Doping ‘legalisers’ are really just far left collectivists?
I’ve written before (also this) about the recent rise in academics and public intellectuals (some who have no interest in sport) giving their queasy support to legalising all forms of drugs in sports. A few years ago I also wrote this about the decrease in individualists in football.
Individual superiority, earned or otherwise presents a theoretical problem to many socialists. Someone like Peter Singer, openly disinterested in sports, coming out with pieces on why we should legalise drugs in sport “to make it fairer, more equal”, gives an insight into the thinking.
Of course any sane and rational person would quickly understand legalising drugs in sport wouldn’t make it “fairer” but would create an ugly hell hole of depravity, massive and serious health and economics issues, and a crisis in youth and amateur sport. But these matters of fact are of no interest to the moralists in their socialist and collectivist theories.
All that matters to them, is opposing what they see as an oppressive, unequal system where some people are better than others. This is abhorrent to a collectivist and must be destroyed at any cost.
To a collectivist, people have no real right to be born better at something than everyone else. The fact that many successful sportspeople actually overcome significant personal obstacles and put huge amounts of effort to rise to the top — is irrelevant — they don’t value that. Because it means some people missed out.
Obviously, they have no real answers to the horrors of individual success people enjoy watching, that they endure to witness in the sports world. But they’ve begun to latch on to the doping issue, in some vague hopeless hope this is an alternative to the horrific Randian heroes that sport produces.
