Tweet
The more I get into soccer/football, the more I begin to understand the divide culturally between our cultures. We do not think in terms of nationalism in the same way. Neither is better, neither is worse, but I've come to a conclusion that I believe to be accurate. This may be long, but if I am right I believe it will be worthwhile for people on both sides to read it.
The basic claim is this: Europeans express there loves and biases in terms of nationality, Americans through less consistent channels. Americans rarely ever root for a fighter because he is American. That is the truth. It just doesn't happen. British people however, for example, will root passionately for a fighter for seemingly no other reason. The biases are an extension of passion and exists in all people, but they show differently. Europeans don't seem to find our biases well. Again, it has little to do with being American.
America is too big and divided historically for that. We have regional and racial biases out the *******, but it is rare that you will see a nationally united bias in sports. Inner city blacks will become Floyd nuthuggers, rural blue collared whites will root for Kelly Pavlik. Puerto Ricans will root for Puerto Ricans, Mexican-Americans for Mexican brawlers. Irish-Americans for John Duddy, Polish-Americans for Adamek. Fighters will have strong regional ties as well too. Cory Spinks would receive favorably treatment in St. Louis and St. Louis alone, for example.
The reasons for this are both conditioning and history. First let us address the conditioning. Americans are basically NEVER exposed to international competition. Our most popular sports are exclusively (with the exception of teams in Toronto, Canada) American city based organizations with mostly American players. Americans learn growing up to think team versus team, the Bulls versus the Lakers, the Cowboys versus the 49ers. America as a country never factors in. We have no European Premier League and any equivalent. Nationality doesn't come into play at all. The only time it does is when the Olympics roll around every four years, but even then it is treated as an amusing distraction. I've never met someone who really cares (or, look at the ratings, even really watches) the Olympics. We are not conditioned to think in terms of nationality like a European would be growing up.
Consequently we commit arguably the worst kind of arrogance: Americans often forget about the rest of the world. If it isn't here, it doesn't exist. It has never been necessary to look outside our borders for our sporting entertainment. If a fighter doesn't come here than he instantly isn't worth our time. That isn't true, obviously, but it is the built in perception. That is why fighters like Carl Froch get dismissed all the time. It is an ingrained cultural flaw that will take time to fade. It isn't an active, "anti-x" bias; it is passive, which you could argue is worse. It isn't that x fighter is German and therefore we don't like him, it is that he is German and doesn't exist by default unless he comes here and proves himself. It took Calzaghe to come here and win a fight before he was acknowledged by everyone. Arthur Abraham comes here once, KOs Miranda (a guy he had already beat anyway), and suddenly is accepted. You can bet Froch will be too now. Hatton is probably the most accepted British fighter in history in the US. Why? Because he has fought here so many times.
So we have a passive bias that we don't realize, generally, is even there against people who don't come here. What is our in favor of bias again? Race and region. America is a huge landmass. The same athletes people care about in Los Angeles don't matter half as much in New York City. Also, there has never been one America in terms of population. It has always been a splintered group. There are probably dozens of Americas within these borders, each will have different allegiances. I'm aware that this holds true to some extent everywhere, but there are few places where the history of race relations is so... ingrained.
I hope that helped. I hope that explains why when a fighter like Jermain Taylor loses to a fighter like Carl Froch and you come to taunt the fat yanks our deserved medicine for dismissing Froch and supporting Taylor you get such funny looks. No one thinks like that. Americans didn't even realize they were dismissing Froch and I'd venture to guess that most American boxing fans don't support Jermain Taylor specifically. African Americans will, people from the Southeast might, but random white guy from Seattle watched that like it was two fighters from Zimbabwe. He had no attachment. The country is too big, too divided, and no one ever taught him to think like that in terms of sports.
The basic claim is this: Europeans express there loves and biases in terms of nationality, Americans through less consistent channels. Americans rarely ever root for a fighter because he is American. That is the truth. It just doesn't happen. British people however, for example, will root passionately for a fighter for seemingly no other reason. The biases are an extension of passion and exists in all people, but they show differently. Europeans don't seem to find our biases well. Again, it has little to do with being American.
America is too big and divided historically for that. We have regional and racial biases out the *******, but it is rare that you will see a nationally united bias in sports. Inner city blacks will become Floyd nuthuggers, rural blue collared whites will root for Kelly Pavlik. Puerto Ricans will root for Puerto Ricans, Mexican-Americans for Mexican brawlers. Irish-Americans for John Duddy, Polish-Americans for Adamek. Fighters will have strong regional ties as well too. Cory Spinks would receive favorably treatment in St. Louis and St. Louis alone, for example.
The reasons for this are both conditioning and history. First let us address the conditioning. Americans are basically NEVER exposed to international competition. Our most popular sports are exclusively (with the exception of teams in Toronto, Canada) American city based organizations with mostly American players. Americans learn growing up to think team versus team, the Bulls versus the Lakers, the Cowboys versus the 49ers. America as a country never factors in. We have no European Premier League and any equivalent. Nationality doesn't come into play at all. The only time it does is when the Olympics roll around every four years, but even then it is treated as an amusing distraction. I've never met someone who really cares (or, look at the ratings, even really watches) the Olympics. We are not conditioned to think in terms of nationality like a European would be growing up.
Consequently we commit arguably the worst kind of arrogance: Americans often forget about the rest of the world. If it isn't here, it doesn't exist. It has never been necessary to look outside our borders for our sporting entertainment. If a fighter doesn't come here than he instantly isn't worth our time. That isn't true, obviously, but it is the built in perception. That is why fighters like Carl Froch get dismissed all the time. It is an ingrained cultural flaw that will take time to fade. It isn't an active, "anti-x" bias; it is passive, which you could argue is worse. It isn't that x fighter is German and therefore we don't like him, it is that he is German and doesn't exist by default unless he comes here and proves himself. It took Calzaghe to come here and win a fight before he was acknowledged by everyone. Arthur Abraham comes here once, KOs Miranda (a guy he had already beat anyway), and suddenly is accepted. You can bet Froch will be too now. Hatton is probably the most accepted British fighter in history in the US. Why? Because he has fought here so many times.
So we have a passive bias that we don't realize, generally, is even there against people who don't come here. What is our in favor of bias again? Race and region. America is a huge landmass. The same athletes people care about in Los Angeles don't matter half as much in New York City. Also, there has never been one America in terms of population. It has always been a splintered group. There are probably dozens of Americas within these borders, each will have different allegiances. I'm aware that this holds true to some extent everywhere, but there are few places where the history of race relations is so... ingrained.
I hope that helped. I hope that explains why when a fighter like Jermain Taylor loses to a fighter like Carl Froch and you come to taunt the fat yanks our deserved medicine for dismissing Froch and supporting Taylor you get such funny looks. No one thinks like that. Americans didn't even realize they were dismissing Froch and I'd venture to guess that most American boxing fans don't support Jermain Taylor specifically. African Americans will, people from the Southeast might, but random white guy from Seattle watched that like it was two fighters from Zimbabwe. He had no attachment. The country is too big, too divided, and no one ever taught him to think like that in terms of sports.
Comment