Entertainment in an anarchist world wouldn’t be much different – but it would almost certainly be better.
I see it often and I’m not really sure why it occurs, but there is a very pronounced disgust for sports – and entertainment in general – among many anarchists. It seemingly goes beyond the original understanding of the complaint about “bread and circuses” by the Roman poet, Juvenal. But Juvenal wasn’t decrying entertainment because it gave pleasure to the masses. The criticism was of the apathy towards the state – that the military and the “high civil office[s]” of the Roman Empire were not receiving the proper attention and glory that he felt they deserved; that there was a distinct lack of military and political “heroes” in his declining state.
I have witnessed plenty of arguments about bread and circuses where the arguer sneers at the entertainment industry in general and dismisses it as an arm of the current state. The claim is that society is purposely distracted – by design – from the actions of government so that the latter may freely continue with its nefarious plans. While there is certainly a great deal of lobbying and involvement with the state, some of it is done out of necessity for the entertainment industry. However, that doesn’t mean that the industry is an actual arm of government for the sole purpose of propaganda and diversion.
I understand the distraction argument and I agree that too many people are completely oblivious to the design and the actions of government. I also agree that many of these people are more interested in games than politics. But can you really blame them? Would you be interested in the never-ending corruption and backroom deals, ignorant and juvenile public debates, the plethora of arbitrary laws, eye-glazing political speeches, and the general idiocy that flows from government offices? Would you rather have people more interested in the failing system and participating in the vote-buying and coercion?
I think the bigger picture is being missed.
Competition in Free Market Entertainment
There’s nothing inherently wrong with competition. It’s the fundamental principle of free markets, after all – and sports are no different. Actually, sports are the epitome of competition. The champion is not determined by how much the viewers or consumers of the sport like a particular athlete, team, or the product overall. The champion is the person or team that proved to be the best competitor – and that’s the ultimate goal.
In that regard, sports don’t represent anything that free market anarchists necessarily oppose. If anything, the competitors who become champions have demonstrated their value as participants and have successfully proven to be the best product in their market, free of any coercion. And their popularity in society is almost always a result of their success.
One complaint in particular that I’ve repeatedly seen is the notion of cheering for one specific team over another – usually having a lot to do with hometown allegiance. It’s often equated to rooting for one’s home government with the claims of, “My country is the best!” I actually don’t see a problem with that kind of team support. Cheering for your local team represents more of a feeling of community, and I get that. It’s not like simply cheering for your country’s athletes in the Olympics just because they’re from “your” country – especially from a country the size of the United States, Russia, or China, where an unknown athlete from 3,000 miles away is blindly supported because of the color of their outfit.
If you live in a small town like Green Bay, Wisconsin, then your football team has had a huge impact on the culture there, and likely on you, if you were raised in the town or the surrounding areas. They’re a good franchise that has had a lot of success and involves itself in the community. Enjoying that culture and your love of the community is perfectly acceptable. I understand it and, to me, criticism of that really misses the point of anarchism, which is largely based on commonality and being a part of the community.
On the other hand, there are far too many people who support their hometown teams simply because they’re the hometown team. Some of these teams have been awful for decades and don’t have a rich tradition of community involvement, but they’re still loved and supported, often fanatically. In a world of competition, tons of people support utter and perpetual inferiority. I have more respect for “fair-weather fans” who actually recognize and reward excellence. It makes more sense.
I wouldn’t go to a musician’s concert and buy their albums if their music has been terrible for ten or twenty straight years. I wouldn’t go buy every book from an author that I couldn’t stand reading. I wouldn’t see movies from a bad producer and director and a failing studio that continually pumped out garbage year after year. This type of support would serve almost no purpose for either the entertainer or the consumer. One side is rewarded for mediocrity or outright horridness and the other repeatedly consumes something that they don’t enjoy.
Regardless, in an anarchist society, I believe the sports industry overall would be able to provide an even better experience for consumers and likely at a much lower cost. Imagine how much an athlete’s salary would be if they didn’t have to pay hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars in taxes every year – then multiply that by the number of players and coaches on each team and account for all of the different levels of employees, managers, administrators, and owners that are involved. (Also imagine if the team owners were responsible for purchasing their own property and financing their own stadiums.) With less waste and a more competitive market with fewer barriers to entry, the existing leagues and franchises would need to ensure that their product is in fact superior, or else risk losing a sizeable investment.
In my opinion, renewed innovation and competition – within specific sports and within the general industry – could trigger a sports renaissance. Personally, I would welcome that with open arms.
Leisure Time and the Demand to be Entertained
Some of the anarchist arguments against the entertainment industry in general seem to be a complaint about how other people prefer to spend their leisure time, which sounds quite contradictory to me. It’s their time and it’s their preference. If they choose to be entertained by sports, film, or musicians, rather than politicians, fearmongering, and tax laws, then that’s their choice – and I actually commend them for it. They appear to be living life the right way and I’m a little jealous that I can’t so easily turn a blind eye to state lunacy.
The fact that people are able to devote so much time to sports and other entertainment is a great testament to the efficiency of production in our modern society. The amount of leisure time we have and the options and volume of entertainment choices far surpasses any other time in history. If there wasn’t a state intervening in every conceivable market and hampering production and efficiency (and quality), we would have even more time for leisurely pursuits – which means more time for enjoying our favorite sports, watching ridiculous “reality” shows about pseudo-celebrities, sitting through another Transformers movie, and going to Taylor Swift or Kanye West concerts. I may not like any of these things myself, but there would certainly be a large market for entertainment and these will likely be in demand within that market.
There is a huge demand for entertainment that won’t simply vanish once the coercive state is abolished. It’s naïve to think that people will simply give up sports and other entertainment or that these markets won’t exist and flourish because the state no longer exists. We want to be entertained. We want to listen to good music, watch great films, witness athletic dominance, laugh at jokes, or cry at a play. The existence of the state is wholly unrelated to those desires.
Also, the fact that we demand entertainment in no way translates to not caring about philosophy, government and politics, and the abuses of the coercive state. These are not mutually exclusive interests for an individual to have.
Live and Let Live
I love sports, music, movies, comedy, video games, and reading. I also play the piano and guitar and I love to write. I hate the illegitimate, oppressive state. I can love the former activities and criticize and work to abolish the latter institution without being contradictory – without being a “sheep.” What I do with my leisure time shouldn’t concern others, as long as I’m not harming anyone else. Anarchists, more than any other groups of individuals, should understand this well.
Let’s stop turning every personal preference that we don’t share with others into antagonism.
Oh my gosh... I'd never thought about it, but now that you mention it, there IS this disdain for sports and entertainment in the Libertarian and Anarchist circles. I'd noticed that many of us tend not to have televisions, and those I know most closely spend their free time in a creative pursuit of some sort - and yes, there's a bit a sneer aimed at someone who'd watch crap TV or go root, root, root for the home team. I think it comes from the drive to be an awake, aware creator rather than primarily a consumer (carrying with it the connotation of being on autopilot). Fascinating post, and a reminder that it's all voluntary. Thanks!
I understand that some people might prefer to create than to watch sports. What I don't understand is the disdain, like you mentioned. It's cool if one person wants to write a novel or create internet memes. It's also cool if another person wants to play baseball or go to a football game. As long as neither are depriving me of my liberties, I don't care. Go have fun. I'm going to do what I want to do - so stop making it a point of antagonism.
As I said - Live and let live! That's anarchy!
Thanks for the comment. I appreciate it!
I used to love sports when I was younger. Today they do not do much for me. Occasionally I will watch my Buffalo Bills play but that is about it for my former countries sports.
I do enjoy watching Panama soccer matches. That is quite entertaining. They remind of my Red Sox growing up. Always coming up just short.
I used to play and watch sports all the time. Somehow that has not managed to make me an oblivious statist in my adult life.
One of these days, on a trip to Costa Rica, I'll see if I can't manage to work in a fútbol match. I've never been to one outside of the US. I always hear that they're a great deal of fun.
I couldn't really care less about sports myself, it's certainly nothing I have a strong enough feeling about to hate, but I can certainly see a couple of issues that are present in almost all sports today. The main issue I see is that team sports are based on mini-nationalism; my team versus your team, and just generally teaching people to have a negative reaction to another person based on programming about them waving a different flag.
I just see this as the nature of competition itself, especially in sports - since the purpose of competition is to defeat your opponents and become the champion.
There is some negativity and a lot of adversarial behavior in sports today, but that has a lot to do with horrible fans than the actual competition itself. The players frequently feed into it, but it's not as bad as most people believe it is. I don't go so far as saying that it similarly represents nationalism of the state. Even if it did, there's nothing coercive or harmful about liking your favorite team or disliking another team.
That is, in itself, an issue. Competition is necessary for survival in the wild, building it into culture is done because of how much it props up the ideas of statism, nationalism, corporatism, and all of these other sociopathic issues we are dealing with as a species. Conditioning is always going to have much wider-reaching ripples than the immediate physical activity that's being looked at.
Except for the fights, riots, and other violence that often happen around large sporting events.
I grew up in a football town. It had its perks and was a fun thing to grow up in. When I became an adult I lost interest. I could still go to a bar from time to time and watch a game and enjoy myself. But being sucked into sports world has no appeal to me. If people could remember the "stats" of the voting records of politicians with half the effectiveness and passion of their favorite player or team, we would live in a different country. But people get lost in the mindless fluff that is sports land and none of it matters. Beyond the entertainment value of watching that play, or shot, or whatever, its all absolutely worthless.
I used to be a stat guy, mostly just for the sake of taking an analytical approach to the players. I still do it occasionally, especially with college football players and teams. Yeah - it's all pretty meaningless, but sometimes I'll have some free time and I just feel like doing it. But I do the same thing with government budgets and crime statistics as well. That was one of the reasons that I wrote this - to say that criticizing sports and other entertainment because most people are oblivious about government misses the truth of the matter by a long-shot.
It isn't sports that is "distracting" these individuals - it's the fact they just don't care about politicians and the state. Politics doesn't interest them, so they don't engage. Even if they think they're getting screwed over by the state, they don't care to get involved or don't believe that it would make a difference - and they're pretty much correct about that. Sports and other entertainment simply serves as just that: entertainment. Do they get passionate about it? Sure. Would they be passionate about politics and government if there was no football or basketball? Not likely. For some reason, lots of anarchists believe that sports are somehow ruining political/philosophical discourse. I just don't see any proof of that. All I see is people who would rather be entertained by athletes than spend their leisure time carefully analyzing the lying, corrupt politicians working in a crappy and rigged system.
And then there are people like me who enjoy sports and see the state for what it is and want to abolish it.
I hate televised sports because we were always forced to watch every sporting event to the detriment of anything else on TV. No matter whether my father was watching the program or napping, reading the newspaper or not even in the room, if we switched channel, he would be annoyed.
Watching sport on TV, therefore bores the hell out of me.
What about lives sports? Do you go to live events, or do you dislike them altogether?
I don't loathe the TV coverage of skiing (just about the only sport I'll watch on TV, plus the Olympics, but as that happens once in 4 years, I guess it doesn't count). My husband watches F1 motor racing and sometimes I'll watch that, but only for the Monaco race (we've visited that track) and on the odd occasion I'll watch TV coverage of motorcycle racing.
I dislike watching most sports and the only live events we would go to would be some kind of motor sport. I prefer concerts, gigs etc - even going to support local bands.
I'm afraid any love for sports has been thoroughly quashed, which is a shame really as there are a few sportsmen in my family history.
Saying that, we've watched the Superbowl coverage with great interest. The Americans certainly know how to put on a lavish show!
I have sort of noticed this too. I feel like I can't really post things about sports. I feel like it won't get any attention on here.
As an anarchist, it's such an odd thing to be opposed to. It really makes no sense to be opposed to athletic competitions - especially when the participants willingly choose to engage in it. I would seriously like to know where the harm is and how this equates to an extorting, kidnapping, murderous state. Quite frankly, it's absolutely ridiculous to make the comparison.
OK, so fans watch the competitions and want a particular person or team to win. Who cares? They're still not harming anyone. And the ones who do should be properly handled. It's still not a statist issue, though. Some anarchists, man...trying to find a contentious issue where it really doesn't exist.
I've been called an 'anarchist' by others for over forty years. Perhaps I are one. I don't like sports.
Boring.
I'd much rather read, write or surf the internet. (I don't like TV either)
I like to do all of the above. And I'm pretty sure that I'm still an anarchist, too!
It's probably because we're all nerds.
In the USA at least, sports companies receive millions of dollars in subsidies, so maybe that's part of it.
For me personally, I don't mind if people watch sports, even if I don't particularly care for them. In regards to the "cheering for your team" thing, I was watching a game from the World Cup, Mexico vs Croatia, (I live in Mexico) and I did find it a little unsporting that they would cheer like crazy when Mexico got a goal, but there wasn't even a clap when Croatia scored their goal. It was a good one too.
Yeah - one of the big downsides to professional sports is their constant stadium-building and renovating that sticks taxpayers with a large chunk of the bill. That's total BS. Once the state is abolished, though, we won't have to worry about that problem.
But why would Mexicans cheer for a Croatian goal? That would be crazy!
Yes. Haha. I wasn't expecting much, just a little clap in appreciation of the sportsmanship.
You have really high expectations!
Hahaha apparently. After Mexico won, everyone went out into street, drinking beer in an intersection. People would walk up to me and say "Hey! You are Croatia!" and then a crowd would gather, and say "eeeeeeeeeeEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEH! PUTO!" That's how people express their excitement in Mexico I guess.
I used to be into sports, but became disinterested because of the commercialization. As money became more prevalent, the character of the sports seemed to diminish. I just quit caring much about teams, though I do still like to watch a football game every year or two.
I enjoy amateur sports. And I could actually enjoy passively watching golf. Some sports I think are awesome to watch, but I usually have something better to do. And I enjoy playing, but don't get opportunities like I used to. If it was available, I'd be playing volleyball as often as I could. But our little town doesn't draw that sort of thing. I guess I could go bowling.... nah... :)
I prefer college football to the NFL, but even college is becoming a bit too commercialized for my tastes. I definitely enjoy a good fútbol match, probably because it doesn't have that feel to it, despite all of the sideline banners around the field. It's not interrupted every few minutes for a commercial break. I would definitely play volleyball on the beach. I just don't get a lot of time to do that kind of stuff, then I'd have to find people who can also play. Bowling though? I could do that...
Nah. (Actually, I do enjoy it...with a pitcher of beer.)
I am almost an anarchist I think, definitely a libertarian, and I love sports. Especially UFC!
Almost an anarchist? Come on in. The water is warm.
And is the UFC really a "sport?"
Ha! I'm nearly there. Swimmers are on. Just need to jump in.
The UFC is definitely a sport, well MMA actually. In fact, one of the purist. I know of no other athlete required to train at the same level in multiple disciplines, plus strength and endurance conditioning, while also requiring a solid intellect.
I only don't care so much about sports because I generally need a solid story to retain my interest when it comes to entertainment. It's the same reason I don't like network TV - some forms of entertainment satisfy the basic feelings but I myself need more. Dick and fart jokes keep me interested about the same way that watching a bunch of hunks run around a field or court with a ball does. Just kind of lackluster.
Now woman's hot oil wrestling, and beach volleyball? That's something I can get behind...
I enjoy watching women's beach volleyball. Mostly, I think that's due to the length of the match and the pace of the action. (The bikinis certainly don't hurt, either.)
Who said anything about bikinis? You are going to the wrong beaches....
Of course I am joking. I've never been to a beach.
Good point. I should not have assumed!
I don't know why people hate sports, I can see why they do not watch them but no idea why the hate.
Some could say they make too much money but when you start at such a young age and devote your life to perfecting this skill and people are willing to pay for your talent then that is not your issue.
Well, "hating" was just a jab - but I certainly see a lot of people who really don't like sports. I have no problem with it. They don't harm me. And if someone is willing to dedicate their life to something that entertains me, I'm not going to condemn it.
I like participating in sports, but I understand that sports fanaticism is incompatible with voluntaryist anarchy in the same way as religious extremism and patriotism.
There is a very superficial argument in support of team sports. I would argue that supporting team sports is way worse than supporting national governments. I would say that ideally we should do away with both eventually, but even for things that you're against, some are worse than others.
Nation states perform a purpose. If you live in a developed country, your chances of survival and passing on your genes are far higher than living in tribal society. So even though my views are mostly anarchistic and I have many criticisms against nationalism, I would pledge my allegiance to the United States before any other country or sports team any day.
Sports fanaticism is one of the crudest form of tribalism that persists to this day. It perpetuates an "us vs them" mentality that spreads hate without any rational consequences. If you frame sports games as a form of religious ceremony with the team mascot as an idol, then everyone would think that it is the most violent, lunatic, and primitive form of religion there is. Fans attack each other and rally behind warriors who battle against worshippers of different gods. Sports fanaticism tap into the most primal nature of mankind.
You cannot have a voluntaryist society that promotes sports fanaticism. The sports are a representation of ancient warrior cultures. Humans evolved for survival, not for accurate perception of reality. In terms of peace, sports are our ways of experiencing the desire for war. In war, bloodlust irrationality is inevitable. Conflicts between fans will escalate into honor killings and primitive rituals in an anarchist society that allows for sports fanaticism. That is the biological nature of human beings.
Wow! What kind of sports are you watching? You make it sound like every sporting event is a gladiator match that's fought to the death, with the crowd cheering for more blood-lust.
Sorry, but I just don't see that happening. Is there an occasional fight that breaks out among (usually drunk) fans? Yes. Do teams compete on the field and are there fans that have a preferred team that they want to see win the competition? Of course. Does this mean that it's necessarily violent or even that the other competitors are necessarily an "enemy?" Not at all.
Does such a competition make the event worse than a coercive state that harasses, extorts, assaults, imprisons, and murders individuals on a routine basis? Not at all.
I get that some people just don't like sports, but trying to characterize sports as the problem with society is absurd. And in an anarchist society, who's going to forcibly prevent athletes from competing with each other? Who's going to prevent people from watching such competitions and being entertained by them? The fact of the matter is, athletic competition isn't going anywhere...probably ever. If nobody's rights are being violated, then it's not anyone's concern. If a rabid fan wants to attack someone, then they can be dealt with accordingly. I just don't see how someone participating in sports or watching them for entertainment is my business. They can do what they want and I'll be OK.
That's not my point. I don't think sports are bad. There is a lot of value in team sports. What I'm saying is that rallying a whole city behind sports fanaticism is philosophically incompatible to volutaryism, which I also think is good in many ways but also flawed. Saying that in an ideal world, people can follow the NAP and not infringe on other people's right to their own activities and beliefs is as silly as liberals believing in a communist utopia.
Competition, coercion, and deep personal connections are necessary for human beings. There is no steady state equilibrium. I think the world needs people with voluntaryist anarchist opinions, yet at the same time, it will never work for the whole world.
The religious nature of team sports I discussed in the previous post was not entirely an attack on either religion or team sports. They are simply inherently connected mindsets that makes us human, for better and for worse. There's a cost and benefit to such behaviors. For every cost that you list for statism, there's a counterbalancing benefit. For every cost of anarchy, there is also a counterbalancing benefit. Government is complex network of relationships. Human beings are largely irrational, and if you've ever played the telephone game, you know that information gets distorted the further away you are from the epicenter. That is the cause of conflicts in all relationships. Between 2 people, it could be a fight between spouses. When the network is bigger, like in a government, the miscommunications affect many more nodes, so the effects are amplified and could lead to deaths.
Until we can mind meld, we cannot solve the problem of imperfect information. What anarchists do is pointing out the superficial problems without offering any deep insights or solutions.
Don't just observe what happens as an immediate effect of an action. If that's all that matters, then everyone would have been libertarians already for thousands of years. When you realize that consequences of actions become extremely complicated when you expand the implications out 10 steps, you start to see the intrinsic connections between statism, team sports, religions, and many many more ideas. Now add in a random error parameter to every step, and you start to see that anarchy isn't as elegant and ideal of a proposal as people make it out to be.
Therefore, I can lean anarchist and personally enjoy playing sports while having this view of global dynamics. I consciously avoid confirmation bias.