Thursday, April 17th, 2014
Facebook / Twitter / Tumblr / Podcast

Blog

Roundtable

  • Simon Maxwell Apter

    Better to be Feared

    Tags:
    ,
    ,
    ,
    ,
    ,
    ,

    nazi490x300.jpg

    In his 2006 book How Soccer Explains the World, author and editor Franklin Foer examined the role that a given nation’s government plays in its World Cup success. As it turns out, the correlations between repression and good soccer seem to be closely related. With the exception of 1998 champions France (its 1940-44 Vichy regime notwithstanding), only one World Cup champion since 1970 can boast of a fascist-, strongman-, or junta-free twentieth-century history. Notably, 1970 champions Brazil and 1978 hosts and winners Argentina won their titles while toiling under authoritarian military juntas. So it takes a good right-wing dictatorship—fascist, military, or otherwise—to incubate a soccer team and, even with Italy’s embarrassing flameout, the 2010 tournament has proven quite fruitful for nations with some twentieth-century right-wing extremism on their resumes. Sixteen teams out of thirty-two advanced to the second round of the World Cup; of these, ten spent a significant portion of the twentieth century under the thrall of a strongman or military junta. Those freedom-loving Americans and Glorious Revolution-staging English never stood a chance.

    This year, Argentina plays Germany in the quarterfinals, a rematch of a 2006 quarterfinal match (won by Germany on penalty kicks) and of the championship games in 1986 and 1990. (Although it should be noted that all of Germany’s postwar World Cup success is attributed to West Germany, which is considered the official statistical predecessor to today’s unified team; sorry, DDR.) Led by Maradona, Argentina beat West Germany 3-2 in the 1986 final, played in Mexico City. And in an ugly game in Rome, widely considered to be the ugliest final ever played, West Germany exacted a 1-0 payback from the Albicelestes, who finished the match with just nine men on the field after two were sent off with red cards.

    Now, with the exception of its relationship with Adidas (whose founder took a break from shoe production in 1943 and, on Hitler’s orders, recalibrated its Herzogenaurach factory to produce the Panzerschreck, or antitank bazooka), German soccer has long been divorced from the state’s harrowing history. But Argentina, while able to ignore Justicialism—the kinder, gentler quasi-fascist political movement of Juan and Evita Perón—has had more trouble dissociating itself from the brutal National Reorganization Process government. El Proceso disappeared, kidnapped, and tortured tens of thousands during its seven year reign between 1976 and 1983. The 1978 Cup, which Argentina hosted and won, was notable for the various (and suspicious) logistical advantages that the hosts bestowed upon themselves, and the Dutch team, who wound up finishing second, publicly discussed boycotting the tournament altogether as a protest against the ruling junta.

    But the Argentine connection between state and soccer runs deeper than that. César Menotti, who coached the team in 1978, was considered a left-wing dissident, and his long hair, flamboyant personality, and Communist party membership contributed to an overall air of bohemianism. Indeed, he dubbed his free-flowing style of play “left-wing” soccer, and he wasn’t talking about the larboard side of the field. For the ’86 run eight years later, coach Carlos Bilardo led Argentina to glory, this time with a conservative, “right-wing” approach that fans and commentators saw as regimented, martial, and defensive-minded. As with Menotti, all of Argentina knew of Bilardo’s political ideology, which was decidedly conservative. With one world championship apiece for Left and Right, then, conservatives and liberals alike argued for decades which was better for the team—and the nation.

    So say what you want about the tenets of National Socialism, Justicialism, and the National Reorganization Process—at least they win championships.

    July 2, 2010 Bookmark and Share
Roundtable Archive Love this? Subscribe to Lapham's Quarterly today.

Comments Post a Comment »

  • looks fascinating

    Posted by derek stein on Sat 3 Jul 2010

  • Given that virtually none of the current cohort of Cup players is the direct beneficiary of Franco's Spain or the General's Argentina (much less fascist Italy or Germany), one could argue that it is the rejection, rather than the embrace of National Socialism, Justicialism, and the National Reorganization Process that is the key criterion for fielding a winning Cup side.

    This Cups results suggest that neither Thatcherism nor the Neo-Cons have provided the requisite base for successful World Cup campaigns for England and the US. For the sake of consistency, maybe it is the failure of these countries to completely reject their recent right wing tendencies that is the real problem. To think of all the time we have spent bemoaning foreign players in domestic leagues, crying about the lack of effective youth development programs or bitching about the pernicious influence of college sports on athleticism- when the answer was so simple.

    Posted by juancito on Mon 5 Jul 2010

  • The focus of this article is silly. The underlying yearning for tyranny is quite real.

    Posted by Claudia on Thu 8 Jul 2010

Post a Comment

Note: Several minutes will pass while the system is processing and posting your comment. Do not resubmit during this time or your comment will post multiple times.

RSS
RSS
Featured Contributor
Simon Maxwell Apter is a freelance writer whose work has appeared in the Virginia Quarterly Review, The Nation, The Guardian, and The American Prospect.
Recent Posts
  1. Going Viral in the Nineteenth Century — 03/25/2014: In antebellum America, editors perfected the content-sharing model by swapping humor columns, anecdotes, and ephemera to add essential inches to their newspapers.
  2. Jane Austen’s Trivial Pursuits — 03/21/2014: In which numerous faintings, and several comic tableaux of patricide, class warfare, cannibalism, and drunkenness occur.
  3. How Was the Show, Mrs. Lincoln? — 03/18/2014: After a hundred and fifty years, will it always be “too soon” to laugh at the Lincoln assassination?
Archives
  1. April 2014
  2. March 2014
  3. February 2014
Blogroll
The brutalities of progress are called revolutions. When they are over we realize this: that the human has been roughly handled, but that it has advanced.
Victor Hugo, 1862
Events & News
January 27 / Purchase tickets for "Death & Comedy" a celebration of readings from our two most recent issues at Joe's Pub. More
Apropos

Vague Premonitions

The Great Beyond

Subscribe
Current Issue Revolutions Spring 2014
Blogs

Content on this page requires a newer version of Adobe Flash Player.

Get Adobe Flash player

Audio & Video
LQ Podcast:
Orlando Figes
The Russian historian describes the Revolution’s retreat in the 1920s from its high communist ideals under the New Economic Policy.
Eponym
Lewis H. Lapham is Editor of Lapham's Quarterly. He also serves as editor emeritus and national correspondent for Harper's magazine.
Recent Issues