Johnny Boy wants teams to focus on soccer, not politics. Denmark is going to wear black jerseys instead of their normal red in mourning of those who died to build the stadia. One of the ironies of this cup is that one of the stated reasons for nations who voted for Qatar is that the stadia are built in such a way that they can be disassembled and sent to poor nations that could use an upgraded stadium. IOW, the alleged social good of a Qatar World Cup is directly related to thousands of deaths. https://www.espn.com/soccer/fifa-wo...nations-told-to-stick-to-footballnot-politics The hyperrelatavist assertion that no culture is better than any other is obvious nonsense…so the Nazis aren’t worse than, say, Canada? Russia invading Ukraine is the same as Ukraine defending itself from the invasion? The vision of America as an ethnonationalist Christian nation is no worse than the vision of America as a place of freedom and multiculturalism? I guess so if the only way to measure goodness is by looking at bank accounts. Which, sure, FIFA gonna FIFA. But the irony is that non white nations run FIFA, which is why this Cup is in Qatar instead of the US, so the cynicism here is off the charts.
This thread exists because the US didn't get their pony in 2022. Was 2026 not soon enough? FIFA is run by White folks. They tossed Qatar a bone. Deal with it
As an anthropologist, that's not exactly what is meant by cultural relativism (and I recognize you used "hyper-relativist", so it's not exactly the same thing, but given this is precisely what my students are learning about this week and next, I feel motivated to "lecture" on it here). Ethnocentrism is when you argue your culture is better than another. Anthropologically, we traditionally don't want to judge other cultures by our cultural practices, we try to understand them based on their rules, values, beliefs, practices, etc. - all of which stem from their cultural worldview. We try not to examine them based on our worldview, unless we are trying to understand our own values and practices better. Our goal is to try and understand how their practices make sense to them based on their worldview, not how they are completely immoral based on our worldview. But yes, people can take it to the extreme in ways that become problematic, but if you change your basic assumptions about how the natural and cultural environments work, those extreme positions can make sense (it doesn't make them "right", which is a culture-bound concept to begin with, but it makes "sense" with their basic assumptions). As Americans one of our most important underlying assumptions is the importance of the individual over the importance of the group. If you change that foundational assumption, that "all people are created equal", then you open up a completely different set of values. And Middle Eastern cultures, including those in the Bible, are not based on the importance of the individual, but of the group. Personally, I believe the Cup is in Qatar because of blatant bribery of the people who voted. That's the same reason the last Cup was in Russia.
WC years are always good times to dust off some Chuck Blazer stories. Before he fell ill -- he has recently been reported to be suffering from several forms of cancer -- he would occasionally be spotted rumbling around Central Park in New York on a motorized scooter with his parrot on his shoulder. (Intermission: There are more than a few people who roll around New York with parrots on their shoulders, but I could swear I've seen this guy before.) The bird had an eccentric story of its own. At some point in Blazer's past an ex-wife had departed, taking the parrot with her. By the time she returned it a year later, she had trained it to spout abuse. Blazer kept the bird in a gilded cage in his sumptuous Manhattan penthouse office, and complained that his business meetings were often interrupted by the bird squawking: "You're a dope." https://www.sbnation.com/platform/a...s-parrot-was-trained-to-mock-him-chuck-blazer
The USA has far more blood on its hands than Qatar so from a moral point of view it’s far better to give it to them rather than the USA.
Big difference. In the US there is an active civil society which has the ability to speak out against actions causing the bloodshed. It may not always work, but it is always present, which allows the government to be openly criticized internally. This does not exist in Qatar.
If such a distinction were made, some people might argue the group featuring the USA, England & Wales, and Iran would maintain its integrity.
It didn’t stop the US under the leadership of Kushner to declare sanctions on Qatar because they wouldn’t give him a several billion $ loan.
1. I doubt Johnny Boy was speaking from an anthropologist’s viewpoint. But I enjoyed the lecture. Didn’t cost me $40,000 a year, so it’s a bargain! 2. It’s both. The nations that voted for Qatar took bribes AND they’re non white nations.
Merge Northern CONCACAF (US/Canada) and Southern AFC (Australia) with UEFA. Add Brasil (Bolsonaro & other Nazi types), Argentina (same), and Uruguay (also the same). There's your rotten guys. Take CAF and merge it with southern CONCACAF and northern CONMEBOL. There's your good guys.
How is it even close? This is like saying you’re not sure if Rambo depicted more on screen violence than Postman Pat but it’s damn close.
While I joked with my Kenyan friend in previous World Cups about France being the last remaining African team in the knock-out rounds, I'm not sure I would consider France to be a "non white nation" even though I suspect we were in the group that likely took bribes.
The French aren't happy about it. Google "laurent blanc clarefontaine black players. Those guys should focus on their club careers and refuse to give France any more trophies. Zidane had to act just to keep LePen out of office. France is pretty doggone conservative.