For many progressive people, it's easy to get behind anti-Olympics sentiment. Sport just doesn't budge the needle on their What's Important metres. It's not uncommon for progressives to disdain all sports, even to boast about their ignorance – it is seemingly the only avenue of human endeavour for which it's acceptable, even preferable, to be utterly ignorant. Those who aren't contemptuous will admit their lack of interest with a shrug.

But I appreciate sport. I'm often in awe of the talent, drive, dedication, and incredible effort that goes into competing on the international level. Anyone who can qualify for the Olympics is a great athlete, and anyone who earns any medal is one of the best in the world.

There's also my connection to the Paralympics. I wrote about disability sports for more than 20 years, including covering the 1996 Paralympics in Atlanta. From interviewing athletes with disabilities over so many years, I've developed an intimate understanding of their journeys and their issues. I can't help but feel connected to their events.

So unlike many of my progressive friends and colleagues, when I think about the Olympics, I have mixed feelings.

There are, after all, so many reasons to protest the 2010 games.

First on my list is the stifling of dissent of Canadians protesting the Games.

The B.C. Civil Liberties Union is helping two activists who are challenging the constitutionality of Vancouver's new gag law, the "Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games Bylaw." It was passed in June to restrict “the distribution and exhibition of unapproved advertising material and signs in any Olympic area during the Games,” with an exception for celebratory signs, “which are defined as those that celebrate the 2010 Winter Games and create or enhance a festive environment and atmosphere.”

As Cory Doctorow explains in a recent article for Olympic free speech, the bylaw includes a clause that will almost surely trigger a Charter challenge. Clause 4B makes it illegal during the Winter Games without authorization to:

(a) bring onto city land any (i) weapon, (ii) object, including any rock, stick, or glass or metal bottle useable as a weapon, except for crutches or a cane that a person who is elderly or disabled uses as a mobility aid, (iii) large object, including any bag, or luggage that exceeds 23 x 40 x 55 centimetres; (iv) voice amplification equipment including any megaphone, (v) motorized vehicle, except for a motorized wheel chair or scooter that a person who is elderly or disabled uses as a mobility aid, (vi) anything that makes noise that interferes with the enjoyment of entertainment on city land by other persons, (vii) distribute any advertising material or install or carry any sign unless licensed to do so by the city.

Protest signs usually are made using sticks, often are larger than subsection (iii) allows, as are puppets and other protest devices. Demonstrations almost always employ megaphones or other voice amplification devices, and can well "interfere with the enjoyment" of the Olympic spectacle by those who chose to be so offended. Protesters often pass out leaflets as well. Thus, any of the dozens of protests I've attended over the last few years would easily be in violation of five of seven subsections.

Another reason to protest the Vancouver Olympics is the billions of dollars wasted in a city that suffers from a housing crisis and some of the highest poverty rates in Canada. Environmental destruction and the continued appropriation of Native land go hand in hand with this arrogant, wasteful, entitled mentality.

As a footnote to all this, VANOC originally banned the excellent athlete-supported organization Right To Play from the athletes' Olympics village, because of – what else? – competing sponsorship. They were forced to reconsider after an onslaught of negative publicity.

These are all valid reasons to protest and shun the Olympics and if I lived in B.C. I probably would have joined the fray long ago.

But as much as I stand in solidarity with the struggle for free speech and environmental preservation, what ultimately drives me away from the Games are the evil conjoined twins of nationalism and corporate consumerism.

Even when I loved the Olympics and Paralympics, I was never nationalistic about the competition. I never cheered for any country's medal count. I could never stomach the quasi-military pageantry of marching and flag-waving. But I overlooked those elements because I loved the sport – and probably because I was less evolved in my thinking.

I've come to see nationalism as one of the most destructive forces in the world – an agent of division, an ever-present rationale for war, the enemy of the cooperative, international, universally-human mindset we need if civilization is going to survive. And I can no longer distinguish between patriotism and nationalism as some do.

If there was a way to see the world's most talented athletes compete in another configuration, grouped in some way other than by national flag, I could get behind it. But rah-rah Canada is no better than rah-rah United States. It's us against them, we're better than they are because we live on this piece of land and they live on that one.

And when it comes to the Olympics, nationalism wears a bar code. The Olympics have become one gargantuan extended commercial for Love Of Country as we are inundated with imprecations to buy, buy, buy to show your pride.

Last week I flicked on The National. They were doing a story on Olympic gear – what everyone is looking for at the Bay, which of course has the exclusive rights to "official" Olympic merchandise. In other words, CBC was running an extended commercial disguised as a news story. The story went like this. Canadians want to support "our" athletes. We can support our athletes by buying stuff. Buying stuff means you have pride in Canada. Do you love Canada? Do you cheer for Canadian athletes? Then buy stuff.

In this equation, patriotism is inextricable from consumerism. Canadians dutifully march to the store and announce their love of country by exchanging their hard-earned dollars for a bunch of crap with a Maple Leaf sewn on. But is there any pride of country sewn into this gear? None of it is made in Canada, and HBC is owned by a U.S. corporation. That's some slick sleight-of-hand that has Canadians believing their purchases are patriotic.

Along with the orgy of nationalistic consumerism comes the corporate branding of Everything Olympic. And for me, nothing is worse than the omnipresent logos of McDonald's and Coca-Cola. Two companies whose names are synonymous with poor nutrition, bad health, environmental destruction and the corporate takeover of the planet are now as integral to the Olympics as starting blocks and skis. But in Canada, there's a Maple Leaf in the middle of that big golden “M.” See? It's patriotic!

I still think there are aspects of the Olympics worth celebrating. But some things are just more important.