From George Orwell:
I am always amazed when I hear people saying that sport creates goodwill between the nations, and that if only the common peoples of the world could meet one another at football or cricket, they would have no inclination to meet on the battlefield. Even if one didn't know from concrete examples (the 1936 Olympic Games, for instance) that international sporting contests lead to orgies of hatred, one could deduce it from general principles.
Nearly all the sports practised nowadays are competitive. You play to win, and the game has little meaning unless you do your utmost to win. On the village green, where you pick up sides and no feeling of local patriotism is involved. it is possible to play simply for the fun and exercise: but as soon as the question of prestige arises, as soon as you feel that you and some larger unit will be disgraced if you lose, the most savage combative instincts are aroused. Anyone who has played even in a school football match knows this. At the international level sport is frankly mimic warfare. But the significant thing is not the behaviour of the players but the attitude of the spectators: and, behind the spectators, of the nations who work themselves into furies over these absurd contests, and seriously believe — at any rate for short periods — that running, jumping and kicking a ball are tests of national virtue.
From Noam Chomsky:
Friday, February 09, 2018
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Posted this very early in the morning (my time) before I was fully awake.
Now that I've had the whole day to think about it, I regret posting this.
This is probably a bit too close to the stereotype of the self-righteous leftist college student who intentionally looks for ways to spoil things that everyone else likes.
I was that person 20 years ago, but it's probably a bit more forgivable at 19 than at 39.
Not that I'm taking back these opinions. I actually really do hate the Olympics. But I regret attempting to proselytize about it. Especially as I've already expressed myself on this topic several times already. HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE. So I should probably just content myself with having expressed my opinion at this point, and let it go.
Based on what you've written here, I see that you and I are simpatico on this issue.
I suspect you've had the same feelings that I had. As a young person, you were intuitively repulsed by all the mindless nationalism and jingoism that accompanied the Olympics. But you lacked the ability to fully articulate what you were feeling, and everyone around you seemed to love the Olympics (and the national soccer tournaments), so that you felt that you would be a killjoy if you mentioned something. Or you wondered maybe if there was something wrong with you.
And then you read the article by Orwell, or listen to the words from Chomsky, and you feel suddenly that you're not crazy, and somebody out there is saying what you've always felt, but had been afraid to say.
And the relief of hearing someone else say it makes you compelled to voice your agreement.
That's certainly how I felt when I first read that Orwell article, or when I listened to Chomsky talk about sports. It sounds like it's the same with you.
[Deleted comments weren't so bad, I recover them here. Slightly modified, hopefully not distort original comments too much.]
#1
Bothering an old blogpost with a mundane comment may not be what I should do, but this hits right in the feel so... How do I even organize my thoughts...?
I feel the same.
Imagine working yourself so hard just to participate in something you yourself hate but forced to, for the egos of the people you hate.
If you won, the bystanders received more benefits and pleasures out of the event than you did, those who trained you took credits despite having done nothing to help you grow - while you yourself not receive enough of what you deserve. But if you lost, you would be hated for trying your best, more than those who did nothing. And they would also hate you if you wanted to drop out midway. People just think of you as their national flag basically.
[This of course is a very bad case scenario in a very toxic environment - so the point is that sports or competitions are decidedly bad when it involves coercion. This point was repeated again in my 2nd comment when I posted it.]
I for one do not feel guilty for my own sentiments, just that most of the time I don't let them out (or not having anyone who care to hear what I have to say). I did take part in (read: forced to join) some competitions in schools (math, english, and some traditional games) to see the bad sides of all these things.
One tangential trivia: Right on the very year this blog post was written, my country (Vietnam) managed to win some regional soccer competition. It has always been so niche and barely watched by anybody. Yet suddenly once the national team reached the final, the entire country suddenly went all nationalistic - and the demographics who should concern with it the least, now go cheering. I myself included.
Cringes ensued.
Funny cause those who cheered then may not even remember the name of the soccer cup now.
#2
To a certain degree, maybe.
The comment was also meant to address other blogposts you linked.
I think Orwell does make some good points here and there. Chomsky's views for what he has to say seem purely dismissive. I do think their points are narrow and could have been expanded with many further points. Maybe if they tried harder to put themselves into the shoes of those people, they would find more reasons that make the whole thing vain and rotten, and thus the hollowness of the nationalism in it.
Even when the natinoalism is not a bad thing in itself during those occasions, it's not a nice thing when millions cheering and reaping the fruits of somebody's labor, while said person have to receive some sorts of losing in exchange for what they do. It's like stepping on somebody's corpse and thump your chest.
Given that, I just don't feel guilty for my own views.
Maybe in countries and places and occasions where forced participation isn't a thing, it's not all bad. If anything it's always encouraging-worthy if the competitor can get the fair share of what they want.
But in my beloved Socialist Republic, one cannot get by public schools without being forced to join some sorts of competitive games or sports every single year during the events. The kind of stuff that has a tendency to be rotten is even more rotten in such situations.
Not an environment or situation that would make you feel bad for being that stick-in-the-mud self-righteous person (who will pose resistance if nobody feels righteous then?).
This kind of makes me think of Bobby Fischer. Judging from what I have read, contrary to what they say, it feels like he's one of those participators who feels being mistreated, not getting enough of what he deserved, or smelling something rotten about the people that took him there, used him for their political or whatever purpose - that led to him throwing tantrums and became more vocal about stuff, could be due to his discontent or bitterness later on. I really wonder how many atheletes or competitors out there that got enough of what they exchanged for, right before fading into obscurity.
Post a Comment