Its really terrible how socialist countries were obsessed in the useless endevour of sports.
Exercise and healthy lifestyle can be encouraged without having to pour in billions in organized sports teams filled by millionaires that dont contribute anything to the working class's wellbeing.
Other urls found in this thread:
t. Zig Forumsyp trying to start useless discussion
Pol is obsessed with sports though
exactly
Pol supports sports as they believe its an effort to show the superior physique of the aryan man and because they associate it with masculinity.
t. butthurt liberal
i love sports and they can be done without big ass stadiums and teaching people to not be angry when their team loses end of the discussion
Stadiums are only one aspect. An ideal socialist state would pay olympic athletes poorly and not invest much in expensive sports equipment because these athletes don't contribute to the economy.Also sports schools should get minimal funding too.
Watching sports? Nah. That's a past-time for all classes. But sponsoring them and owning sports teams is certainly bourgeois.
Seems reasonable considering how overly glorified sports are as a means of bread and circuses. Don't remove them, but tone down their importance.
If people purchase the produced commodity, then the labour that went into its production is useful.
sports are the most marxist activity since you use your very materialist body to hit things into material objects and engage in your material world
No
Today I found out t.ankies don't believe the USSR was an ideal socialist state, what sort of loopy land have I entered?
This is pure ideology.
1.Athletes' labour has no material value
2. Sports infrastructure doesn't give any tangible technological or material resource returns
3. Material going to pamper athletes is wasted because it should contribute to socialist science, housing, industry, etc.
just a joke m8, it's like me saying this is the best album cuz it says material in the title
1.Soviet obsession and extreme investment is sports went in overdrive in the cold war during the rule of liberal revisionists
2. Most ☭TANKIE☭s never claim the USSR was ideal.
3.You're a filthy liberal that creates a strawman.
No>>2836603
Stfu up nigger, soviets clearly were never extremely obssesed with sports, as shown by their clearly bigger military and space exploration budgets, so don't even bring that shit up.
Do you not understand that sports and the military/space programs require funding of completely different dimensions? Your logic is retarded.
The activities themselves are not.
Their nature under capitalism definitely is.
Mark Fisher wrote some interesting stuff about English football under late social democracy and emergent neoliberalism.
The Olympics itself used to have the amateurism rule where Olympians weren't allowed to be paid for their sportsmanship iirc. Like one guy was disqualified because he was paid to play Basketball, even though he was in a completely different Olympic sport.
The soviets were definitely obsessed with sports, but I dare raise another question here: Were they the ultimate materialists in doping their athletes to fuck? Is the idea of competing without the advantages that science and technology afford a spook? Or were they playing to the spectacle of the event rather than mastering it for the promotion of socialism?
Ok?? Your point?
My point is you have no point.
Lmao ok nigger
STADIUMS
ARE
BOURGEOIS
MADE BY THE LIBYAN JAMAHIRIYA GANG
No
Sports, like games and other recreational activities are what society makes of them.
Naturally in in a bourgeois society sports are a lucrative business but also a tool to divide and distract workers.
On the flipside sports can also be a very proletariat thing since most of the viewers are proles and the tipical sports fan stereotype is prole. Also most of the games can be played casually among friends and neighbors in a rather comunistic activity (Burger sports save for basketball are reactionary since they require autistic fields and tons of expensive equipment). Remember how Tatcher mother of neoliberalism was highly repressive of football?
Professional sports and sports as part of the culture industry are indeed a toxic product of capitalism. But physical culture is a tenet of socialism.
Socialism is supposed to celebrate and facilitate the greatest possible exercise of human ability and achievement. Imo socialism should strive to excel in all areas, including athletics. The Soviet investment in this area was based.
Modern sports ball is pretty gay but bodybuilding and hand to hand combat should be encouraged
they are now but they used to be fine. better to have communal entertainment than individual anyways
Body building is the most useless shit anyone can ever do.
Can anyone explain this Gadaffi stadiums meme?
And hand to hand combat is only useful in arranged settings like a street fight or riot brawl where weapons aren't allowed because "that's going too far". What use is kick boxing and body building to a revolutionary?
what does it matter after established socialism?
.t a fat person
Then what's the point of this thread?
Nod an argumend
Gaddafi ranted about stadiums in the Green Book IIRC.
Sports in a Socialist country
I wasn't replying to an argument either fatty
Okay then, why should we encourage bodybuilding and HTH combat in a socialist society?
That's not surprising, people who worship aesthetics rather than usefulness tend to not rely on le facts and logic.
fail to practise sport by and for themselves. They are fooled
by monopolistic instruments which endeavour to stupefy them
and divert them to indulging in laughter and applause instead.
Sport, as a social activity, must be for the masses, just as power,
wealth and arms should be in the hands of the people.
their health and recreational benefit. It is mere stupidity to leave its benefits to certain individuals and teams who monopolize
these while the masses provide the facilities and pay the ex-
penses for the establishment of public sports. The thousands
who crowd stadiums to view, applaud and laugh are foolish
people who have failed to carry out the activity themselves.
They line up lethargically in the stands of the sports grounds,
and applaud those heroes who wrest from them the initiative,
dominate the field and control the sport and, in so doing, ex-
ploit the facilities that the masses provide. Originally, the public
grandstands were designed to demarcate the masses from the
playing fields and grounds; to prevent the masses from having
access to the playing fields. When the masses march and play
sport in the centre of playing fields and open spaces, stadiums
will be vacant and become redundant. This will take place when
the masses become aware of the fact; that sport is a public activ-
ity which must be practised rather than watched. This is more
reasonable as an alternative than the present costum of a help-
less apathetic majority that merely watches.
warmth. It is unlikely that crowds will enter a restaurant just
to look at a person or a group of people eat. It is also unlikely
that they will let a person or a group or people enjoy warmth or
ventilation on their behalf. It is equally illogical for the society
to allow an individual or a team to monopolize sports while the
society as a whole pays the costs of such a monopoly for the
exclusive benefit of one person or team. In the same way, people
should not allow an individual or a group, whether it is a party,
class, sect, tribe or parliament, to replace them in deciding their
destiny and in defining their needs.
Striving for aesthetics and beauty is a noble goal that all cultures respect
Oops I misread, you weren't replying to an argument, you were replying to a critique of your unfounded statement, which requires an argument
staying fit is good and i guess promoting a nice body figure is ideal but aesthetics and "beauty" are subjective.
Be honest, you used to be a fascist, right?
...
Not in terms of the human body
not an argument
is it tho
spooked weirdo
read a book (not the fucking greeks)
its like you can only communicate in memes
at least my memes belong to the 21st century, virgin.
So that's a yes?
not him but an special focus on aesthetics and beauty is indeed very fashy, you could simply stay healthy by doing exercise every now and then and eat good food, which is actually useful compared to beauty and aesthetics.
today i learned that the Andamanese do it for the aesthetic
>>>/liberalpol/
that is a component to having an aesthetic body
it can lead to them, i guess as long as you don't kill the people who don't look aesthetic when they are fit and healthy everything is ok mane
Get in the fuggen gym nerd
penises are bourgeois, tranny rights NAOW!
Tell me faggot, what use is bodybuilding?
t. samenigger who did the two tranny threads
Phil Greaves is that you?
Lol, as opposed to the literal FBI honeypot and 20 generals that hideous freak leaves unanchored every time he logs on?
rent free
Are videogames and movies bourgeois?
What use is playing games or reading an entertaining book or becoming skilled in certain art or engaging in a hunting trip? Socialism give us the ability to improve ourselves and engage in such activities of leisure. To become the complete and absolute pinnacle of our possible potential selfs.
Healthy exercise=/=body building.
I don't give a fuck if someone wants to buff himself up because of his insecurities. If it helps him, then sure, go ahead. Just don't pretend there's anything inherently positive about it.
amazing future of not paying rent
I don't say this often, but you may be actually projecting here. Just because someone wants to improve themselves in an area doesn't automatically make them insecure, it just means they wish to improve or perfect themselves in an area.
gotta ask why they'd pick that area instead of something more useful or interesting
there are some legitimate reasons but nobody on this site is gonna meet them
Okay, and you say "improving", and I ask for the fifth time, WHAT IF THE BENEFIT OF BODYBUILDING?
why wouldn't you
Sports is the most collective thing ever. Builds up the Community.
Lenin said that even under Communism everyone wouldn't be in one giant nation so there's nothing wrong with competition.
...
Better bloodflow, less stress on heart, better protection of organs, stronger bones, more support on bones form muscles. You are asking "What is the benefit of an activity that makes the body healthier and can give a person more healthy years in their life? " and the answer is self evident.
Not him, but it is aesthetically pleasing. What's the benefit of being a chess master or baduk pro? Why can't we do something simply for the joy it brings us?
Body builders experience a variety of health issues that they wouldn't be experiencing if they were exercising for health reasons, not for aesthetics.
Fag.
Never did I say you shouldn't do it if it brings you joy. I actually said
subjective
a reasonable question, but more immediately defensible on the grounds of being an intellectual pursuit.
it doesn't seem like a reasonable comparison. bodybuilding is specifically an aesthetic thing. it's not like weightlifting, or running, or whatever in general. being a chess master is more comparable to being able to lift a certain weight effortlessly, rather than pursuing a specific aesthetic preference. bodybuilding is more comparable to fashion than to competitive sport.
I have to ask you what makes something more "legitimate" in your eyes? A person could enjoy a game or a similar hobby and become extremely proficent in it, even though such things will never be of actual real life use besides sating his own desires and fulfilling his own sense personal fulfillment/enjoyment. There may also be others who appreciate such things and take personal enjoyment in their own appreciation of such things, maybe feeling inspired to do such things themselves. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "legitimate", because to say such things like bodybuilding is illegitimate would by extension make all other art forms and activities illegitimate.
Same "benefit" one gains from any other hobby, artform, or sport, with bodybuilding fulfilling all three. It is also a hobby and artform which keeps one in good health, in the same way dance is both an artform and benefical to ones health. Would you restict dance and gymnastics as well? No one in daily life "needs" to partake in either, but there are those who enjoy the activity of a tango or a properly executed flip.
But then what differentiates bodybuilding from an art? It is simply in this case that the artist has decided that their own body will be the canvas or clay upon which they form an aesthetic shape to their pleasing. And if there are those Connoisseurs who wish to judge such art, who are we to stop them? We hold art competitions, so why not those of the art of the body?
Okay so we agree, it's a useless hobby and there's no reason why we should be talking about it.
cuz the human body is stinky, like america after 911
youtube.com
Football sucks
I suppose all art is useless to you then by extension.
Because this is the sport thread
This conversation started after some user stated that bodybuilding was "the most useless shit anyone can ever do" in response to another user. I'll admit it was a sidetrack, but this discussion was primarily about the validity of bodybuilding. Also, the line between sport and art is admittedly pretty vauge. For example, dance and figure skating is considered a sport but at the same time it is clearly also an art.
What?
doping to FUCK, what part of that is not clear?
Dishonest. This started with a guy saying
I was not talking to that guy though, I was talking to the user who said bodybuilding was useless. The discussion was about the validity of bodybuilding. If it was about the user who said bodybuilding should be encouraged, the discussion would have been about "Should bodybuilding be encouraged?". Instead this conversation was about "Is bodybuilding legitimate and can it be defined as "improving"?" The discussion I'm involved in started with the latter user of the two, not the former.
I am the guy.
These two are obviously very closely related. If something is an improvement then it should be encouraged. Body building has no benefits over proper exercise apart from some fascist faggots having something to gawk at. Is it "legitimate"? I have no idea what that means. It's useless.
It's not useless if someone get's some joy out of it.
Only pro-sports are.
Just like pro-gaming.
No. Private ownership of sports teams and the exploitation of them for profit is bourgeois. The massive advertising and merchandising machines of the NFL, NBA, NHL, etc. are bourgeois.
Team sports predate capitalism and the bizarre complex of ownership and sponsorship that currently exists is only holding them back from being truly great.
I'm a pretty big hockey fan and the greatest hockey team of all time, CSKA Moscow, would not have existed without socialism.
side-note:Gaming is way more bourgeois than sports will ever be.
Also this thread is stupid and I'm just shitposting at this point
...
Guess strangling you is useful