Some Thoughts on Hooliganism

In the 1980s, Margaret Thatcher used hooliganism incidents as evidence of her belief - and to service her political agenda - that modern times were witnessing the moral degradation of the United Kingdom and that real life "A Clockwork Orange" gangs of amoral youths were literal wolves at the door of civilized society. Given some of the high profile hooligan incidents European - and in particular English   - soccer experienced in those years, it's understandable how one might adhere to this narrative.

However, if hooliganism in sport is to be relied upon as the barometer for societal degradation, then we hit rock bottom years ago...like thousands of years ago. As long as there have been spectator sports, there has been violence among spectators at sporting events. Part of the reason we love sport is the sense of identity and tribalism that comes from supporting a team, its culture, and its history with a boisterous rabble that has, even momentarily, become comprised of your closest friends. It's like mini-nationalism, and whereas the majority of any given country's citizens only want peace, the armies and invasions and wars that arise from nationalistic fervor are present in sport as well.

The interesting thing about hooliganism is that hooligans don't define themselves as such. Authorities and governing bodies classify these groups and individuals as drunken, ill-behaved buffoons with nihilism their only motivation, but hooligans themselves would more than likely define their actions and motivations in the language of nationalism.

It stands to reason, therefore, that any serious discussion regarding hooliganism in sport would seek to identify the actions and motivations of hooligan groups from the perspective of said groups rather than rely on the same old narrative of block-headed drunks destroying things for destruction's sake.