Franklin Foer's allegory of globalization through the depiction of soccer stadiums around the globe portrays an interesting image for what the future of the world will be. As ideas are shared and disseminated, dominant cultures seem to supersede weak ones and destroy cultural identity in the process. States lose themselves to Westernization or become part of something bigger and connected like the European Union, abandoning their currency and combining economic power. Globalization has been a driving force that brought McDonalds to the Middle East and vaccines to sub-Saharan Africa. It bolsters economic growth through free trade and breeds collaboration on the world's greatest problems and emergencies. But at what cost? My original theory would be that people are slowly slipping into a hegemonic culture, but Foer offers an alternative situation. Rather instead of institutions like the EU fostering peace and understanding, a disconnect and distaste is starting to form among member states because of strong nationalistic pride.
The situation in Greece, and the reluctance of member states to aide their economically crippled ally was a sign that the Euro Zone is not something that can remain stable or "business as usual" in the future. Perspective from the United Nation University offers 2 scenarios for the future of the EU: increased fragmentation or increased integration. Fragmentation would fall into Foer's cynical theory that strong "facades" like the European Union will be torn down from within by opposing nationalistic forces and a divide among the rich and the poor states. Integration calls for a unified solution to beat the financial crisis and future crises by removing more of an independent identity and investing in and voting for the other member states. These scenarios however are a glorified example of the Prisoner's Dilemma, in which it would be in the greatest interest to collude, avoid arrest and increase overall benefit, but the threat of lying or going against the group is too great to trust in integration and therefore all states will help themselves. The in-fighting and lack of collusion can be seen by the way the EU handled the E.coli breakout, passing blame from one state to another making inflammatory remarks about who did what. Combine that with the lack of any unified political reform because of the lack of votes going to candidates from other states. Increased integration seems ideal but less likely in the current trend and Foer may be correct.
However states have been making strides towards forcing increased financial independence towards driving a unified Euro Zone by investing in member states infrastructure and public sectors. As of now, the weaker and poorer states like Greece are the ones making the deal unappealing for states like Germany and France, but reform could change that. What is the future of the euro? I don't believe its going away any time soon, but there will never be one European flag to unite them all, just as there won't be one European soccer team in the World Cup. Diverse voices, cultures, and people will make the EU constantly evolve. Opening the door to the Euro Zone only unlocks more doors to be opened, all within the same structure but never the same.
http://unu.edu/news/news/europes-future-fragmented-implosion-or-greater-integration.html
http://www.bundesbank.de/Redaktion/EN/Reden/2013/2013_11_22_dombret.html
Monday, December 1, 2014
Islamic States and Soccer
Foer’s chapter in How
Soccer Explains the World does an awesome job at recognizing soccer as one
of the few vehicles of globalization that have been effective in Iran (and most
of the Islamic Middle East for that matter) over the last century or so. Some
of his examples regarding soccer are undeniable in how they have encouraged
globalization in Iran and other states that are largely governed by an Islamic
regime. The way Foer analyzes Iran’s timeline over the last century and how it
has reacted to globalization depicts a sort of back-and-forth pattern in the
country. It would appear that in the first half of the twentieth century, under
rule of the Shahs, the country was open to globalization. Western influence was
growing and the leaders of the state encouraged adopting western ideas and
certain cultures. Then a period in the eighties and nineties, heavily
influenced by Iranian clerics, undid and put a halt to much of the
globalization that occurred earlier in the state. One of the events in the late
nineties that confronted this period of anti-globalization, as pointed out by
Foer, was the 1997 World Cup qualifying win against Australia. This win
“demanded a more liberal Iran.” This pattern continues following this new
period, which contains this “Football Revolution” and would appear value
similar ideas toward globalization as the first part of the twentieth century.
In this part of Foer’s book, he seems to question whether or not soccer can
continue to be a promoter of globalization in Islamic states, despite other
failing methods used to promote globalization in these areas.
The methods most often used to attempt to make these Islamic
states participate in globalization have been failures. Foer points out one
way, used most notably by the US, as “injecting globalization”. So far it
hasn’t worked. Injecting globalization into these areas is perceived by Islamic
states as the west exploiting these area’s underdeveloped and un-modern ways of
life… and I don’t blame them. While globalization can contribute positively to
places that allow it to occur, it is almost natural instinct to reject things
that are forced down your throat. Similar to this, is what Foer describes as
the US’s unique position as the only force advocating democracy in Islamic states.
This has caused a “hate the messenger” sensation toward the US due to their
aggressive ways in forcing their foreign policy, alone. Again, I can’t say I
blame these areas for not cooperating with an enemy’s attempt to install a
foreign government in their home land. I agree with Foer that at this point, things
like soccer are these places’ best bet to advocate globalization. Soccer can be
identified by globalization in so many ways from the players to the brands to
the leagues, that it will always be liberating to those who are exposed to it.
As long as soccer exists, a window of globalization will be available. Soccer
may not be a super strong way to begin attempting to have globalization occur
in these areas which shy away from it, but it is a way to move in the right
direction.
In the Game of Soccer Nationalism Shines Bright
Globalization is tricky to understand.
It is a contested concept, which many try to wrap their heads around. One of the main points that many people take
away from globalization is the concept of increased interconnectivity. Today,
more than ever before people around the world are connected with one another,
whether it is over the Internet, the phone, or simply the same brand of
sneakers they wear on their feet. We have seen a huge increase in economic and
financial flows across borders. Nations are exchanging goods, services, ideas,
and cultures with one another, which has made the earth that we live on much
smaller than it was 200 years ago. There are many positive aspects of
globalization, as it has increased trade across the world, and bettered the livelihood
of millions with increases in technology and medicine. But one of the major
critiques of globalization is the deculturalization effect that it has on many
cultures around the world. Many argue that globalization is ruining the
cultures of many people, homogenizing nations, and killing nationalism. But,
the game of soccer is a great example of how nationalism and globalization can
co-exist with one another.
With the increased influx of goods,
services, knowledge, cultures, etc. across borders many worry that globalization
will crush nationalism. The idea of “Americanization” is very prominent today
in the globalization conversation. We should ask: Is the United States along
with other first world countries destroying cultures left and right as
globalization and western culture spreads its reign. The game of soccer says
no.
Soccer, the most popular sport in
the world today, drawing in more than 250 million players from over 200
countries, is a great example of how nationalism and globalization can
co-exist. As Franklin Foer, author of “How Soccer Explains the World” stated,
“soccer teams don’t just represent players, they represent social class, religion,
and nationality”. An increased interconnectedness from globalization was
supposed to crush nationalism, but events such as the World Cup show us that
nationalism can co-exist with globalization.
The sport of soccer is the most
globalized sport in the world. The love for the game is shared amongst people
from over 200 different countries. Soccer brings together people from all
reaches of the earth, but it doesn’t trample their cultures and beliefs in the
process like globalization does. Out on the pitch and in the stadium is where
those cultures are shone most vibrant. Fans, covered in their team’s colors,
cheer and fight their hearts out for their team, representing a unique culture
shaped by various political, religious, and social beliefs. Soccer is a billion
dollar industry, which prides itself on the uniqueness and diversity of its
fans and the people who play the game. The sport of soccer is unique in a way
as it represents the cultural diversity of the world in which we live.
Nationalism and globalization shine bright on the pitch as we see a world more
connected and diverse than ever before.
Soccer is a
great representation of how nationalism and globalization can co-exist but
unfortunately I do not believe it represents a plausible model for how we can
protect the integrity of cultures around the world from wrath of globalization.
The overwhelming number of goods, services, and ideas coming from the hegemon
of the free world has killed off many unique and vulnerable cultures of third
world countries. Many see globalization creating a more homogenized world, with
fewer borders and less cultural diversity than ever before.
Sources:
Foer, Franklin. How Soccer Explains the World: An Unlikely Theory of Globalization. New York: HarperCollins, 2004. Print.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Amo1b3BUgc
Sources:
Foer, Franklin. How Soccer Explains the World: An Unlikely Theory of Globalization. New York: HarperCollins, 2004. Print.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Amo1b3BUgc
A Team of Immigrants
As the saying goes, “America is a
nation of immigrants.” Immigration is one of the United States’ most divisive
issues, and President Obama recently pushed the topic into the spotlight with
his executive order on immigration policy. Some feel as though globalization
and its resulting diversity threaten national identity, but this year, Americans
rallied around a “globalized” U.S. national team at the World Cup, watching the
tournament more than ever before. The team was filled with players from diverse
racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds. While many argue that globalization decreases
a sense of nationalism, this team demonstrated that it can unify a nation and
strengthen its national identity.
Of
the 23 players on the team’s roster, seven were born or raised outside of the
U.S. A handful of other players had at least one parent born in another country.
The remaining players were a diverse group, too, made up of various backgrounds,
including two Native Americans. The coach, Jurgen Klinsmann, is not an American
citizen. Nonetheless, each player stepped on the pitch wearing the same jersey,
representing the same country; the team’s diversity encapsulated America’s
diversity. In any team sport, including soccer, players put everything aside to
work towards a common goal. This is one of America’s foremost ideals: embracing
cultural differences and fighting for democracy, freedom, the American Dream,
and so on. Whether these ideals actually function the way people romanticize
them (i.e. Does the American dream really exist today?) is another discussion
altogether; for sake of argument, let’s simply agree that these are things
Americans value and believe in. In this respect, the U.S. national team stood
for and represented American values, and that increased their ability to act as
an agent of unification.
Franklin Foer's How Soccer Explains the World offers a conflicting point of view. He claims that from diversity rises
conflict. For instance, in the chapter “How Soccer Explains the Pornography of
Sects”, Foer explains the rivalry between the Catholic-supported Celtic and
Protestant-backed Rangers in Glasgow, Scotland. This is a fierce rivalry, and not
in the way that the Yankees and Red Sox are rivals. Foer describes threats,
fights, and even murders that have resulted from the rivalry. Instead of
unifying as Scots, they divide as Catholics or Protestants. Another example is
the current state of affairs on race in European soccer. There have been
countless incidents of racist chants from fans and racist comments from coaches
or other players, especially when a black footballer plays for a European
country or club team. For example, some Italian fans hurled insults at their
team’s black, Italian-born player, Mario Balotelli, choosing racism over
supporting the national team. In these cases, racial or religious diversity
does not lead to unity, but rather to conflict, and national identity is
weakened.
In his book, Foer depicts instances in which diversity, spurred by globalization,
causes conflict and decreases national identity and unity. His argument is
certainly valid, but it doesn’t have to be this way. As the U.S. national team
demonstrated, globalization can lead to greater unity if differences are
embraced and everyone works towards a common goal. In this last World Cup, the U.S.
national team was diverse in a number of ways: players were different races, different
ethnicities, and came from different cultural backgrounds. This team was
representative of its country: a nation of immigrants. A “globalized” team and
nation came together and unified under something they all shared: national
identity. They were all Americans.
Sources:
How Soccer Explains the World by Franklin Foer
U.S. national team’s diversity: http://www.sbnation.com/soccer/2014/6/6/5766076/us-soccer-german-americans-jurgen-klinsmann
Racism in soccer: http://soccerracism.blogspot.com/
Racism towards Mario Balotelli: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/worldcup2014/article-2635044/Mario-Balotelli-suffers-racist-abuse-Italy-fans-World-Cup-training-camp.html
Corruption in International Soccer
Rampant corruption is a common
theme in each of the soccer clubs Franklin Foer discusses in his novel How
Soccer Explains the World. Specifically, in the discussion of Brazilian
soccer, Foer notes that “executives have no legal accountability” and clubs
here have managed to maintain a deceivingly altruistic “non-profit” status
(Foer p. 116-117). Corruption, commonly associated with failed states and at
times even the United States government, clearly exists beyond the club level
of soccer as FIFA, Fédération Internationale de Football Association, in its
position as the soccer hegemon to avoid accountability and profit at the
expense of others. By setting rules, facilitating cooperation and compliance,
increasing credibility of commitments, and increasing socialization, FIFA is
similar to an international organization like the United Nations or the North
American Treaty Organization but instead of dealing with political interests
FIFA deals with soccer interests (Lecture). Identifying as an International
federation, many are right to question the morality of its practices,
decisions, and actions of FIFA as it largely corrupt.
FIFA is
a hegemon in the international soccer community as there are no other actors
that challenge its influence or power. While individual continents have their
own soccer leagues, FIFA controls the world of intercontinental play granting
them absolute power to determine rules and regulations among other mandates.
Though the federation asserts that they have put into place processes “to
ensure good governance, transparency and zero tolerance towards wrongdoing” its
lack of accountability to anyone but its self makes this less assuring (FIFA).
Even the most corrupt international states face accountability to international
organizations like the United Nations and/or sanctions from trade partners, but
FIFA is not acting in the political realm and therefore these repercussions are
not applicable. Despite no military power that one may expect a hegemon state
to have, FIFA’s power in the soccer realm is absolute, discursive, and involves
much coercion.
“FIFA engages with its member
associations, international development agencies, non-governmental
[organizations] and other actors” to achieve its goals and fulfill its soccer
related purposes. However, these interactions create a plethora of
opportunities for states to bribe and influence FIFA for their own personal
benefit. Deciding which bidding state will host a World Cup is just one of the
many important decisions FIFA gets to make as the soccer hegemon and Qatar’s
selection as the host for the 2022 World Cup raised many eyebrows in the
international community and sparked many new accusations of bribery and
corruption. Qatar, a desert nation with temperatures that could threaten the
safety of both the spectators and athletes at the summer event, seems an
unlikely choice despite beating out other bidders, Australia, Japan, Korea
Republic, and the United States of America. FIFA conducted an internal
investigation as to determine whether votes had been bought, bribes were
accepted, or any wrongdoing in regards to Qatar’s selection as host occurred.
The federation determined no such wrong doings occurred but as previously
mentioned, there is a severe lack of accountability and therefore this
investigation and its findings are rather incredulous. Unfortunately, in this
particular case of corruption, a team or state was not simply unfairly favored
but the safety of an entire population of those who attend this event.
Sources:
Foer, Franklin. How Soccer Explains the World: An
Unlikely Theory of Globalization. New York: HarperCollins, 2004. Print.
http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/organisation/footballgovernance/index.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)