Journalists love nothing as much as spins. No spin, no story; the bigger the spin, the better the story. So what's the spin about Beijing Olympics?
There have been many, some more imaginative than others. But every journalist worth his or her salt knows that the best spin is the one that appears to be a "true" one. It's a bit like historical fiction, in which certain historical facts are woven into the work of imagination.
For lovers of spins, the biggest one about the Beijing Games is its comparison with the Berlin Olympics of 1936. Articles started appearing in newspapers and blogs weeks before the opening of the Beijing Games, drawing parallels between it and the Berlin Games. The conclusion, we are told, is that Chinese communists want to use the Olympics the way the Nazis did the Berlin Games - put up a dazzling mask in order to hide an ugly face.
The world has been dazzled by the opening ceremony in Beijing. But articles still warn you not to let the shine blind your eyes to the dark designs of China. The Middle Kingdom's "coming-out party", we are advised, is only a smile that hides the scowl, a benign facade that masks a malignant mind. We are asked to remember 1936 and the historical fact that three years after the Berlin Games Nazi Germany invaded Poland, thereby starting World War II.
There's more, we are told, to ram home the Berlin-Beijing parallel. It's no simple irony that the designer of the master plan for the Beijing Games is Albert Speer Jr, son of the German architect, who was the designer of the Berlin Games. More points of similarity have been mentioned, but they are only footnotes to the main story.
Now, let's sift fact from fiction and see how comparisons can be not only odious but also ridiculously misleading.
First, should the sins of a father be held against a son who had no part in them? Many would be familiar with a children's story about a tiger and a lamb with the same moral - the sins of fathers shouldn't be blamed on their children. But the other moral is this: those who want to kill - or abuse - would use any pretexts.
Second, there are crucial historical facts about Nazi Germany - and the world's response to its rise - that are carefully avoided in this Berlin-Beijing spin. Berlin had been awarded the Games before the Nazis took actual power in Germany. In fact, the Nazis initially wanted neither the Jews nor the African-Americans to take part in the Games. For them, the Games was an opportunity to parade before the world the superiority of the "Aryan" race.
That's the point, the Berlin-Beijing theorists tell us - the Chinese want to show their rise through the Beijing Games.
Wait a minute. Long before 1936, the Nazis had given ample evidence of what kind of a "rise" of Germany they were aspiring for. How the world watched silently, often even approvingly, is now part of any authentic history that tells the story of World War II, warts and all. Yes, China is on the rise. But what has China done to justify such a scare- and spin-mongering?
See how they've displayed their economic muscle in preparing for the Games, pat comes the retort. True, China spent $40 billion to build the facilities and give Beijing a facelift. But didn't the small and not-so-rich Greece spend $15 billion for the Athens Games?
And, finally, there is the argument that the Games show is the communists' strategy of legitimizing their rule through whipping up nationalism. This is no place to go into the complex debate about the border between nationalism and patriotism.
Yes, the Chinese feel proud of their achievements. But they know that the ultimate legitimacy of their government will depend on whether it can give the people economic and social security long after the Games is over. There are far too many millions in China for whom the legitimacy of their government is linked, not just to the success of the Olympics, but to how it can lift them out of poverty.
It is so for any government and people. China is no exception.
E-mail: ashis@chinadaily.com.cn