Should sport and politics mix?
60.00%
• 3 votes •
Yes
40.00%
• 2 votes •
No
Should sport and politics mix?
Viddax said:It would seem simply perverse and inhuman if sports and politics were kept completely separate; large gatherings will almost inevitably have some politics connected to them.
By that I mean the 'vanilla' or 'basic' politics based on location and culture. What could be described as 'banter' or friendly rivalry; highlighting of differences to create a 'us' and 'them' dynamic. A dynamic that feeds upon the differences and doesn't actually want everyone to be the same; where one side is not objectively better than the other.
The problem seems to be when differences and actions are curtailed or banned or frowned upon. Where expression is repressed, because the underlying issue is not being addressed.
The sad truth seeming to be that the rolling bandwagon of today's rallying cry, that changes from one thing to the next, highlights that issues still exist and Utopia is but a dream.
Politics in Sport can get to a very large audience, a very interested and passionate audience; they are invested in the sport and are inclined to invest time and thought into any associated politics. This is better than having sport as strange physical only thing, that doesn't dare challenge any status quo, for fear of having some purpose other than simply sport.
It annoys me that some people want things to be one thing only and nothing more: as if life, the universe, and everything, is not a complex wondrous thing.
It is possible to have sport, with politics on the side as a light garnish that hardly anyone notices or cares for. The whole concept of teams is irrevocably attached to politics, but it is a nice watered-down familiar version that isn't particularly new or interesting.
I avoid topics like this for good reason. We all have our own opinions, like our assholes as they say.
But, your comment is intelligent, insightful, and a welcome read.
Well said. Regardless if I, or anyone, agrees with you, you made excellent, rational, articulate points. That's to be respected.
By that I mean the 'vanilla' or 'basic' politics based on location and culture. What could be described as 'banter' or friendly rivalry; highlighting of differences to create a 'us' and 'them' dynamic. A dynamic that feeds upon the differences and doesn't actually want everyone to be the same; where one side is not objectively better than the other.
The problem seems to be when differences and actions are curtailed or banned or frowned upon. Where expression is repressed, because the underlying issue is not being addressed.
The sad truth seeming to be that the rolling bandwagon of today's rallying cry, that changes from one thing to the next, highlights that issues still exist and Utopia is but a dream.
Politics in Sport can get to a very large audience, a very interested and passionate audience; they are invested in the sport and are inclined to invest time and thought into any associated politics. This is better than having sport as strange physical only thing, that doesn't dare challenge any status quo, for fear of having some purpose other than simply sport.
It annoys me that some people want things to be one thing only and nothing more: as if life, the universe, and everything, is not a complex wondrous thing.
It is possible to have sport, with politics on the side as a light garnish that hardly anyone notices or cares for. The whole concept of teams is irrevocably attached to politics, but it is a nice watered-down familiar version that isn't particularly new or interesting.
I avoid topics like this for good reason. We all have our own opinions, like our assholes as they say.
But, your comment is intelligent, insightful, and a welcome read.
Well said. Regardless if I, or anyone, agrees with you, you made excellent, rational, articulate points. That's to be respected.
