Every England thread seems to come back to same thing, but this thread seems most relevant to post this in:
Anti and pro-English posting seems to follow 3 patterns and let's look at those and diagnose them:
Logical Fallacies
- Manchester United is based in England, therefore you should support England (or at least not be against England)
- Scotland, Wales England and Northern Ireland are in the United Kingdom, therefore if you are British you should support England
- Only English citizens can support England
These are logical fallacies, which are easily disproven. Stating logical fallacies as truth in public is the playground of dotards and idiots, and will not serve you well in life, unless you are a politician.
Perspectivism and Absolute Perspectivism
- From my perspective, supporting the England team means you must support the entire history of the British Empire good and bad and account for it
- From my perspective, I equate the England football with hooligans and right-wing politics, and that means if you support them you must justify hooligans and right-wing politics
- From my perspective, I equate supporting England with racism, so you must be racist if you support them
This is trash garbage philosophy, yet all too common in both politics and everyday life now unfortunately. Perspectivism is a bastard child outcome of deconstructionism and medieval religious faith-based thought, has an underlying logical fallacy underlying it, namely, "my truth should be your truth." If only the great philosophers of our time would come down from their ivory towers and take a blowtorch to this scourge upon humanity. The rejection of it is simple, as so eloquently stated in the Big Lebowski, "That's just, like, your opinion, man." When it comes to truth and your place as a collection of atoms in the universe, your opinion means f*ck all, as does your existence, unless mathematically or logically proven. You are not special. Unless you are a politician, apparently.
Relativism and Moral Relativism:
- Maradona cheated in 1986, so it's okay Sterling took a dive
- The Italians cheated, too, so it's okay if we cheat
- All nations did bad things, so I can justify the sins of the British Empire
Ah yes, this line of idiots forget the age old adage: 2 wrongs don't make a right. The underlying logical fallacy of moral relativism is, "I justify supporting this action, which I know is wrong, because someone else committed a wrong". Relativism requires equivalency to be effective. When is it effective? "Hey mate, the pints at the last pub where £4.25, but here it's £4.50, and it's my round so let's call it even." The equivalence is a .25p differential, acceptable by all parties. When does relativism not work? Comparing the historical atrocities of empires or nations. There is no equivalence. Using relativism to justify one's moral or political outlook on the world is what Jean-Paul Sartre would call "bad faith" or a fundamental flaw in your existence. Unless you are a politician or leading an insurrection (or both), it's highly effective.
Reductionism:
- If we sign a central defensive midfielder, we could win the league
- If had a Director of Football, we would win the league
- If the Glazers sold United, we'd be proper sorted
- If we fire Ole, we'll win the league
- If we start Grealish, we'll win on Sunday
- Any other manager than Southgate, and we'll win it
Reductionism takes a complex problem, that requires a complex solution, and reduces it to a simple "silver bullet". Ever had an old drunk in pub lean over and say, "You what'd fix this country? Proper beatings, like my dad gave us when we didn't behave. That would sort this country right out." Yes, of course, beating our children will fix local and national deficits, our healthcare system, complex geo-political affairs, the complexities of trade negotiations, national defense, and rising inequality. Beating our children will sort that out, mate. Reductionism is the lowest form of cretinism, and allowing a paralytic drunk at the end of the bar during last call to influence your thinking. Reductionism also often appeals to prophecy, usually. If this
most likely outcome doesn't happen, it was because you didn't adopt my simple solution to a complex solution. Appealing to prophecy is basically saying, "I bet this outcome is likely to happen, so I'll hedge my bet in it's favour, and when it happens, I can say, 'I told you so', because I can see the future'" These are dangerous, unstable, people. Again, it's highly effective if your ambitions are to be a politician.
My point...
Don't fall into these traps. Be better than this. Resist subscribing to these techniques. Don't engage in logical fallacies, perspectivism, relativism, reductionism, or prophesy.
Your whole life will be better for it.
That said...
It's coming lads!!! It's coming home!!!!!