The Cycling Consensus

AJ Gold
Period 2
The Cycling Consensus
Cancer-survivor. Seven time Tour de France winner. International icon. Lance Armstrong’s resume is certainly an impressive one. However, with the recent developments in the blood doping cases, Armstrong has taken a nose-dive in the media, and was stripped of his cycling titles. While Armstrong has taken incredible amounts of heat from the media, society is not looking at the bigger picture. Armstrong was one of many to dope in cycling, but due to his high prestige, all the attention has fallen on him rather than other fellow-dopers, reinforcing the fact that many aspects of the tyranny of consensus established in The Crucible are still apparent in society today.
There are two divisions of the tyranny of consensus; those who are inside the consensus, and those who are outside. With these accusations, Armstrong was thrust to the outside as he disobeyed the rhetoric of consensus, staying clean in cycling. However, this isn’t the tyrannical aspect; the tyrannical part is the silence of the other cyclists who have doped as well and who have also been very successful. It almost works in reverse to the tyranny of consensus in The Crucible, where nearly the entire town of Salem was accused of witchcraft. Here, rather than everyone pointing fingers at everyone, they’re all pointed at Armstrong, while the rest of the cheaters remain silent in order to maintain their spot on the tour and to keep whatever accolades they have, just as those who accused others of being witches looked to bolster their spot in the consensus or establish one, all with the intention of personal gain.
As a result of the doping accusations, Armstrong was stripped of his seven titles, and the first place spot has been deemed vacant, with no crowned winner. This scrutiny Armstrong has come under, and the lack of scrutiny the other cyclists have encountered for committing the same crime Armstrong did, exemplifies the tyranny of consensus and how individuals are still willing to do whatever it takes to earn and keep a spot in the consensus. According to a piece published by the New York Times, “more than a third of the top finishers of the Tour de France have admitted to using performance-enhancing drugs in their careers or have been officially linked to doping” since 1998. A third!
But that’s not how the media today sees it. The media goes to whatever lengths it must to publicly embarrass Armstrong, the most popular and successful cyclist, about his doping accusations, while these other cyclists have basically gotten off easy even after admitting to doping. What Armstrong did was obviously wrong and he’s been punished for that by being stripped of his Tour de France titles, as well as being dropped as a sponsor by Nike, but the lack of acknowledgement of the other cyclists demonstrates not only the tyranny of consensus among the cyclers, but in the media as well and the way they go to whatever lengths necessary to enhance a story for their own benefits.
The tyranny of consensus has always had a place in society, and although it may not be as prominent as it was in Salem with the witchcraft trials, it is still evident in many areas, especially here with the Armstrong doping accusations. The tyranny of consensus in 2012 may vary from the one in 1692, but the staples of the consensus-- the rhetoric and the ultimate goal of self-advancement-- are still very much in place.

Word Count: 575
Works Cited:
www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/08/24/sports/top-finishers-of-the-tour-de-france-tainted-by-doping.html
www.foxnews.com/sports/2012/10/22/decision-day-for-lance-armstrong/