Democracy on the football pitch
Players play — referee enforcing the law — audience controlling the referee. Is that what democracy should look like?
The other day I went to The Hive Stadium in North London to watch a match between Barnet and Dagenham, two clubs that play in the National League, the fifth tier of English football. I bought a ticket for an away stand because the Dagenham supporters seemed more cheerful when I saw them in front of the stadium. That proved to be correct when they outvoiced the home fans of Barnet at the beginning of the game.
“Your support, your support, your support is fucking shit,” Dagenham fans chanted at some thousand Barnet fans who were indeed not very interested in supporting their club. They were simply sitting and watching the game. They seemed very focused.
Something in that very scene made me think about democracy.
“For hundreds of years, great thinkers, philosophers and politicians have thought about the idea of an ideal, perfect democracy — How do we know if the system of democracy works as it is supposed to? What can we do as a society to improve democracy? What powers to give to people to really achieve dēmos (people) + kratos (rule) = the rule by people?” I thought as I was looking at the Barnet supporters on the west stand.
“Since the beginning of the pandemic, we have seen some very democratic countries weakening certain democratic characteristics. The likes of the United Kingdom, Germany or Australia, who had had very expressed democratic features concerning fundamental rights, freedom of expression and independent sources of information (those are some of the features which an ideal democracy should have according to Encyclopedia Britannica), lost those traits overnight. The control that has been put over people is at an all-time high. We have come to the situation that in the state of emergency, it has become normal that the state has absolute control over us — where we go, what we do, what we speak. On the other hand, countries we like to call young democracies, such as Croatia or Bosnia and Herzegovina, which hadn’t particularly practised freedoms in the past, now in the pandemic, proved to be more democratic than experienced democracies of the West. A public debate on lockdown, testing and vaccination in Croatia became a regular subject long time ago, and even some mainstream media have accepted the narrative about lockdown which is very different from the establishment one.
The conclusion is there is no such thing as an ideal democracy. One thing always excludes another. There is no such thing as perfection, therefore a political system can’t be perfect either. Democracy can’t be perfect, the system ruled by people can’t be perfect,” I thought as peaceful Barnet fans suddenly got upset when a match referee didn’t award a free kick for their team for what they thought was a clear foul.
“Wait!” I told myself as Barnet fans stood up and booed the referee.
“The rule by people!” I repeated. “Is this what the rule by people should look like? Is the game of football showing us how democracy should look like? Instead of being controlled by the state, shouldn’t real democracy, the real rule by people, imply control over the state instead — just as on the football pitch.”
Barnet supporters sat back down.
“In football, we have a referee who enforces the law, but he is controlled by an audience who is there to watch him the whole time, just as these Barnet fans are watching this referee, not losing him from the sight for a second. On the other hand, in life, people are controlled by the state instead (in the theory of representative democracy, people should have control over the state via elections and via media, but in reality, people are controlled),” I thought to myself when Dagenham supporters on my stand started shouting the name of their player: “Paul McCallum, Paul McCallum, Paul McCallum!”
“And this is a result of such a system. The audience supporting the player is the result of such a system,” I thought as they kept shouting the name. “If there is control over the law enforcing body, we get an environment where the audience genuinely supports somebody. These fans actually want this guy Paul McCallum to make it. They want him succeed. That is because they have control over the referee, and we have a fair system with no corruption. As the audience has control over the referee, the referee can’t be corrupted. If a player tries to cheat to achieve something, there is the referee who punishes him. If he scores a goal with a hand, the ref blows a whistle. And if the ref doesn’t punish him, then the ref gets punished by the audience, by people. By these Barnet fans.
It leads to a fair system where the ref does his job honestly and where players play because they deserve to play. If you are good, you play. If you suck, you don’t play. Ultimately, it results in a supportive environment where people want you succeed. Unlike life, where most of the time, people don’t forgive you success. And why? Because they don’t have control over the state and law enforcing body, and they always believe somebody is successful because he corrupted the system and he doesn’t really deserve to be successful. You can’t corrupt the game when people have control.
Is that an ideal democracy?” I thought when Paul McCallum scored for 0–1 and Dagenham fans went crazy.
“So, maybe people are not that envious after all as we believe. Maybe they are just a little bit sceptical.”
“The people shall be judge; for who shall be judge whether his trustee or deputy acts well, and according to the trust reposed in him, but he who deputes him, and must, by having deputed him, have still a power to discard him, when he fails in his trust.” — John Locke
If you like my ideas and observations, subscribe to get an email every time I publish an article. https://karlo-tasler.medium.com/subscribe
