Chris Shaw

The destruction of Eagleridge Bluffs for the 17-day Olympic party was inevitable. Documents obtained through Freedom of Information legislation prove that the District of West Vancouver along with British Pacific Properties and the Ministry of Transportation were discussing massive housing developments on Eagleridge even before Vancouver won the 2010 Games.  These discussions, however, were not the point of no return, the point at which the fate of the Bluffs was sealed.  Rather, the fatal moment came when those opposed to the 4-lane highway decided that that they could fight the project without actually being against the Olympics, in other words from when they accepted the official Olympic “frame”.  The Coalition’s acceptance of a pro-Games “frame” locked them into a classical cycle of self-imposed defeat.  Dennis Perry and the other leaders of the group took the position that being seen as anti-Olympic would be a “disaster”.  How it might have been a bigger disaster than the utter destruction of Eagleridge that has come to pass remains a mystery to this writer.

A frame is the context in which any issue is viewed.  For example, the dominant government and media frame for the events of 9-11 is that Islamic terrorists who simply hate our rights and freedoms attached America on that day with no motive besides pure evil.  Whatever you may think about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, this construct has made every subsequent discussion rotate around the issue of Islamic terrorism.  In much the same way, any debate about the pros and cons of hosting the Olympics is constrained by its own frame, that is, that the Olympic Games are about elite athletics for peaceful competition and world peace.  This view has been studiously crafted by the International Olympic Committee (IOC), reiterated ad naseum by local Bid Corporations and kowtowing politicians, and endlessly pounded into our collective consciousness by the corporate media.  Accepting this frame puts potential opponents into the hopeless position of supplicant.  In the case of Eagleridge, Falcon and Vancouver’s Bid Corp (later VANOC) dominated the rhetorical high ground from the beginning. Basically, their spin on the IOC frame was this: ‘It’s our time to shine’ as Vancouver finally becomes ‘world class’ by hosting the world’s premier event.  Now that we have won the bid and the Games are coming, we have to fix the highway to get the visitors to Whistler faster.  The overland route is the only way to do so.  Everything else had to become subordinate, and did.  In the end, a highway versus a tunnel was merely a detail and Eagleridge just another piece of turf to be modified to enable the grand real estate project to proceed.

Most Eagleridge protesters – certainly their leaders - bought the Olympic frame hook, line and sinker.  Yes, they proclaimed, “we love the Games, we just want them to be green.  And destroying Eagleridge is not green”.  Indeed not, but this was not really the issue, since the real plan was real estate ventures and how best to hoist tax dollars out of Victoria to develop them.  The developers, incidentally, understood this perfectly well long before Vancouver even had a bid.  Far better than most Vancouverites, they knew that the Olympic Games are all about making money using elite sports as the power tools of choice. The IOC makes a fortune (all tax free, everywhere on the planet) by peddling television rights of cute athletes in Spandex and Gortex.  Any local Bid Corp - VANOC no exception - is built and owned by real estate developers who want land and tax dollars for their pet mega projects. 

The official Olympic frame is so dominant, so thoroughly ingrained, that opposing it seems like being for Bin Laden.  How could you? Are you against athletes, against peaceful competition?  These are the trick questions. Answer that you “love the Games, but…”, and you’re done for.  Contemplating such an answer in the face of overwhelming Games hype is simply scary and not often a place that Games opponents are ready to go.  Yet the failure of those at Eagleridge to save the Bluffs provides the best possible example of what happens to those who buy into the frame yet try to oppose some part of the Olympic juggernaut. 

There is only one way to win and it is this: Don’t let the local boosters put you in their frame.  VANOC’s crucial vulnerability lies in its credibility.  Take away the notion that the Olympics are about sports rather than real estate and VANOC’s credibility vanishes.  In turn, the IOC’s centre of gravity lies in the informercial spectacle put on by the host cities.  When enough people realize they’re being scammed, the audience vanishes.  Ending the circus that the modern Olympics has become then becomes pretty simple.  It all starts by deconstructing the frame.