Sports Good, Politics Bad
I‘ve suggested before that there seems to be an inverse correlation in today’s America between sports and politics: When sports is worth watching, politics is worth lamenting.
Needless to say, I have no idea why this is so, if it is. But it’s something I noticed early on. As a high school kid in New York, I enjoyed one of the greatest fan years-and-a-half ever, with the Jets winning the Super Bowl under Joe Namath in January 1969, the Mets taking the World Series about nine months later, and then the Knicks winning the NBA championship in 1970 (here’s a nice brief video to remind you of the great “Willis Reed 7th Game“). Meanwhile, of course, the country was falling apart.
Six years later, I had my greatest personal experience as a sports fan at the 6th game of the World Series at Fenway Park, seeing the Red Sox pull out an amazing victory to stay alive behind Bernie Carbo’s pinch-hit home run in the 8th, “Dewey” Evans’s game-saving catch in the 11th, and then Carlton Fisk’s famous homer in the 12th. Of course, 1975 was also a low point in modern American history, with Vietnam falling and other disasters as well.
Anyway, I figure this is ample evidence for the good sports/bad politics hypothesis. There’s certainly more solid evidence than most social science arguments present these days
So. Now, in politics, 2016 featured the depressing spectacle of Trump vs. Clinton, with the rise of Sanders as well. The year ended with both parties perhaps as far away from a sensible appreciation of markets, the rule of law and American world leadership as they’ve ever been. And the first month of 2017 hasn’t been any better.
In sports, on the other hand, as I think I’ve remarked before, we had a terrific NBA finals followed by a spectacular World Series, and then a great college football championship to start off 2017. And now tennis connoisseurs assure me that the fact that this past weekend’s Australian Open finals were between two aging greats, Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, and between the two Williams sisters, were special. Indeed, we published online the day before the match a fine appreciation of the Federer-Nadal final by Jeff Anderson. As Jeff summed it up:
Soon, either Federer will have won his eighteenth grand slam title (no one else has won more than 14) [in fact, Federer won, in five sets–ed.], or else Nadal will have won his fifteenth and moved within a mere two of his greatest rival. Either way, tennis fans are in for a rare treat.
Read the whole thing. And be sure to read also Chris Caldwell’s terrific analysis of “the management secrets of Bill Belichick,” the Patriots’ coach, as you prepare for next weekend’s Super Bowl. Even if you’re not a football fan, you’ll find Chris’s account of the grounds for Belichick’s extraordinary success thought-provoking not just about sports but about society and, indeed, life in general. As good writing about sports–and sports itself–so often is. Meanwhile, let’s hope this fine sports year culminates in an exciting Super Bowl, since politics isn’t likely to get much better (though I suppose we’ll get a strong Supreme Court appointment this week, which will be good).
* * *
ADVERTISEMENT
* * *
Ceaser on Trump
Meanwhile, if you do want to think about politics, the Foundation for Constitutional Government has released a new conversation with University of Virginia politics professor and frequent TWS contributor James Ceaser [read some of his recent contributions here].
In this Conversation, Ceaser offers his account of the election of Trump and considers what we might anticipate from the Trump administration—on policies like immigration, trade, and American leadership in the world, as well as on constitutional issues like the separation of powers. Ceaser also discusses modern conservatism and how the Trump presidency might affect it. Finally, Jim reflects on the Obama years and discusses possible similarities and differences between Barack Obama and Donald Trump.
I do think this conversation, along with the earlier one with Harvey Mansfield, are among most interesting discussions I’ve seen of the Trump phenomenon. Neither is celebratory, neither is alarmist. Both approach Trump–and our current political situation in general–in the spirit of Tocqueville, with “that salutary fear of the future that makes one watchful and combative, and not that soft and idle terror that wears hearts down and enervates them.”
* * *
Onward.
Bill Kristol
* * *
ADVERTISEMENT
Ad
* * *
