics is the way to the future, however specifically noting it’s not perfect or utopian, arguing that it will only reduce the chances of

In addition, being the founder of the Olympic games, it’s possible that there is an intention to make it see more peaceful in order to get more to attend. The second to do this is document 5, which talks of the immense pressure from Japan during post World War II times to host the 1964 Olympic games. Japan at the time was viewed as very weak by the rest of the world, and their intent in hosting the Olympic games was to restore their place as a trade power. The document speaks that the Olympics brought Japan back to a stable situation by the “magic” of the Olympics, meaning that the Olympics helped other countries realise Japan was capable of great feats, and therefore wish to trade with them. The third document to speak on this is document 6. This document is an information guide given to the press by the Soviet Union’s Olympic Organizing Committee. It shows that the Soviet’s purpose in hosting the 1980 Moscow Olympics was that they wished to show their “peaceful foreign policy” to the rest of the world, stating that the respect for the Soviet achievements in sport were secondary to the political purpose of these Olympics. Since the context of this document is directly from Soviets, a clear bias is shown

It is, however, written from a British perspective in a post-war attitude in 1956. It shows that the Nazis were protesting “any decision that could be challenged” and were trying very hard to win everything they possibly could. This document argues that the Nazis would take any measure to further push Hitler’s demands in the Olympics. It, however, could be biased, as the attitude in 1956 in Britain was one of recent success, as it is just after World War II, after the axis, including the Nazis, lost to the allied powers, including the British. In addition, it was from a British team official, who even further likely has a bias towards Britain. It potentially could be over-estimating the purpose behind German athletes in the 1936 Berlin Olympics. It could potentially be manipulating the purpose of the athletes from simply competing in the Olympics to pushing a broader message, therefore making the source slightly less reliable. The second document to speak on this is document 4. It is from the perspective of an American athlete in the 1952 Helsinki Olympics in Finland. It argues that there was a lot of pressure on American athletes because of the pressure of the Soviet team. At the time, tensions were very high between the Soviets and Americans, as 1952