4th Blog Post

After reading Foer’s book  “How Soccer Explains the World”, I have gained a deeper understanding of how the sport of soccer is more than just a sport. I have learned that soccer not only depicts many aspects of globalization but it also has a direct correlation with a globalizing international society. Throughout the course of the book Foer enlightens the reader of how the world of soccer is similar to a international economy, a clash of civilizations, and social class division. Some of these characteristics were exemplified more thoroughly in chapter eight, How Soccer Explains The Discreet Charm of Bourgeois Nationalism. In this chapter Foer explains the politics of the process of picking a favorite soccer team. He begins the chapter by describing his thought process in picking a favorite team. He tells us that he did not choose the best teams because all they did was “buy championships” and he did not choose certain other team because of their unlikeable culture in terms of discrimination and liberalist views. Next Foer describes the specific culture of his chosen team, Barca, and why he believes that they are the best team to root for. Teams such as; Real Madrid, Manchester United, and Juventus are considered by Foer as multinational conglomerates. These teams use money to win games. However Barca is a team that holds moral standards and has no issue in releasing or opting out of signing a star player because he doesn’t follow the culture. This example of picking a favorite soccer team represents a division of social hierarchy in a globalizing society. Foer’s purpose throughout this chapter is to demonstrate how he favors a middle-class team with more moral standards to an extremely wealthy conglomerate that simply has the advantage in the purchasing power of star player.  The politics of choosing a soccer team is incredibly similar to the structure of social hierarchy in a globalizing society.

             

Fourth Blog Post

How Soccer Explains the World, a book written by Franklin Foer to offer a theory of globalization through examination of professional soccer, reveals how corporations have the power to control significant portions of a nation. Calling it a kind of neo-medievalism, the corporate influence inside of the soccer clubs is not only powerful, but telling of the kind of control multi-national corporations have over every other corner of the world. Broken down in chapter 7, How Soccer Explains the New Oligarchs, Foer uses the example of AC Milan, and its infamous owner, Silvio Berlusconi. Just as Berlusconi’s power and influence over the soccer club translated into real political power following his rise to Prime Minister of Italy, so too is there a connection between wealthy tycoons and business leaders to the powers that be across the developed world.

Globalization, for all the benefits it has brought society in terms of access to goods and the spread of culture, has resulted in the unprecedented spread of private corporations into the public sphere. The owners of the Juventus soccer club, the Agnelli family was, for all intents and purposes, a royal family within Italy. Through their ownership and influence in banking, finance, and publishing, the Agnelli’s were untouchable. Even the Prime Minister of Italy had to “polish the Angellis’ doorknob,” as an old joke went. While this sounds terrifying, similar trends have emerged among the billionaire elite here in the United States and around the world. Whereas in years prior such power was hidden and used behind the scenes, the elite are now openly known.

They are, however, largely immune to the rule of law, protected by loopholes, legal restrictions, and more than a few greased hands. While it would be poor form to simply assume that politicians are largely corrupt and exist solely to serve the wealthy, it would be inaccurate to assume that it isn’t happening at all levels of government. In the instances where the wealthy are punished for obvious crimes, sentences are usually much lighter than those inflicted upon average members of society. With no one willing or able to stop them, corporate leaders continue to push for greater control of industries, sectors, even parts of countries.

Soccer is but one area of life where this obvious influence can be seen and measured. By taking note of how oligarchs of the past have behaved as opposed to current corporate backers, we can analyze the use and spread of their influence in other areas as well. Only by properly identifying and checking their power can society prevent a corporate takeover from usurping the power of elected officials. In the largely democratic society most developed countries find themselves in, it is to be expected that only those elected should have power over others. Those whose sole claim to legitimacy is wealth, however, must be confined solely to the free market economy, lest they attempt a power grab.

fourth blog post

     One of the concepts that resonated with me in Foers book is the concept of how soccer teams in Europe represent the class, ethnicity and religion of the area that the team is from.  This is interesting because it creates a stronger bond between the people of the area.  This feeling can create a feeling of nationalism for the area and it also makes it possible to develop prejudices against other teams for racist, and Anti-Semetic reasons.  This parallels the idea of different countries hating each other because of race or religion.  This is a major reoccurring theme in the world.  Countries and soccer teams in Europe share the same type of method in which they stereotype their enemies. 

            One of the major issues this country faces is the way that we as individuals perceive other countries.  Not only do we generalize nations, we also don’t account for the way in which things change overtime.  For instance, Canada is considered as country full of lumberjacks that are all overly friendly.  This possibly could have been the case years ago in certain places, but in general it is a country filled with diverse people.  These kind of misconceptions make it hard for people to relate to people of other countries and creates unnecessary problems between them.  It is unfortunate that people let stereotypes effect the way they treat and think about other nations.  I think that if this kind of nationalism that promotes hatred continues it will be impossible for people from different places to respect each other and come together in times of crisis.  Although globalization does make it easier for different people to relate to each other, this boundary will exist for as long as people perpetuate lies about other nations.  Stereotypes are cruel and for the most part incorrect assumptions.  It is the responsibility of individual people to rise above this and find a way to understand that all people no matter where they are from are individuals and should not be grouped together as one.

            Nationalism and Globalization can sometimes oppose each other and it is important for people of a country to be able to have pride in their country without having negative and mean perceptions of other countries.  It is however undeniable that there is a strong parallel between the fans of soccer teams and the citizens of countries.

Fourth Blog Post

In How Soccer Explains the World, Franklin Foer uses soccer as an international phenomenon to display different aspects of globalization. In the chapter How Soccer Explains the Black Carpathians he uses the Ukrainian soccer clubs importing Nigerians to keep their teams competitive to relate a central feature of globalization, various states going overseas to bring in foreigners they believe can perform a certain job better. While there are certainly some advantages to this feature of globalization, I believe it is overall a negative, as it creates an identity crisis for the state in question, in this case Ukraine. Foer gives several examples of this problem throughout the chapter.

            In lecture and mostly in discussion we identified the “winners” and “losers” of importing jobs in globalization. Along with large corporations who we felt benefited most from globalization, we established individuals with desirable skills who are able to leave their current state for a better life due to globalization among the winners. Chiefly among the losers however we listed those losing jobs to this process. Displaying larger issues using soccer as a model, Foer writes, “Why not invest the money spent on Edward [the Nigerian import subject of the chapter] into the development of young Ukrainian talent?” (Foer 157) This illustrates the “loser” aspect of globalization. Due to the ease of international trade and travel with globalization, instead of attempting to develop talent within a certain state, that state is more likely to import when it is the easier route. In Foer’s example, the “losers” are those ten Ukrainian players the captain claims they could have developed for the price spent on importing Edward. (Foer 157) More specifically, players on the team whose spots Edward and other imports taken are now out of a job, as almost always takes place in this type of situation. This is very clearly a problem for citizens in a global society losing jobs to foreigners that corporations feel will get the job done more efficiently.

            In addition to this aspect of globalization creating clear-cut losers of globalization, this process also creates a loss of cultural identity within a state. This loss of cultural identity typically works to lower the morale of citizens. This loss of morale tends to be very widespread, and is a large problem for leaders of a state, more so than simply specific losers identified earlier. Foer explains this problem clearly, stating “Ukrainians imagined that they were once a great soccer nation. Now they needed Nigerians to become great again. This fact couldn’t be read any other way: It was a humiliation.” (Foer 157) With soccer being one example of this phenomenon, this humiliation and loss of identity could be paralleled to any instance of a state importing foreigners for a certain job they feel their citizens cannot perform as well. It is simply natural that citizens will begin to feel uneasy with a large amount of foreigners taking jobs once possessed by natives of this particular state. As a backer of constructivism I believe cultural identity is very important and there is no doubt that this process can gradually erode cultural identity.

Depending on the job in question, this loss of morale could be very significant and even cause citizens to feel some animosity towards leaders of the state making these decisions to import. One aspect of a state being successful we identified a few weeks back is a manageable relationship between state citizens and leaders. There is a possibility that the importation of foreigners becoming more and more commonplace in modern society can make this relationship worse. I simply believe that the risks of the drastically increased importation of foreigners due to globalization becoming too widespread far outweigh the advantages in certain areas that leaders feel they can gain.