Olympics and Nationalism, Ordinarily Well, Nanomagnetism

Olympics and Nationalism, Ordinarily Well, Nanomagnetism

Top of Mind with Julie Rose - Season 1, Episode 356

  • Aug 9, 2016 6:00 am
  • 1:43:31 mins
Download the BYURadio Apps Listen on Apple podcastsListen on SpotifyListen on YouTube

Nationalism and the Olympics Guest: Peter Rutland, PhD, Professor of Government at Wesleyan University, Blogger at NationalismWatch.com Isn’t it a little strange how we root so intensely for American athletes at the Olympics, for no reason other than our shared citizenship? Most of us don’t follow most of these sports closely, but the Olympics come along and we’re suddenly bursting with pride to see athletes we’ve never heard of before standing atop the medals podium, beneath the stars and stripes, as our national anthem plays. The Olympics are practically built for indulging in what you might call “good nationalism” – as opposed to the xenophobic kind that leads to discrimination, war and even genocide. But the 2016 Summer Games arrive at a time of fervent support political messages of American superiority, while terrorism and the refugee crisis fuel fear of outsiders and a desire to close ranks in Europe. Why the US Wins Big at the Olympics Guest: Camila Gonzales, Member of Dartmouth research team to predict the Rio Olympic games medal count Since we’re talking about national pride at the Olympics, let’s look at the medals count: America is currently in the lead in Rio with 20 medals, total. Five of those are gold medals – and on that score, America is currently tied with China, which also have five golds. When it’s all over in Rio, the US is predicted to top out over 100 medals, with China coming in at 89 and the United Kingdom with 67. There’s a very precise formula behind those predictions, developed by researchers at Dartmouth who have predicted previous Summer Olympic results with stunning accuracy. Peter Kramer: “Ordinarily Well” Guest: Peter Kramer, PhD, Psychologist and Author of “Listening to Prozac,” “Against Depression” and “Ordinarily Well” When Peter Kramer published his landmark book “Listening to Prozac” in 1993, it changed the way that people thought about anti-depressants, but it also caused some backlash as critics clamored that placebos were just as effective or that psychotherapy w