As I, and many other brave souls, remain neutral in the midst of ICE raids, issues with Israel, and other foreign and domestic problems, it is clear that people have lost the ability to think critically and produce a solid argument. To fix this blazing issue, I propose that we all collectively agree to treat politics as we would sports. Any one man who has aggressively talked basketball with his friends knows how difficult methodically crafting a sound and flawless argument is, especially when the group of people involved don’t exactly know what they are talking about. So, people should apply the same logic and process when it comes to politics, because it can lead to more effective conversation on foreign policy and domestic issues.
Check the Box Score (i.e. Do Some Form of Research)
This is a big one, because not only when talking sports and politics do people make outlandish claims, but they rely solely on their own intuition rather than facts, truths, and important details. Now, don’t get me wrong: I’m all for a hot take or a questionable solution. The problem is, there needs to be some basis of an argument or proof in order for me to support it. For example, if I make the claim that Kevin Durant is a better player than LeBron James, I can at least bring up shooting percentages (a real, undeniable stat) and have some sort of grounds to build an argument. On the other hand, if I try to claim that Shai Gilgeous-Alexander is a better player than Michael Jordan off the basis that his Instagram captions are catchier (an opinionated, irrelevant stat), I probably don’t have much of an argument to begin with. So yes, before arguing with someone on topics that handle the future of our nation and our world, maybe get on the internet and learn something about these things called “government” and “taxes.”
Require Production, Don’t Stay Stubborn
Here’s another one. When I’m watching a basketball game, there are those players that I just inherently like and don’t like, and there’s nothing I can do about it in the moment (for example, I can’t stand LaMelo Ball, despite having no reason for it). Furthermore, I am a huge Kevin Durant fan, and will defend him to my death. However, if Kevin Durant makes a mistake (game-losing miss, turnover, bad shooting night), I am just as ready to admit his fault. I don’t bother defending him just because I like him, I require production. If the production doesn’t match expectations, I can admit that. In contrast, if a player I don’t like (LaMelo Ball) does something impressive, I don’t fail to acknowledge his success. This goes the same way for politics. Just because I like one candidate doesn’t mean everything he says or does or believes is right. Just because I don’t like one candidate doesn’t make every statement of his inherently wrong or misguided. It’s quite simple. Remain open minded and require your candidate or solution to bring about something beneficial.
Review Film, Not Highlight Reels
Anybody can take 10-15 clips of a NBA player hitting a shot and make it look like they’re the best shooter of all time. They can cut the clip to include only the shot and ignore everything that happened in the possession before the shot. This is heavily misleading; people can frame their own argument any way they want. In a similar way, people can take 10-15 clips of an NBA player turning the ball over, missing a shot, or playing bad defense. It’s the same thing that English students do when analyzing a passage of The Great Gatsby. And, in case you were uneducated, this is what most news outlets do to push the agenda they want. So, dig deeper. Look for everything you can find, not just the first link that shows up when you google “Israel vs Palestine.” In doing so, you’ll likely get a more complete image of the story, and you can even begin to do something called “thinking for yourself.” And please, for the love of everything, don’t use TikTok as your primary source (not even for basketball).
Context Matters, in Quotes and in Actions
On February 4th, 2022, the Brooklyn Nets lost a game against the Utah Jazz 125 to 102. In the midst of that, the benchwarmer Cam Thomas scored 30 points in 31 minutes. An impressive game that gets even more impressive if I don’t mention the fact that the Nets were down 34 at one point and Thomas’ minutes were in large margin spots, but less impressive with all those details. Meanwhile, Nikola Jokic’s December 16 performance of 20 points starts relatively unimpressive (for Jokic) but only gets more impressive the more context you add. The 14 rebounds, 13 assists, 1 point win, and two steals only add to the accomplishment. In other words, it’s important to add context. Otherwise, you end up praising performances or decisions that are less ideal than they initially appear. In the same way, require context for every bit of information you can find. Anybody can clip together a regular conversation and make it seem weird or inappropriate by choosing what to show and what not to show. Be aware and be careful of articles or events with no context.
Final Thoughts
So, there it is. Four amazing reasons why politics and sports aren’t so different or at least shouldn’t be. Now, yes, I’ll acknowledge the obvious greater importance of politics at least on a global scale. That being said, my thesis still stands that the exact process brought to argue sports can (and should) apply the same to politics. So, the next time you plan on debating your uniformed friend on foreign policy and whatnot, perhaps give this method a chance, and see what happens.