Tag / totalitarianism

by Nathan Coumbe

Baseball follows the decline of American democracy

“Baseball suits the character of this democratic nation. 

Democracy is government by persuasion. That means it requires patience. That means it requires a lot of compromise. Democracy is the slow politics of the half-loaf. 

Baseball is the game of the long season, where small, incremental differences decide who wins and who loses particular games, series, seasons. In baseball, you know going to the ballpark that the chances are you may win, but you also may lose. There’s no certainty, no given. You know when the season starts that the best team is going to get beaten a third of the time; the worst team is going to win a third of the time. The argument over 162 games—that middle third. 

So it’s a game you can’t like if winning’s everything. And democracy is that way, too.” 

—George Will, “Ken Burns: Baseball“

I would now posit that Americans’ declining interest in, and ability to watch and focus on, baseball directly correlates to our declining democratic ideals. 

When winning is everything—like it is in the new American pastime, football—and our culture reflects that, American democracy can no longer function. 

Baseball has become the jazz music of American sports culture: something we created that truly reflects who we are as a culture, yet no one cares about anymore.

Baseball and jazz—two of the greatest cultural creations that are 100% genuine American innovations—are the same two things most Americans don’t care about, understand, or appreciate. 

We’ve traded cerebral, authentically human jazz for three-minute pop songs, mostly created by computers with singers who rely on autotune to hit anything above or below a 5-note range. A 162-game baseball season over 8 months, for a 16-game football season that lasts 5 months. 

I’ve often said that our declining interest and ability to follow baseball is an indication of social media’s detrimental impact on our ability to focus for long periods. 

Now I’m quite certain it heralds something much worse.

by Nathan Coumbe

Fear keeps the majority out of power

It only takes one person for something evil to occur. For example, one of the reasons many authoritarian countries haven’t changed their regime already is that the vast majority of people live in fear of the handful of people who would commit evil on behalf of the leaders.

This is a question of power. If every single person in the country realized that they only have power because they can get other people to do bad things, the leaders would no longer be in power. 

The flipside of that is that it only requires one person being willing to harm or kill another for these people to be able to keep their power. 

It’s contagious—one person begets another person willing to commit harm (or too scared to refuse). Pretty soon, a tiny minority of people grows who are willing to commit evil to keep this one person in power.

Because not everyone says no, the minority rules, and the majority seems powerless. As such, the people who are in the majority must seemingly be willing to face death at the hands of the minority to effect change.