As the world watches the Winter Olympics in Milan-Cortina, a debate that should be about athletic excellence has instead become a flashpoint in America’s broader culture wars. At the center of the storm is Hunter Hess, a member of Team USA who recently said he has “mixed emotions” about representing the United States at the Games because of disagreements with the nation’s policies and political climate. That moment of hesitation has sparked sharp criticism from all corners, including former President Donald Trump, who labeled Hess a “real loser” on social media and suggested he “shouldn’t have tried out for the Team.”
This incident underscores a larger truth: when you are chosen to compete under the Stars and Stripes on a global stage, you carry more than just your skis and training. You carry the symbolism of a nation and the expectations of millions who see that flag as a representation of shared ideals. That is a privilege, not an open invitation to air grievances about your country to the world.
Some will argue that athletes are citizens first and should be free to voice their opinions anywhere. That is true. Freedom of speech is one of America’s foundational strengths, and no one should be silenced at home for dissent. But there is also a distinction between private critique in domestic forums and using an international moment meant to unify as a backdrop for political dissent. The Olympics are, by design, a celebration of peaceful competition among nations, a moment when athletes step out of the polarized echo chambers of domestic discourse to represent something larger than themselves.
Criticism of U.S. policies is a fixture of American civic life. Debate over immigration enforcement, LGBTQ rights, racial justice, foreign policy, and economic priorities animates our politics every day. Yet when those conversations spill into global venues through athletes wearing the American uniform, it undermines the cohesion of the team and invites foreign adversaries to weaponize internal divisions. Already, international media and analysts have seized on these comments, portraying the United States as uniquely conflicted at a time when global stability and partnership matter.
Make no mistake: the backlash Hess and others have received from some political figures and much of the public stems not from a denial of free expression, but from the expectation that Olympic representation comes with a certain loyalty. It is not blind patriotism; it is respect for an institution. When an athlete accepts the honor to compete for Team USA, they implicitly accept that their words carry weight far beyond the ski course or the locker room.
There is a difference between acknowledging shortcomings and broadcasting national discontent. Americans at home can debate until dawn about who is right or wrong on any issue; that is our national character. But at an event designed to transcend politics, athletes serve a different role. They are ambassadors of sport and, whether they like it or not, symbols of the country they represent. That role invites admiration, pride, and unity. It does not grant license to turn that platform into a public rebuke of the nation in front of millions of international viewers.
This is why previous generations of American athletes understood the weight of the privilege they carried. When swimmers, runners, hockey players, and gymnasts stepped onto the Olympic stage, they embodied America’s aspirations and resilience, even if they privately disagreed with aspects of national policy. Their primary task abroad was to compete for excellence, not to use the international spotlight as a soapbox for domestic grievances.
There is space within America to argue for reform. There is even room for critical debate about how and when Americans should express dissatisfaction. But there is also a time and place for that debate. Global athletic competition, steeped in tradition and symbolism, is not it.
Moreover, when athletes speak on controversial domestic topics while in uniform, they risk overshadowing the very spirit of the Games and the achievements of their teammates who have dedicated their lives to training and representing their country with excellence. That doesn’t mean they must agree with every policy or defend every action of their government. It means they should be mindful that wearing the flag in competition is an honor that transcends personal politics.
To represent the United States on the world stage is not a right; it is a privilege earned through extraordinary dedication and performance. Those who are granted that opportunity should honor it by focusing on what unites rather than what divides. They should elevate the narrative of aspiration, courage, and excellence that America has long stood for — not reduce it to a platform for condemnation.
In an era of intense polarization, we need moments that remind the world of America’s best qualities. The Olympic stage should be one of those moments, not an extension of domestic disputes.