What type of American would say "The United States is not my favorite team by a long stretch. I'm an Argentina guy, myself". Don't you have any patriotism? Or national loyalty? My father came from Peru and if a Peruvian said that about their national team (especially about preferring some superpower team) he'd slap him. Only an American writer for the nation would proclaim he preferred another national team to his own.

And I find it funny that you write that soccer shouldn't be used as a political football. Do you know anything about the game? The whole world cup is about nationalism and patriotism and cheering your colors. Diego Maradona proclaimed his cheating goal against England meant more because of the Falklands war. Soccer, especially in the world cup is an inherently political game.

Oh and do you even watch the game? Nobody who saw the US play Algeria would proclaim Algeria played gallantly. Algeria, a team of thugs who got 3 players ejected in the African cup of nations, whose style of play is to kick at more talented teams, who had a player elbow Dempsey in the face without admitting it, who played for a draw when they needed a win to advance played gallantly.

Stick to duke lacrosse and other false rape complaints.

Ron...you really missed it on that one. I don't see DZ saying it "shouldn't be used as a political football," but quite the opposite , as he writes: "It's yet another reminder why it is so important for progressives to not just thrill to the joys of sport but be conversant in the politics of sports." While I am constantly disappointed by Americans who support other countries (DZ included), this country is like no other in racial/national matters, and so its a bit more understandable. You have the freedom here to support who you choose, without being slapped.

I agree about Algeria's play. They seemed to be happy with a draw rather than chance a loss by putting all their effort into attacking (and advancing). Yes, the elbow to the face...ugly, and was a definite Red card...however, Algeria's play was not what it was in the Africa Cup (even the double yellow was unwarranted as the second one was given to the wrong player; the captain was trying to get his guys OUT of the refs ear). Although the US had many chances the Algerian defense and goalie were able to keep us out of goal until extra time.

Stick to.... I dunno, whatever you like.

Hey Ron-
I guess the question is can your conception of yourself expand beyond your country's borders or are you constrained by them? The world and history are over-flowing with characters to marvel at and be inspired by.. Don't cheat yourself.

Go ahead Ron Mexico (that's some ID there!), trash and villify the Algerians. Prove all the hateful stereotypes of Americans, why don't you?

Yes, Algeria did not attack enuf and seemed content to go for a draw - so they did not deserve to advance. They let frustration get the better of them and 1 or 2 of their players lashed out. One deserved a straight red. But the fact is they defended valiantly - just as they did against England and Slovenia. Try learning to respect your opponents. Oh, and Dave has every right to support whatever team he wants. For those of us who actually know the sport and have been following it for decades, the world cup is not just about "patriotism" and "nationalism" -- please get over yourself. It's about wanting to watch the diversity of nationalities playing their type of football, wanting to see the minnows try to beat the big boys, wanting to see some of the best players, wanting to see some shock upsets, it's about seeing the world come together and celebrate the sport. Not about hating other countries, like you seem to do.

Dave obviously loves positive, attacking football with flair - that's why he loves Argentina. Many people choose their teams based on the style of football. Nothing wrong with that.

Great article, Dave. I'm from Brazil, btw and I forgive you for supporting Argentina. :-D Certainly I've been tempted to since Dunga turned our team into a pragmatic, superdefensive machine.

Actually, I quite enjoy watching Argentina myself, love their players and won't be surprised if crazy Maradona manages to bring the trophy home. Unfortunately, we may have to see him fulfilling his promise if he does bring it home: running naked thru the streets of Buenos Aires.

And as for the US, I too was cheering them on and marveled at their amazing achievement in such a difficult game. But then I have to listen to idiots like the radio host you mentioned and the whole thing just sours on me.

So some rednecks make some racist comments and you use that as your strawman? Disappointing to say the least, Dave. I watch all the games with a very international audience and believe me, they are much more overtly racist than Americans. Get out of your comfort zone brother. You have not made a rational argument here at all, but an emotional one; and quite frankly, you have exposed yourself to the charge of being a simpleton, and even worse, an ideologue.

Wow Zirin, have you ever enjoyed anything in your life ever? It's people like you that make mainstream Americans hate us progressives.

Mike V;
I actually think that what Zirin actually does is to transcend a label such as Progressive ( a term which can mean just about anything). What he actually does is to point at the seedy political aspect of sports. He is not political himself, but anti-political; analyzing politics for what it is: the compromise of the commons to the few; commons meaning not only public treasury, lands and resources, but also the labor and time of human beings.
Those who don't see this lack a sense of intellect, irony, and are actually the true ideologues. Among the qualities that define ideologues is the inability to think critically, analytically, or logically. They lack a background in the fundamentals of life such as human rights, ecology, and empathy, and they don't tend to understand the origins of language and are easily manipulated by the wealthy class. They fight against their own interests and those of their communities. They are boring, soulless and are obstacles of the common good of people and their environment.

Ideologue-
1 : an impractical idealist : theorist
2 : an often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology
That means you start with an idea, and then make your argument fit that idea, regardless of rationality.
Sound familiar?

and a soccer fan. the other soccer fans i know comprise the full political spectrum, and i haven't heard any sort of this nonsense blathered about by those on the Sports Fix. as much as you and some other political opposites have tried to label soccer as left vs. right, when you're dealing with a billion followers of a sport it just isn't that simple.

There's an amazing, radical radio show on The World Cup called The People's Game. Their take on Donovan was brilliant, great conversations about why the right wing is threatened by global football. Edge of Sports readers will love it. It's from Pacifica Radio. http://www.thepeoplesgame.org

No surprise Dave relates to fat drug addicted tax-cheating communist like Maradona.

"Given what Algeria suffered at the hands of French occupiers, they probably have a different definition of terrorism."

There would be no Algeria without France(of course the nation didn't exist prior to the French settlement) but before the French got there 98% of the country was unlivable desert. Modern Algeria could not have existed without the modern agriculture and medicines the French brought.

Mr. Definitely,

You're so definitely right! I love how you just proved to us Lefties with a few strokes of the keyboard that '98% of [Algeria] was unlivable desert' before the arrival of the French. It was so unlivable that no one was there and they must have imported those 'Algerians', too, to be colonized.

27 June 2010

Algeria, Haiti, Vietnam, Indochina, Cambodia, Morocco, Senegal, West Africa...

Tiny countries on which an entire laundry list of U.S. imperial quislings such as France have and continue to feed and to ply their master's genocidal imperatives.

You'd think they'd get tired of ass whippings. (You know: the Algerian War, Dien Bin Phou in Vietnam, the spectacular victory of the Haitian Revolution from 1791-1804 ...Empire after empire has fallen. Empires ALWAYS do.

As I said: you'd think they'd learn. But they don't.

Thus, the comments of 'Mr. Definitely,'um - definitely display the (mostly un) fascinating norm of hegemonic masculinity that passes for intelligent thought amongst certain classes and genders in this country.

It is a dangerous reality that here in the 21st century, there are still Willie Lynch mentalities that seek dominance over peoples of color and/or over anyone who dares to think outside the norm.

Neanderthal types such as Mr. Def here, seem pathologically predisposed to believing that without Europe, Africa would be an unenlightened, dead end rock of savagery, obsolescence, and villainy.

That makes Mr. Definitely one of the more desperately insipid individuals on the planet. Not that he doesn't have company, you understand; it's just that he fails to recognize that were it not for AFRIKA, neither he nor anyone else would exist; for AFRIKA is indisputably the place where all life AND all civilization AND all humanity began.

Keeping this in mind, we have only to examine quite closely, the relationships between the oppressed and France & the colonial regimes its governments have engendered to refute any allegations that they have been, are, or ever will be the so called 'light bringers' of humanity or of the universe.

For example, a classic example of 'textbook' 'ignorance posing as enlightenment is the common belief that the Nazi's & Hitler were the first to utilize the gas chamber to commit mass murder & to promote racism, genocide, and atrocity as acceptable forms of human interaction.

This however is not true. 140 years earlier than Hitler, France's Napoleon burned sulfur dioxide gas in the holds of ships to murder over 100,000 AFRIKAN people in his attempt to quell the rebellions of AFRIKAN peoples he attempted to enslave all over the world.

He, his brother in law, and their henchman Antoine Richepanse vowed to kill every AFRIKAN over the age of 12, routinely had dogs rip apart AFRIKANS in the arena; and forced enslaved AFRIKANS to ingest gunpowder so they could be shot and blown to bits, among other cruelties.

All of these methods of terrorism and genocide and more were supported by U.S. 'foreign aid,' and used by Napoleon during the French wars against Haiti, the Caribbean, and the Ottoman Empire (Turkey,) researched, praised and used by Hitler in WWs I & II, and used by the French in Algeria.

Haitians responded by soundly kicking Napoleon's a** (and that of his brother in law) and throwing England, France, and Spain out of Haiti between 1791 -1804. Algeria & Vietnam, did the same, to France and the U.S.; Algeria from 1954-1962; and Vietnam from 1946-1954, and again, from 1955-1975.

These are people's victories, Mr. Definitely. They are recorded fact, not fiction. I am a politically aware AFRIKAN Woman athlete, Mr. Definitely. I know monsters when I see them, and you are just a bitty piece of a big, monstrous, international ho...

Read Claude Ribb's Le Crime De Napoleon (The Crime of Napoleon) or go to
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/history/75755-french-fuhrer-napoleon-barbaric-hitler.html to read about the antics of Napoleon in Haiti in a bit more detail on the CANADIAN CONTENT.COM website.

In the meantime, Mr. Definitely, before you go spouting off about 'classic' 'textbook' behavior patterns, praising France, and singing La Marseillase; learn the truth about your so-called, Modern Day France - & her incestuous U.S. ally.

And read up on your Sun Tzu as well, so you'll get a glimmer of what's coming to fools like you when he states:

" Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win."

Power to the People
m



Forward,
mk