![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Democracy and Sports
I have a theory. But let me backtrack a bit first and say what I'm theorising about. The USA is in the process of barely, just about, unseating from the White House a man who is patently, obviously, completely unfit to be there. He has done nothing good for the country - or the world - since he got there, and he's done a hell of a lot of harm. Yet, despite all the evidence, just under half the country voted to re-elect him to that office. Why the fuck would they do that?
I think the answer lies in sports, and specifically, the media treatment of sports. Team sports in particular - football, soccer, American football, hurling, ice hockey, rugby - are all reported in the news as though they were things of import, things that matter. There's been a lot of focus on when sports competitions of various kinds could restart after COVID-19 lockdowns. I mean, why? What use is it to have 22 grown men crashing into each other while chasing an inflated bit of leather around a field? Clearly, it is of no use at all.
(The correct answer is: it is of use to the media and the 'owners' of the sports businesses, who make a lot of money from it. But let's leave capitalism aside for now, because the answer to "why is anything shit" is "capitalism", and that's not what I'm after here.)
It's important to ordinary people, though, to have sports - or more strictly, sports coverage - back in the "news". I say sports coverage, because it's been adequately demonstrated by wrestling and greyhound racing that actual competition is unimportant; what people want is an appearance of competition. They want this back because it is part of their identity. Every sad sack of an office lad has a team they think of as being theirs. They will wear that team's scarf or an expensive replica of the kit worn by the players (I think of this as sports cosplay, although it's a pretty poor level of cosplay). They will be better disposed toward people who support the same team. If that team has a traditional opponent team, they will be poorly disposed toward supporters of that team. Clearly, this is ridiculous shite, but it's essentially tribalism. Denied the possibility of identifying with clan or liege lord, humans will apparently find something - anything to glom onto. And of course, loyalty is important. One does not give up on a team merely because it is losing, and even if it is relegated, yea, even unto the third division, one sticks with it. Because, y'know, tribalism.
The winning and losing, and much of the surrounding guff, of teams is covered in the media as though it had import. This give the tribalists a feeling of relevance. Their identity-mascot, their clan substitute, is being talked about! They are important! And the tribalist, by the magic of association, feels important. But at the same time, the winning and losing and surrounding guff, and this is important, has no impact on their life. It does not put more, or less meat on the table. It does not affect how warm or cold their dwelling is. It does not, in short, have any impact other than being entertaining, and giving a playful collective identity.
So, we are now in the position where a thing that is covered in the media is not actually a real, relevant thing. The same people who have that experience also read about (or watch) politics in the media. And by the magic of similarity, they understand that politics is the same as sport. You pick a team, you wear your team's colours, you slag off the other team's supporters, and of course, when your team loses, you stick with them. Giving up on your team, and worse, switching to the opposition team, why that would be disloyal. And we have already established that the things covered in the media do not make a difference in real life. They they do not put more or less meat on the table. They do not affect how warm or cold the dwelling is. They do not, in short, have any impact other than being entertaining... no, wait.
But the tribalists do not get as far as the "no, wait". Many of the good people of the US of A will complain about the government at the same time as they stand under and wear the symbols of that government. Because the media has provided enough evidence that the team identity isn't a real thing, they will stick dedicatedly to Their Team, Their Party, in the face of all the evidence, because it's not real, it's just entertainment, exactly like the media have shown.
In short, media coverage of sport is responsible for half of America trying to vote back in a racist, narcissist, downright evil fucker. Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
(And it's probably best not to get me started on celebrity culture.)
I think the answer lies in sports, and specifically, the media treatment of sports. Team sports in particular - football, soccer, American football, hurling, ice hockey, rugby - are all reported in the news as though they were things of import, things that matter. There's been a lot of focus on when sports competitions of various kinds could restart after COVID-19 lockdowns. I mean, why? What use is it to have 22 grown men crashing into each other while chasing an inflated bit of leather around a field? Clearly, it is of no use at all.
(The correct answer is: it is of use to the media and the 'owners' of the sports businesses, who make a lot of money from it. But let's leave capitalism aside for now, because the answer to "why is anything shit" is "capitalism", and that's not what I'm after here.)
It's important to ordinary people, though, to have sports - or more strictly, sports coverage - back in the "news". I say sports coverage, because it's been adequately demonstrated by wrestling and greyhound racing that actual competition is unimportant; what people want is an appearance of competition. They want this back because it is part of their identity. Every sad sack of an office lad has a team they think of as being theirs. They will wear that team's scarf or an expensive replica of the kit worn by the players (I think of this as sports cosplay, although it's a pretty poor level of cosplay). They will be better disposed toward people who support the same team. If that team has a traditional opponent team, they will be poorly disposed toward supporters of that team. Clearly, this is ridiculous shite, but it's essentially tribalism. Denied the possibility of identifying with clan or liege lord, humans will apparently find something - anything to glom onto. And of course, loyalty is important. One does not give up on a team merely because it is losing, and even if it is relegated, yea, even unto the third division, one sticks with it. Because, y'know, tribalism.
The winning and losing, and much of the surrounding guff, of teams is covered in the media as though it had import. This give the tribalists a feeling of relevance. Their identity-mascot, their clan substitute, is being talked about! They are important! And the tribalist, by the magic of association, feels important. But at the same time, the winning and losing and surrounding guff, and this is important, has no impact on their life. It does not put more, or less meat on the table. It does not affect how warm or cold their dwelling is. It does not, in short, have any impact other than being entertaining, and giving a playful collective identity.
So, we are now in the position where a thing that is covered in the media is not actually a real, relevant thing. The same people who have that experience also read about (or watch) politics in the media. And by the magic of similarity, they understand that politics is the same as sport. You pick a team, you wear your team's colours, you slag off the other team's supporters, and of course, when your team loses, you stick with them. Giving up on your team, and worse, switching to the opposition team, why that would be disloyal. And we have already established that the things covered in the media do not make a difference in real life. They they do not put more or less meat on the table. They do not affect how warm or cold the dwelling is. They do not, in short, have any impact other than being entertaining... no, wait.
But the tribalists do not get as far as the "no, wait". Many of the good people of the US of A will complain about the government at the same time as they stand under and wear the symbols of that government. Because the media has provided enough evidence that the team identity isn't a real thing, they will stick dedicatedly to Their Team, Their Party, in the face of all the evidence, because it's not real, it's just entertainment, exactly like the media have shown.
In short, media coverage of sport is responsible for half of America trying to vote back in a racist, narcissist, downright evil fucker. Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
(And it's probably best not to get me started on celebrity culture.)
no subject
no subject
Um...
I have opinions about this post.
And while some of them are definitely of the #notallsports or #notallsportsfans variety, others aren't. Hmm.
no subject
And like most if not all #notall reactions, it doesn't have to be #all, if it happens with #some, that's bad enough to stop doing it.
no subject
With regard to the sports piece though, I think of pro sports a bit like the Truman Show where all participants are Truman. And the audience just have to keep watching to see how it all pans out. And that’s ok, I don’t care much to know which Kardaschian kissed who, or which team won what trophy, they’re the same to me. I have a lot of respect for the sporting elites (whether I watch the sport or not), I respect the training, devotion, skill and sacrifice to get to that level in anything. I see value in sports in terms of the health benefits it can have. But I think it is the same as anything else that requires practice. Is it newsworthy? Well, if enough people want to know something I guess it becomes newsworthy. Personally, I don’t care.
no subject
no subject
And instead of supporting the sports team of their city, in politics they are supporting the team of their convictions or better: fears.