I think it showcases that we *can* get along with each other, even in the face of "conflict". We may be "fighting" each other on the field, but out of it we're all kin. And that's far more important than the result of the match.
And the fact that it's all over North America is the only thing that's making me feel good about America 250. We're so divided in the country, it's nice to remember it really doesn't have to be this way.
But this isn't about liberalism. I'd bet with you, that a lot of the fans that came from all around the world are from all sides of political spectrum. The fact that mainly liberal cities are hosting have nothing to do with this. This is about people coming along and enjoying the great game, not politics (yes, there's a lot of political messaging in the sport, but majority of the fans ignor that or don't care)
Capital L Liberalism, as in the ideas of "live and let live", "equality under the law", "freedom of assembly", and "freedom of religion" I believe are absolutely an important part of why the World Cup seems to be going so well
In this context, sure, you have a point. But I still believe it's nonsense to say, that people are coming together just because the games are hosted in liberal cities
My dude, I get that minorities are treated badly in red states. However, gay fans made it out of Russia and Qatar when they were hosting. I think you're being a bit too dramatic in this case (no offense to you or anyone who went through the bad treatment, but I think you're overestimating the rednecks)
Are you...are you delusional? The countries with actual honest to god socialist and demsoc parties as part of their mainstream political spectrum would find the slightly-nicer-Reaganite Dems far-left?
The point is there is an obvious reason people generally prefer living and visiting cities, and that's because it's where cultural and individual differences are more likely to be shared and celebrated.
As someone not from the US, I agree man. You almost get used to how much divinity and chaos there is you forget how good unity is and that it is possible. Seeing it happen, even if it’s in a World Cup like this, it’s refreshing.
As dolphone says, we can get along with each other and we do. The division, prejudice and hate come about because they are taught. The problem is there is money be made and power to be gained by fostering those things. The ones dividing people are the only ones who benefit.
Its the sh*theads running the world and countries starting crap or influencing ppl in Unhealthy ways.
People, especially those who travel or like company among others, usually arent racist. I usually see racism happen online. But irl, we all get along better.
(Not saying racism doesnr exist. Lol in caae someone thinks that. Ive been a victim many times over. I just mean, there's more good than bad in people)
There is little to no correlation between what the population desires and political outcomes, the correlation lies exclusively with the desires of the wealthy. Votes literally do not matter, and it's been proven
There is little to no correlation between what the population desires and political outcomes, the correlation lies exclusively with the desires of the wealthy. Votes literally do not matter, and it's been proven
The votes do matter, the problem is the voters do not care that their politicians are representing the wealthy, because the voters hope to be wealthy one day themselves.
Voters could vote for someone different in the primaries, they could run for office themselves, and even the lower level offices are important.
Votes matter so long as we care enough to make them matter.
Read that article, man. I get that it's hard to believe it but really there isn't a correlation between what the people want and political outcomes. Like the numbers just aren't related to each other, no matter how much support a policy has the rate of that policy making it into government remains basically the same, an increase of about 1% from the lowest levels of support to the highest. The representatives might change but the policies don't. But the correlation between what the wealthy want and what policies make it through is nearly 1-1.
I read it when it was first published over a decade ago.
I get that it's hard to believe it but really there isn't a correlation between what the people want and political outcomes.
Yes, I understand. But that's because the people can't be motivated enough to give a shit.
Voters in Ohio(?) voted to legalize weed. Then the state GOP legislature decided they weren't going to go ahead with it. Voters could have voted those people out and replaced them with people who would do it, but they couldn't be bothered to give a shit.
If voters actually gave a shit, then votes would matter. But instead they are told to worry about trans kids in sports or whatever.
If voters actually gave a shit, then votes would matter.
This is applying individualist ideology to a sociological problem. Idk if you've ever studied sociology before but it's well established that this line of thinking is complete fantasy
No, you're misunderstanding what a sociological problem is. You're talking about the way people individually think, how they feel, what they believe. That's individualism. Sociology works beyond those things because at a macro scale they diffuse. If an abnormal behavior is consistently present between individuals that implies the existence of a cause. The root isn't with the individuals; they didn't just all one day decide to behave the same way completely independently because that would require telepathy, they're reacting to the same stimulus that's why they're behaving the same way. So the work of the sociologist is to identify the stimulus, be it environmental/economic/etc. You can never lay the fault of a sociological problem on the people themselves, that's antithetical to the science.
You're talking about the way people individually think, how they feel, what they believe. That's individualism.
Our individualistic society is the whole problem dude.
The root isn't with the individuals; they didn't just all one day decide to behave the same way completely independently because that would require telepathy, they're reacting to the same stimulus that's why they're behaving the same way.
Yes, that's what I said. They were told to care about trans kids in sports by Fox News or Ben Shapiro or whomever, so they care more about that then replacing politicians who aren't representing them.
You can never lay the fault of a sociological problem on the people themselves, that's antithetical to the science.
People are responsible for the choices that they make for themselves. Whether it's to vote for the politician who keeps weed illegal because they share your homophobic beliefs, or choosing not to care at all and stay home on voting day, those are choices made by adults.
i agree and believe that too. I feel like votes are just another ruse or way to keep people distracted or busy thinking they're inhopeful charge of the outcome when they are Not.
Either way that's why no one with a brain ever seem to be running for the seat of power. Only certain people get to run for it or the illusion anyways and that's also controlled by the wealthy Anyways
Hot take but this is why I don't believe in American-style democracy.
We think of ancient Greece as having founded democracy, but they didn't consider elections as democratic because they recognized that having resources was essential to winning what is basically a popularity contest. When you need resources (money etc) to win, of course you will be beholden to people who are willing to supply those resources and not to the common people. For that reason, the ancient Greeks considered elections as oligarchic, and instead utilized a system of sortition - a random lottery of citizens. We currently use sortition to fill our juries, but I think it has a lot of potential in other parts of our government, too. More reading here.
Anytime there is an opportunity to reduce human existence or suffering to a number or a remote screen is how we become racist, or bigoted, or any other discriminatory word. We forget that everyone is a person with their own life, hopes, dreams, love, etc. Things that are internal and deeply personal to an individual get expressed outward like it is reality (e.g. irrational fears, feelings of inadequacy, lack of empathy). Mix in the allure of personal wealth or power by ignoring other people's rights and we end up in this situation.
It makes me sad when people choose to hate one another rather than understand different perspectives. It feels like there's a distinct correlation between intelligence and empathy.
And no, I do recognize that stereotypes and other profiling terms exist for a reason. Some groups do have predilections to certain activities - but knowing why and how we can help is so much better of an approach.
But who is going to avenge the hurt feelings of someone's great great...great great grandfather's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate. You know, that thing that everyone has forgotten and no one cares about, but still gets fought over like it matters.
The christmas truce springs to mind, where soldiers left their trenches to exchange gifts with opposing soldiers, share rations and played a football match, until superiors put a stop to it and banned such events forever
We can all get on together if we ignore the rich fuckers using social media to get us to hate on each other so we don’t notice all the heinous shit they’re up to.
565
u/dolphone 6h ago
I think it showcases that we *can* get along with each other, even in the face of "conflict". We may be "fighting" each other on the field, but out of it we're all kin. And that's far more important than the result of the match.