Nathan Birr - The Official Site
  • Home
  • Bio
  • Books
  • Inspiration
  • Contact
  • Reviews
  • Links


"...With All

My Mind"


Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'"
-Matthew 22:37 (NIV)

Contact Me

Our (World) Cup is Half Empty

6/27/2014

0 Comments

 
This World Cup has made me think a lot about soccer—in short, about why I don’t care. I’m told over and over again that I should be invested, that soccer is a world sport, that it is growing and hugely popular and so forth. And yet, I don’t care. If America was playing Canasta against Bolivia, I’d be chanting U-S-A. So why don’t I care if we beat Ghana or Portugal or Germany in soccer? Is it that I hate soccer so much (and if so why)? Or is there something more?

I think it’s a combination of two things: First, I just don’t like soccer. I find it boring, I think the rules are dumb (stoppage time, penalty kicks as means of deciding a draw), I think it is highly Europeanized (flopping, guys who wear capris, the insistence that we use words like “nil” when we mean zero), and it is has just never been something Americans care about and thus has never been prominent or relevant in my life. It is the sport of South America, Europe, and Africa; it’s not the sport of America. So maybe a lot of it is simply that soccer is not my cup of tea. Which is fine. Different sports appeal to different people. There are those who actually don’t like football; lots of people find baseball boring; I’d rather sit by I-80 for five hours than watch NASCAR; I’ve been told that watching golf is like watching somebody read (and I watch golf all the time). Some people love soccer; I don’t. But I do wish soccer fans would stop telling me how great soccer is and how much I should like it. I don’t. Get over it. Fix some of the quirks mentioned above, and you’ve got a chance. But as presently constituted, I just dislike soccer.

Second, and this is the big one, we (that is the US as a whole) do not care about soccer. The proof: We aren’t very good. You can argue all you want that Team USA (do we call it Team USA in the World Cup?) is competitive or up-and-coming or whatever. But the fact remains, we’re thrilled to make it out of group play—that is, make it to the round of 16. Do you think Argentina or Brazil or Germany is ever thrilled just to make the round of 16? Is the Miami Heat thrilled to make the NBA Playoffs? No. Who is? Mediocre teams like the Hawks and the Bobcats.

Maybe American interest in soccer is growing, but until the LeBron James, Tiger Woods, Richard Shermans, and Mike Trouts start playing soccer, we’re not going to improve enough to be relevant on the world scene. Our best athletes have never played soccer. In Ghana and Uruguay and France, where the athlete pool is much smaller (look at Olympic results if you doubt it) everyone who is anyone plays soccer. And their best athletes are better than our mediocre athletes. (This is not a knock on soccer players, nor am I saying that the guys of Team USA aren’t talented. But you can’t tell me these guys are the best, most talented athletes America has to offer.) Our best are playing football and basketball, or are swimming and running track. We excel in every sport in which we seriously make an effort, and so I have to ask, why aren’t we excelling in soccer?

Part of it is that soccer is such a widespread sport, so it takes more to be elite. When the Dream Team mowed down the world, the world wasn’t very good at basketball. Now it’s better, and although the US is still the crème of the crop, there is at least a crop. Soccer is the most popular sport around the world, and thus the competition is going to be stiffer than it is in most other sports. But let’s be realistic here. It’s not like we’re a walk-on trying to start at Alabama. I don’t think God has given all of the natural soccer talent to third-world countries. I think we here in America have just as much raw potential as anyone—more so, in fact. We also have the best training and facilities available. If we had the same commitment to soccer that we have to basketball or football, we’d be right up there with the other powerhouses—we might even wipe the floor with them. But we don’t have that commitment. Why not? Because we aren’t limited to soccer. People in other countries devote themselves to soccer because it is all that is available to them. We can do other things. We can play football, basketball, baseball, hockey, track and field, swimming, snowboarding, bobsledding, etc. Soccer isn’t big in America, and thus America isn’t big in soccer.

I’m not saying that we should expect to dominate, nor am I saying that if we don’t devote every resource to soccer and soccer only (I am definitely not promoting that idea) we won’t be able to have any success. But with reasonable effort and commitment, we should be able to compete at a high level if we (as a whole) really cared (look at every other sport)—as good as the rest of the world is. Getting out of group play should be expected. Anything less should be an epic failure. (Spain?) And if we get to that level where we’re playing to win the World Cup—I mean really playing with a realistic chance, not a Miracle-on-Ice type of chance—I’d be into it, or at least care about the result. (I watched when the woman gagged away the World Cup in 2011 and was in a snit for a good half hour while I finished my homemade lemon ice.) But America isn’t near that level in men’s soccer and they never have been. Maybe they’re building…maybe it’s coming. But as long as our goal is just “to get there,” don’t ask me to get too excited. It will only end in letdown. And it just reminds the rest of the world how mediocre we really are at soccer, which frankly is kind of embarrassing. I’d rather let the world have soccer and not compete at all than act like we’ve conquered the world when we advance to the knockout round. Else, let’s find a way to get the best of our best playing soccer (albeit not at the expense of them playing football) and let’s show up in 8 or 12 years, drape ourselves in the flag, and beat the world at its sport. Then, although I may not watch 90-minute matches, I will join in the throng shouting, “U-S-A! U-S-A!”


0 Comments

Hail to the...

6/20/2014

0 Comments

 
The Washington Redskins are back in the news again, but it’s not because of Robert Griffin III’s knee. It’s because of their nickname. The term “redskins” has been labeled derogatory, insensitive, and a slur. As such, many would argue that it is unacceptable for Washington to use it, or its logo depicting a Native American. Among those holding such a view is the United States Patent and Trademark Office, which recently withdrew its trademark protection for the Redskins. And I’m not here to argue whether or not the term is offensive and inappropriate because I don’t have enough information and haven’t done enough thorough research. All I know is what I’ve heard from various sources (such as Native Americans who have called into radio shows, some of whom find the term offensive and some of whom don’t; or polls of Native Americans, 90% of whom are not offended by the term). But rather, I’m writing about what I see as a growing trend in America—being offended on behalf of someone else.

The majority of the people who I hear talking about this issue—the ones calling the nickname offensive and labeling it a slur—are not Native Americans. They are white people and black people. (And we’ll table for another day the difference between referring to someone by the color of their skin—a white person—or calling them the color of their skin—a redskin.) And so my question is thus? Why are non-Native Americans offended on behalf of Native Americans?

Several points need to be made here. 1) Native Americans are not without a voice. This is not a case of people with a voice protecting those without, say adults standing up for children who aren’t able to defend themselves. While Native Americans may be a minority in the United States, they certainly are able to have their views and opinions heard. 2) No one is being assaulted or attacked. A sports team is using a nickname and a logo. The argument is made, I suppose, that hearing that “the Redskins beat the Eagles 24-17” is causing mental and emotional stress to Native Americans. I would suggest that if that is the case, there really isn’t much that we can say that won’t cause mental and emotional stress to someone. And while we do need to be careful that our words and actions don’t offend others, there is a line. To misquote Abraham Lincoln, “You can offend some of the people all the time.” 3) We (non-Native Americans) are not elitist authorities on what is best for Native Americans. In fact, to even suggest that we are, would be considered a rather appalling statement to, I think, just about everyone.

So where does that leave us? Asking very important questions. First, is the term “redskin” truly a slur? Was it originally meant and understood as a slur? If not, what has changed? Have we as a culture “evolved”? Or have we as a culture become oversensitive? Is the offense taken by some Native Americans offset by the fact that other Native Americans feel honored by the Washington Redskins? Is “redskin” different than “white” or “black”? Is referring to someone by the color of their skin worse than by the color of their hair or eyes? Does the intent behind the reference matter?

Admittedly, I am not a Native American…well, not a full-blooded Native American. I am 1/16 or 1/32 Stockbridge, I believe. And so it is a fair point to argue that I do not understand all the ramifications of certain remarks. I’ve never been singled out because of the color of my skin. I’ve never been the recipient of a slur. I cannot accurately put myself in the place of a black man in the 1960s South or an Arab post 9/11, or of a Native American watching the NFL to determine if they should or should not be offended. And that is precisely my point. I cannot feel what they feel. So it may not be appropriate for me to say that they shouldn’t be offended. But it is then also not appropriate for other non-Native Americans to say that they should be offended. Shouldn’t it be up to Native Americans—not primarily (to my observance) white men—to determine if the term “Redskins” is a derogatory slur? And everything I’ve seen and heard indicates that, at the very least, Native Americans disagree on the matter. Until they come to a consensus—or at least a majority opinion—shouldn’t we (as non-Native Americans) stay out of it?

The other question that needs to be asked is what is the government’s role in this matter? The First Amendment to the United States Constitution says that “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…” Freedom of speech does not mean that you can say and do whatever you want without repercussion. The standard example is that you can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater. But the First Amendment does mean that the government is not supposed to create a list of acceptable or banned words or phrases, and thus I interpret, logos and trademarks. Even if the term “redskins” is truly a derogatory slur, the Washington franchise has a constitutional right to still use that nickname. And we the people have a right to cheer for the Cowboys (after all, they are America’s team) and not attend Redskin games, buy Redskin paraphernalia, or otherwise support the team. I believe this, at its core, is as much a “free market,” First Amendment issue as it is a matter of whether or not the term is offensive and inappropriate.

I also believe that I likely hold a minority opinion (at least of those opinions being publicly voiced). And I realize that I am, as mentioned above, not the foremost authority on the subject. I welcome dissenting opinions. I welcome a good debate about the topic. But I also feel that the tide of this country is, that if anyone is offended or put off by anything, to rush to the far extreme as quickly as possible, and to label anyone who doesn’t also rush to that extreme as ignorant and insensitive. And the only way that tide is going to be stemmed is if we take a stand against that mentality, if we examine the facts before we rush to conclusion, and if we not let the feelings, opinions, beliefs, and values of a minority—particularly a small minority—dictate the feelings, opinions, beliefs, and values of the majority. That doesn’t mean that minorities should be ignored—please don’t misinterpret me to be saying anything close to that. I’m not saying we shouldn’t have had the civil rights movement because blacks were a minority. But I am saying that if (and I’m speaking generally here, not of a specific situation) 1 person in a group of 10 is offended by something, before we mandate that the other 9 hold the 1 person’s beliefs and offenses, shouldn’t we first examine the facts thoroughly to see if there is a legitimate grievance or if perhaps the 1 person is oversensitive, uninformed, misreported, or just wrong?

If not, I have one more question: Where will we ultimately draw the line?

0 Comments

 

6/3/2014

0 Comments

 

Never Forget

Seventy years ago this Friday (D-Day), Allied forces launched one of the greatest incursions in military history, storming the beaches of Normandy. Over 13,000 planes, 5,000 ships and boats, and some 160,000 troops participated in Operation Neptune, the main thrust to oust occupied Nazi forces from Western Europe. (An additional 700,000 troops would come ashore by the end of June.)

The troops crossed the English Channel and performed amphibious landings on five beaches on the Normandy coast in the early morning hours of June 6, 1944. Many died before they ever reached the beach; thousands more bled out on the sand. And yet they continued to come. They faced insurmountable odds, staunch Nazi entrenchments, and seeming certain death. Bullets spat into the dirt and splashed into the water, and shells and mortars exploded around them. Their fellow soldiers and friends died beside them. And yet they continued to come.

They fought for freedom—for themselves, for their families, and for men and women around the world, men and women they had never met, men and women whose descendants three-quarters of a century later would look down their noses with disdain at the country that had provided their salvation…the country without which they would not have a country. And yet they continued to come. There is a reason these sons, husbands, brothers, fathers, and uncles—now our grandfathers and great-grandfathers—are known as the Greatest Generation. They fought for love of country, for duty.

And they were not alone. Thousands more had invaded Axis Europe from the south, coming ashore in Sicily and moving north through Italy. In the Pacific Theater, they were joined by tens of thousands more who fought and died at Pearl Harbor, Midway, Iwo Jima, and Okinawa. They fought on the beaches, in the fields, in the jungles, and in the cities. They were killed, wounded, and captured. They left wives, children, parents, and the comforts of home.

Sadly, many in my generation are ignorant of D-Day. They are unaware of the sacrifices made so that they can live their lives unhindered by tyranny and oppression. The courage and bravery on display that day are something many of us can only imagine. Many others are very familiar with the courage and bravery, and with the sacrifices necessary to maintain freedom, having made those sacrifices themselves. But in a day and age when history is up for debate, when American exceptionalism is considered a blight, when reality TV stars are seen as heroes, and when anything that can’t be viewed on a smartphone is considered antiquated, we owe it to ourselves and to future generations to make sure that true heroes are remembered, honored, and celebrated. We must not—we WILL not—forget them or their sacrifice.

0 Comments

    Archives

    April 2018
    July 2017
    February 2017
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013

    Categories

    All

    Author

    I'm a thinker. For better or worse, my mind is always running. As a writer, I also love the method of communication. I think there's an artistry to it. This blog is my way of giving my constant thinking a place to express itself artistically.

    RSS Feed

Copyright © 2022, Nathan Birr