The World Cup is both local and global (as is everything---simultaneously local and global). The category of the 'nation' is also readily apparent during the games, but is more problematic.
I'm accustomed to viewing nationalism with suspicion. Although some point to the emancipatory aspects,(struggles for self-determination over a defined territory), nationalism has also been deployed to fuel authoritarianism, xenophobia and the associated violence. Benedict Anderson (1990) argued that nations are 'imagined communities' --although occupying geographical space, the essence of the nation is the shared belief that it exists, and that its sovereignty is associated with identities.
As I'm watching the games I generally find myself rooting for the under-dog (except for whichever team happens to be playing The Netherlands), regardless of the particular national association. In this afternoon's match between the UK and the US I want BOTH teams to lose, so that Algeria and Slovenia have a better chance of advancing. Although these 32 teams comprised of 23 men are representing 'nations,' most of the players are hired labor for private teams all over the world. Is nationalism, in the World Cup, a positive or negative passion?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Have you read Toby Miller's, Soccer Conquers the World, in The Chronicle Review (June 4, 2010)? Steve Mendoza gave me the hard copy of this paper because I'm a huge football fan but I only just read the article last night, partly becuase it was more of a scholarly piece talking about globalization of soccer markets and such. However, after reading some of your postings I got inspired to go back and give it the full read. I'm sure its right up your alley if you haven't seen it already.
ReplyDeletehttp://chronicle.com/article/Soccer-Conquers-the-World/65681/