Harvard International Review | Page 33

stand by their conclusion no matter what the evidence to the contrary, but an unconscious effect of sport results. In the short-term, sports victories create a false sense of accomplishment and security which translates into irrational voting patterns. But what about the long-term? While the evidence of sports victories altering the short-term mood of voters is definitive, researchers are less sure about their significance in the long-term. This is because the electorate, on the whole, tend to be highly short-sighted. Voters pay much more attention to the country’s economic performance during election year, for example, than during the other years of the term; a small faux-pas in the middle of a political campaign will likewise appear more significant than an important misstep by a candidate years prior. This is why a country’s long-term political stability is arguably not decided by the number of goals it scores in the World Cup. The Brazilian attitude towards its World Cup loss, however, is likely to have a more marked impact on its politics than an average college football loss. This is due in part to the highly politicized nature of soccer and in part to more long-standing grievances by the Brazilian people. struck a deal for rising Colombian soccer star di Stefano. Franco proceeded to outlaw the purchase of foreign players by Spanish teams, before then brokering a deal for di Stefano to join Real Madrid through the state. In 1943, when Barcelona appeared to take the lead in a semifinal game against its archrival Real Madrid, which Franco had increasingly made into a symbol of Spanish nationalism, a director from state security paid the team players a visit. Despite having won the previous game 3-0, Barcelona went on to lose the match 11-1. relations between the two countries soon followed, leading to speculation that the game had been fixed. Understanding the Politicization of Soccer At first glance, there appears to be nothing so particular about soccer as a sport that would make it such a popular target for politicization. To understand the sport’s influence in politics, it is important to understand its popularity. The World Cup final always tops the list of most watched sports events around the world, far surpass- Summer 2014 • H A R V A R D I N T E R N A T I O N A L R E V I E W 33 E lections “More than any other sport, soccer has been able to mobilize entire nations around its cause. Dictators and democratic leaders alike have not failed to notice its political potential.” and More than any other sport, soccer has been able to mobilize entire nations around its cause. Dictators and democratically elected leaders alike have not failed to notice its political potential. Generalissimo Francisco Franco of Spain perhaps went the greatest lengths to politicize soccer. While in power, he saw Barcelona, one of the two famous Spanish club soccer teams, as a dangerous rallying point for the Castillan independence movement. Franco had the official name of the club translated from the Catalan “FC Barcelona” to the Spanish “Barcelona CF,” a change that was met by protests from the independence movements. Franco regularly intervened to heighten the status of Real Madrid, Barcelona’s archrival and a symbol of Spanish nationalism. In 1953, Barcelona S occer The Most Political of Sports While not all manipulations of sports have been so egregious, any political leader can see the potential for soccer to galvanize a nation. In 2010, when a controversial goal from France landed it a qualification to the World Cup at the expense of Ireland, the Irish Justice Minister Dermot Ahern was quick to tie the referee error to broader lack of respect for the small European nation. “We are minnows in world football, but let’s put them on the spot,” he said of FIFA officials, to great applause from social media. On the eve of its 2014 World Cup, the Argentine team opened its game against Slovenia by presenting to the world a massive banner reading “The Malvines (Falkland Islands) are part of Argentina.” The dispute over the Falkland Islands is long standing, but the recent focus on it is not. President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner has made the issue a rallying point for nationalism since her election in 2007, leading to speculation that the Argentine government was behind the national team’s decision to display the banner. Like government officials, opposition leaders understand the power of soccer to draw not only national but international attention to their cause. After receiving a bid to the 1978 World Cup, the military junta in Argentina made sure to step up measures to suppress political dissent. The Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo, an organization of mothers whose children had been targeted by the government, found their way around that. Carefully timing their protests with the arrival of foreign dignitaries, they attracted unprecendented attention to their cause: the regime was unable to remove them in front of thousands of foreign journalists. It was suspected, however, of intervening on the field. The World Cup having become a symbol of national pride, and in particular, of the success of the dictatorship, Argentina found itself needing to defeat Peru by a margin of more than four goals to advance to the next round. Despite the strong record of Peru in the tournament until that point, the Peruvian team lost the game 6-0. A large shipment of grain and a thawing in SAVED BY THE GOALKEEPER: FEATURES