taking back tuesday


i've said many times that i don't feel like much of an american, much less a patriot. i doubt i would ever actively choose to fight for anything other than my family and my friends, and the thought of fighting for my country and with my fellow countryman against some nebulous and allegedly nefarious force of "evil" sounds like the most idiotic thing i've ever been allowed to think. i don't get all misty when the national anthem is played or sung. i only half-way pay attention to stories that include our country being in other countries executing anything other than humanitarian agendas.

these leanings, i have no doubt, impact things like "USA-USA" worship services and the way i loathe them. in those senses, i just don't get it, you know? even having a grandfather that shared many of his war stories with me didn't influence me in such a way that my patriot switch was ever flipped. he never really could explain to me why he felt justified in killing other human beings. i've never heard a good explanation from anyone else for that matter. so, what's the real point in celebrating it?

do i feel lucky i was born here? abso-freaking-lutely. the history that has played out behind me delivered me into a quality situation, one in which the way i choose to think and speak and cuss and blog and act is, in most instances, up to me. that being said, the common qualifier is that this country is what it is because of those that literally fought for our rights to party. people died and people killed so that i could and can be an asshole on the internet, and i can't argue with those points or that sentiment. people did die defending this country. people have killed and continue to kill for the same end. that doesn't mean it's not fucked up, though, right?

i don't know, man.

this whole thought line has refused to leave my system since our july 4th extravaganza and other conversations they spawned. see here and here for two of the more intelligent entries into our discourse.  

the nationalism thing reared its head to me again while i observed the groundswell of support towards the usa women's world cup squad. facebook statuses and twitter updates, alike, told the story..."if you are an american, you should be watching this game." "hope solo makes me proud proud to be an american." "these girls make this old soldier proud." wait, what?

i don't know. maybe i just don't like women's soccer and my problem with looking through red, white and blue tinted glasses during massive world-wide sporting events ends there. it doesn't go both ways, gender-wise. i am huge follower of the u.s. men's national team. in related news, i'm also a hypocrite.

the japanese team followed the same script the americans did in their quarterfinal tilt with brazil. they were out-talented and out-played for much of the match but found opportunities given to them by the bumbling american defense for their first goal and found one shining moment of brilliance for their second. twice, they came back from certain defeat to even the game, twice they relentlessly charged ahead whilst american sportswriters were busy crafting poetry towards the three or four american women they would champion above the rest of the team all tournament. japan's never-say-die-ism, their "american" spirit, if you will, lead them to a title. the fact that they are good at soccer probably didn't mean much at all.

however...

even if the morning after talk shows gave minimal credit to the japanese style of play, they did, in turn, raise questions of choking aimed at the americans. an aside: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS CHOKING. EVERY MINUTE OF EVERY ATHLETIC CONTEST COUNTS THE SAME. if the americans cash in even one of the 10-15 chances they had in the first 45, fifa considers stopping the game at halftime out of mercy. end tangent. the morning after columns spoke of how the japanese victory (in a japanese country where only a reported 20,000 females play the sport. i think there are more girls out at the trussville soccer club) might help their nation recover through the healing power of soccer. bullshit. does japan winning a soccer game reunite any of their loved ones with those lost in the tsunami? of course not, but the narrative quickly changed to paint the japanese as heroes and the americans as goats. you build 'em up in sports, so you can tear them down. welcome to the machine, ladies.

in america, we create winners and losers. it's what we do best. hell, it's what i love most about sports. there is no alabama without auburn. there is no braves without the phillies. there is no lebron without lebron. there is no republican without a democrat.

i don't deserve to live in america. i think that's part of my point. i don't love it like i should.

in a weird way, though, american jingoism makes more sense in sports. in sports, you play to win the game. that's the point.

in politics, in foreign policy, in church, we should probably drop the sports schtick and move towards peace and fairness in everything that we are doing.

otherwise, what's the point in trying?  

is it too early to start prepping for the world cup?


i think not.

i wish tommy craggs would write more. he has quickly become my favorite contributor at deadspin.

here's his post from yesterday, riffing on charlie davies road to recovery.