Why Doesn't America Participate in the Commonwealth Games?

The United States not participating in the Commonwealth Games probably has something to do with us giving them the middle finger back in 1776.

Yes, Commonwealth Games are for countries that are still “owned”.

There is a term for that.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/british-commonwealth-countries

Weirdly, it seems that team USA might be inadvertently responsible for starting the games.

theguardian.com

Can radical changes restore sagging prestige of Commonwealth Games? | Andy Bull

https://www.theguardian.com/profile/andybull

The Games found a great host city in Birmingham but are searching for new meaning while the Commonwealth wrestles with its history

Open link

Plenty of former colonies that rebelled successfully against the UK are part of the Commonwealth Games, so the U.S. should qualify, and it was only about 8 years ago that they opened the Booker Prizes to American authors, and our authors have won a bunch of them since, so why not? However, we already have the Olympics, and we are definitely not wanting to say that we are part of any other country's commonwealth.

Has something to do with that insurrection thingy between 1775 and 1783 that resulted in a revolution.

We could probably join the commonwealth if we wanted (we don't).

But the real issue is it's a bunch of goofy British sports. Like cricket (i.e. a super ritzy version of baseball), hockey but on grass, bowling but on grass, netball (i.e. baskeball, except you can't dunk), rugby sevens (i.e. football for skinny people), etc

The first time I heard of netball I looked it up on YouTube and thought it was a joke. There is no way that is a real sport people actually play

Loads of medals in swimming though, so the USA should be able to inflate their medal count like they do at the Olympics by winning those.

The two nations that successfully broke away from the British Empire in revolution (the United States and the Republic of Ireland) are not members. Both countries could in theory join if they wanted and Commonwealth membership for Ireland is almost a certainty if they wanted to regain Northern Ireland.

Nope. Today's "Commonwealth of Nations" is not your father's "British Commonwealth." The modern Commonwealth says members nations "should" have ties to existing members, which we obviously do. The rest of requirements boil down to "be a peaceful, constitutional democracy that respects human rights."

There are at least four countries in the Commonwealth that have no ties to the British Empire: Togo, Gabon, Mozambique and Rwanda, and several that have ties to Commonwealth members besides the UK, such as Papua New Guinea (Australia) and Samoa (New Zealand).

PS If you want more detail, the swimmers, who don't have anything going on this summer, have a nice explainer. If you want more, the Wikipedia article is pretty thorough.

As an American,I find cricket more exciting to watch than baseball. It is tedious watching baseball, there is more energy expended in a 10 second 100 meter dash than in a 3 hour baseball game.

For some reason most other British Colonies still have some level of allegiance to them. Some through the Royal still being a figure head (Canada), others through the Commonwealth Games. The USA rightfully decided once we removed that jack boot from our neck we were going to fully separate. Now we just have diplomatic relations, not any kind of formal allegiance, which is the only acceptable way to deal with your former colonizer

When I think of the British Commonwealth, I generally think of countries that were a part of the British Empire during the Victorian era. Perhaps because nearly all of the countries that constitute the Commonwealth were part of the empire during that era, and ones that left earlier or were conquered at the tail end of it (i.e. United States in the 1780’s and the Arab states in the 1880’s respectively) don’t participate.

There are countries in the Commonwealth that were never colonised by the GBR and joined freely and also republics that ditched the queen that remain in the Commonwealth voluntarily.

The rest of requirements boil down to "be a peaceful, constitutional democracy that respects human rights."(quote)

That appears to rule out the US.

But, as many posters have pointed out, your view of the Commonwealth is out-of-date. The Commonwealth has changed; it is not what it used to be. Even it's name has changed. It is no longer the "British Commonweath." It is the "Commonwealth of Nations." And, it now includes many countries that were never British colonies.

If you want the details, just skim the rest of the thread.

Yeah, that insurrectionist George Washington. We even named our capital city after him.