My vote is golf for the former, and wrestling for the latter

  • CyborgMarx [any, any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Golf is most reactionary in terms of real world effects and the damage it causes to environment and municipal layout

    “Sport” Hunting is most reactionary in terms of ethos and aesthetics

    Soccer is the most proletarian just by reality of numbers

    • la_tasalana_intissari_mata [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      10 months ago

      Soccer is the most proletarian just by reality of numbers

      Another important part of football is how simple it is and how little it takes, you go to any poor village in an African country and you will see kids with a ball kicking it to 2 rocks that represent a goal post, sometimes there’s no ball sometimes it’s just a bottle.

    • someone [comrade/them, they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      10 months ago

      Sometimes I wonder if the most effective leadership-decapitation military strike possible on the United States would actually be a simultaneous bombing (genuinely hypothetically, I am NOT advocating for adventurism) of the top 100 most expensive country clubs at 3pm on a sunny summer Friday.

      • CyborgMarx [any, any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        10 months ago

        It would have a noticeable effect, but Golf Courses are so disgustedly bloated and sprawling that even heavy air strikes would have a high chance of missing without real time spotter intelligence (in a Tom Clancy novel of course)

  • Carl [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Frisbee golf is like golf but with all of the reactionary elements stripped away. Just set up baskets in any given nature area and play, foliage is a feature not a bug.

    Conversely American Football is like rugby but with a whole host of reactionary elements tacked on. It’s the sport with the highest commercials per minute for a reason.

  • Gosplan14_the_Third [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    10 months ago

    Motorsports are the most reactionary even if just because of the high cost of even participating. Alternatively, golf, I suppose.

    Football (soccer) is by far the most proletarian, even if commercialization has been very successful in the last 25 years.

  • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    10 months ago

    Most reactionary is definitely polo, most proletarian is i think football but all professional leagues needs to be burned and remains reeducated (that goes for all big money sports though).

  • GnastyGnuts [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    10 months ago

    MMA has to at least get a mention for most reactionary sport because of its current real-world intersection with the Trump admin, Saudi sports-washing, Ramzan Kadyrov, etc. Although obviously combat sports historically have a strong prole-streak, at least among the fighters themselves.

    Otherwise most reactionary is probably e-sports (because gamers suck) or racing (with cars), since it seems to have a high concentration of rich people and inbred european royals.

    Most proletarian is probably soccer, running, and maybe bocce for being so accessible.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      you can imagine people whacking things around the land with a stick prior to the enclosure of the common land and subsequently formal development of golf.

      Not really? Having acres of land growing an unproductive crop like grass is immensely wasteful, and without being able to mow the grass that sport seems basically impossible anyway since animals aren’t going to keep the grass short enough for golf and they’ll shit all over. It certainly couldn’t be more than a novelty, only possible under very specific circumstances.

      • Carl [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        10 months ago

        People have been playing games similar to modern golf since the iron age. The modern version uses a lot of landscaping because they’re trying to recreate the golf that was played in Scotland in the middle ages, instead of adapting the sport to local conditions.

        That’s why frisbee golf is the modern proletarian take on the sport. No landscaping necessary, just put up some baskets in any given park and play.

    • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      The obvious answer is that sports are generally not characterisable as capitalist or proletarian on their own - you can imagine people whacking things around the land with a stick prior to the enclosure of the common land and subsequently formal development of golf.

      Counterexample: Foxhunting where inbred Anglo nobles on horseback follow a bunch of dogs tearing a fox to shreds will always be reactionary.

  • Chana [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    10 months ago

    Riding bikes is most proletarian. Poor people transportation to work and requires industrialization, made of metal tubes and chains.

    Most reactionary is modern golf. It is absurdly expensive on an ongoing basis and is all about weird Victorian ideas of landscaping and maintaining separation from the lower classes via literal gatekeepers.

    • Palacegalleryratio [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      10 months ago

      Hmm, not sure about bikes. Sure as a mode of cheap transport they’re very proletarian, but as a sport - it’s a rich man’s game - competitive road bikes cost (tens of) thousands.

      • Chana [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s true that at the top they spend a ton of money for slight improvements. There’s even a big group that tries to copy them, as if a fifth placer in a local race would’ve won if only their bike was $5k of carbon fiber.

        But that is almost never necessary. When starting out, a $100 used (not stolen) bike will do you well for years. Nerds with $3k bikes and full lycra get passed by folks in shorts and a band t-shirt on old cheap mountain bikes. If a person gets competitive, getting a more appropriate bike (road bike for road riding, for example), it might jump up to a $500 used (not stolen) cost. Folks on 80s steel bikes still beat $3k bike nerds in local competitions.

        Plus just like in many other sports, there are all kinds of variations, including levels of competitiveness. Like with soccer, mentioned throughout this thread, most people are playing for fun and with pickup games. They have to buy a ball to get started ($10-$50). Once they start getting competitive or just more invested, now they need socks ($10), shin guards ($80), shorts ($15), and shoes ($100+). They’ll need that kit for pickup games that are slightly more competitive. Go up a level (on a team in a league) and now they want better shoes ($200) and new shinguards for their preference ($80) and they have to buy a jersey or shirt and maybe even new socks ($50-100). They have to get a gym bag for carrying their stuff to and from events and practice ($20). If they move up to better teams etc etc they will end up getting a whole new iteration of kit and get into personal optimization and travel expenses, etc etc.

        But a person can also just play pickup games or go back to them. Or play futsol for fun. Or juggle in their own yard or street. Most people that ride bikes, even those who want to go fast and occasionally race, are mostly just having fun rides of various kinds that don’t take any input outside of routine maintenance and wearing padded clothing for long rides.

        Cycling has a bigger opportunity for a person to obsess over an expensive material object for sure, though, no doubt. But most expensive bikes, for most people, are really about a consumption hobby more than the activity. Many of the expensive ones you’ll see in the street are in no way race-optimized. They are big hunks of steel or titanium with parts milled in the imperial core in batches of 10-20, purchased for aesthetics. They could have spent $300 on an older bike with better steel and fixed it up, but they are instead in a consumerist subculture where they got a brand new, lower quality frame for $800 on its own because it says “soma” on the side. A better new frame from China costs $200-300. And all of these bikes… they just look like normal bikes. Maybe one is orange and the other is blue. But a person with extra cash looking for a consumerist hobby will find options like thst $800 ho-hum frame and obsess over it.