The Big Scrum

Here are some thoughts I had while reading The Big Scrum, How Teddy Roosevelt saved football by John J. Miller.

This book I thought was more about the history of football rather than how Roosevelt saved the game.
The book starts out describing the early game of football.  The author quotes several accounts from the early Renaissance period that describe a game that was called "football."  The early accounts called it "football" because the ball was actually kicked with the feet, and the touching of the ball with the hands was against the rules.  The game then was vastly different then the one we now know.

The author also chronicles the life of Theodore Roosevelt as well.  It is well known to historians that Teddy was a sickly child, suffering from frequent asthma attacks.  But with hard work, and a lot of excercise, Teddy overcame the illnesses that often beset him as a child. 

The author also describes a book written in England by Thomas Hughes called Tom Brown's School days.  The book is about a boy named Tom.  Tom is small for his age, and he becomes an easy target for bullies at school.  So Tom learns to fist fight.  Many adults are appalled at the violence of these fights, but Tom doesn't care what the adults say.  The author writes these words: "From the cradle tot he grave, fighting, rightly understood, is the buisness, the real, highest, honestest business of every son of man.  Every one who is worth his salt has his enemies, who must be beaten, be they evil thoughts and habits in himself or spiritual wickedness in hight places, or Russians, or Border-ruffians, or Bill, Tom or Harry, who will not let him live his life in quiet til he has thrashed them."

While Tom Brown's School days  is about fist fighting, it inspired Teddy Roosevelt and many others to realize that the health of their bodies is important.  Many of the great men of the world until the late 19th century were scholars, people who read books, wrote essays and thought great thoughts.  Until about this time athletics were frowned upon.

In England, a comentator called Tom Brown's School days an example of "Mascular Christianity."  The label comes from a novel written by Charles Kingsley, who wrote this statement: "A healthful and manful Christinity; one which does not exalt the feminine virtues to the exclesion of the masculine."  This phrase was made popular by Thomas Hughes. 

The movement of Mascular Christianity sought to combine Christian spirit with physical vigar.  Hughes and others understood that God gave us bodies for a reason; they were to be used to our pleasure, not abused and neglected.  Hughes inserted these ideas into Tom Brown's School days, which made them extremely popluar. 

So what does Mascular Christianity have to do with how Teddy Roosevelt saved football?  I was also wondering this.  When we understand what the motive was for people to play football we can thus better understand its' history.  When people realized that our bodies had a divine purpose, they began to excercise.  This movement not only helped the creation of football, it helped start professional baseball and other sports.

The first intercollegate football game played in the United States was played in 1869 between Rutgers and Princeton.   This game is vastly different than the one enjoyed by millions on the fall weedends.  The forward pass and running the ball were illegal, there were 25 players on each team, and the rules were not standardized.

So with this beginning, other colleges around America soon started to play football.  It gained in popularity with each passing year, and soon the game became so violent that many called for its total abolishment.  But not even deaths could keep Americans away from the games.  Soon, however the forces working to abolish football did succeed in a small measure, but banning it at several of the leading colleges:  Harvard, Columbia, and Princeton.

President Roosevelt was a huge supported of football.  He knew that something had to be done to phase out the violence of the the game.  So in 1905 he called Walter Camp, and other leading officers of the game to come and discuss what could be done. Nothing of note was accomplished at this meeting, but this first meeting led to other meetings where rules were standardized.  Soon these meeting led to the establishment of the National College Athletic Association, or the NCAA.  This became the governing body for all College Sports. 

It does not appear that President Theodore Roosevelt had much of an impact on saving the game of football.  But many of the people that were present at the first meeting at the White House swore that without that first meeting, football might not have survived the movement to abolish it.  Bill Reid, who coached Harvard for many years and was at the meeting wrote, "except for this chain of events there might now be no such thing as American football as we know it.  You asked me whether Teddy Roosevelt helped save the game.  I can tell you that he did."

I love this book!!  It helps me see what things were done in history that influence the way the people of today see the world.  Now millions of kids each year play the game.  We have all kinds of different sports now.  Now I understand the reasons people have for playing it.  I recommend that anyone who loves history read this book!

The Robe

Here are some thoughts from the book The Robe by Lloyd Douglas.  This is an excellent book, and a relatively easy book to finish.  The book is about the Roman soldier who gambled for Christ's robe at his Crucifixion, and won.

*"A brave soldier does not inevitably make a wise monarch."

I love this statement simply because of what it means.  It means that just because someone is an excellent general it does not make them a great choice for a ruler.  I don't think generals should become a ruler.  They already rule an army, why do most of them feel the need to control not only an army but also an entire country? 

I thought of George Washington when I read this.  He probably understood this statement.  He had no desire to be known as George the first.  He knew that a monarchy was not a good form of government.  Even though many of the leaders at the time wanted him to come and overthrow the government under the incredibly inept Articles of Confederation. 

*"No make can be asked to think highly of a man who has robbed him of his freedom."

In the story, this statement comes in a conversation between two slaves. The one who says this, Demetrius, is offered his freedom several times by his masters. But he refuses because he believes he can still be a help to his master, Marcellus.

I might also add the government.  America was founded on the principle of freedom.  That EVERYONE has unalienable rights: Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.  This statement is a summary of everything Americans hold dear. 

But unfortunately as time goes by, people grow complacent.  "There is an awful danger when the people become accustomed to tyranny.  If the people learn to accept small abuses, then larger ones will follow.  It is like a disease, crippling slowly, until the body is beyond repair."  I believe this to be happening with America.  It is very unfortunate, but it is happening, and people need to understand this.  We are paying much higher taxes than the people of the 1760.  But nobody does anything about it.  We have grown complacent.

Now, I do love the United States of America.  I just have little respect of the government that runs it.  My respect is hard to win.  I don't respect many of the highly regarded sports heroes of our time.  I do not admire Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Ben Roethlisberger, or Mark Cuban.  I don't think any of these people are moral, good people.  They are doing things they love; great!  I just don't respect them at all.

But I do respect people who have good, moral judgements.  I love Lloyd Douglas, the author of some of my favorite books.  I respect my dad and grandpa.  I respect George Washington.  These are the type of people that I believe our respect.

*The Jews hated the Romans, but what did they want?  Did they want to rule themselves, or were they just angry at the thought that someone made their decisions for them?  Did they really want their freedom?  What would they do with their freedom?

These series of questions were asked at the start of the book.  So I really wondered, What they did they really want?  They wanted the Romans gone.  Everyone knows that.  So what type of government did they want to replace the Romans with?  Did they want a monarchy?  Or a revert back to their earlier system of judges?  Israel's most celebrated figures at the time of Christ were King David and King Solomon.  So I would assume that they didn't want to go back to a system of judges.

If Israel had happened to get rid of the Romans they must replace it with something.  If they wanted to get rid of the Romans and replace them with a king, who would that be?  Would the people elected their leader, or would a Pharisee or member of the Sanhedrin take over?  All of these were questions I thought of when I read these questions.

Because, truly, we must have a government.  I don't think anarchy is a good idea because I know and understand human nature.  Humans are not capable of governing themselves in relation to others.  That much has been clear to anyone who understands history. 

These questions made me think of more recent events.  The Occupy Wall Street Movement.  Here we have good people, who are protesting what they believe is not right.  I'm glad we live in a country where protesting like that is possible.  From what I understand they are protesting corporate greed and government corruption.  I think they have a valid point.  But what are they offering in replacement? 

They obviously want the greed and corruption to stop, but what are they really doing?  They are just freezing their hind ends off.  They don't have a plan of action, other than just sitting there and protesting.  They aren't organizing into political groups, raising money for TV ads, or anything like that.  They want things to change for the better.  I do as well, but I know there are more effective ways to change our leaders, the public attitude, and policy. 

I think they best way to stop the corporate greed and government corruption is to elect good, honest men and women, who will not change suddenly once they are in office.  I believe many good people go into politics wanting to make a difference, but don't because they soon become exactly what they pledged not to be.

Also, part of my reason for starting this blog was to have people read my posts, and start thinking for themselves.  I don't believe people should necessarily agree with all of my ideas.  But I'm not trying to persuade people.  I am just trying to get people thinking, about possible solutions, about the right candidates for office.

Animal Farm

            The book Animal Farm by George Orwell is a very interesting book.  Orwell wrote the book during the Cold War, and he wrote it to show was communism is.  In the book the animals get rid of the humans on the farm.  The pigs take over control, and as first things are good, but as time wears on the condition for the other animals decline.  The pigs become extremely lazy, but the other animals had to do all of the work.  There is internal strife, and the humans keep trying to come back to the farm.  This book shows perfectly what happens in a communist society.

            I think that several lessons from Animal Farm.   It shows the progression of a communist government.  When a people become tired of their government, they normally overthrow the rulers.  Once that happens, the masses are looking for people to lead them.  If the ideas sound good, the people are normally willing to follow.  In the book, the pigs began to list the things that the animals stood for:  all animals are equal.  Here is list of their rules:

1.  Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy

2.  Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.

3.  No animal shall wear clothes.

4.  No animal shall sleep in a bed.

5.  No animal shall drink alcohol.

6.  No animal shall kill any other animal.

7.  All animals are equal.

            These things sounded really good for the animals.  One of the reasons they got rid of the humans was because they abused and often forgot to feed them.  The rules stated many of the things that the animals had seen the humans do. 

            But what sounded good soon got out of hand.  The pigs could read and write, so they took control of the animals.  They began to direct the other animals in their work.  They took the best of everything.  At first, there was an animal counsel where all the animals could help the pigs plan.  These soon ended, and the pigs directed the other animals. 

            This always happens in a fascist or communist government.  At first the people are willing to follow, so the leaders take advantage.  Under a communist government, everything is government owned.  Everyone was supposed to do their part for the whole people.  Everyone is supposed to work as hard as they can, and everyone will eat.  But invariably, some people begin to be lazy.  They begin to direct, but not actually do any work.  These are the people who lead the masses.

            During the course of the story, the puppies are taken from the dogs.  The dogs don't know where their pups have gone, but the pigs assure them they are well.  When two pigs disagree with each other over a windmill, one of the pigs tells the puppies to kill the other pig.  From then on, the puppies became the pigs bodyguards.  Whenever an animal disagreed with the pigs, the dogs were sent to that animal, and that animal was never heard from again. 

            This also happens in real communist societies.  All world leaders know that if you can teach the young, it is easy to maintain power.  They try to control the childrens' education, to teach them what the leaders want them to know.  If this happens, the kids will grow up believing whatever they are taught.  When Stalin and Hitler came to power, the ordered the burning of many books, which are used to communicate knowledge.  So this is like the dogs, because they were taken from their mothers, but taught by the pigs.

            So for a while the pigs fun unopposed.  Then some of the animals begin to notice that the pigs are abusing their power.  They are getting fat, drinking the farmer's whiskey, and discontent grows.  The pigs send their guard dogs whenever they hear anything.  Many animals begin to disappear.  This breeds fear among the animals.

            Once the communist government is set up, it might appear to be nice.  Maybe it won't to some people.  But the people undoubtedly begin to notice what is happening to the rulers.  They do things that the ordinary people can't do.  If they are questioned or opposed, they send in secret police to silence the opposition.  Communist governments make people fear them, because they cannot control the otherwise.

            The biggest real life example of a communist government in the world is Russia.  They were a communist country from about 1919 to 1991.  This is a long time.  When Lenin first came to power, he began to send the educated people and political opponents to Siberia.  Stalin continued this policy.  They just eliminated all opposition within the country.  They say good things, but good things are never done.  The leaders abuse their powers, and they grow rich while the country grows poor. 

            It is a common belief that under communism equality would be practiced.  This is a lie.  The communist ideals state that the government owns everything, and that everyone would be equal.  But in reality this does not work.  Some people exalt themselves as leaders, and as leaders they do things that they say the people can't do.

            While communism sounds good to many people.  If they have studied communism at all, they would realize that while the ideals are good, the results are not.  At first, the communists proclaim many high sounding ideas.  These are good.  But absolute power corrupts absolutely.  The leaders must be held accountable, as in a republic or democracy.

People

            The world is filled with all kinds of people.  Some have different religions, skin colors, or different physical looks.  Most people in the world tend to place everyone of the same color, nationality, or looks in a general group.  When we do this, we normally have a view of them, whether it is accurate or not.  Sometimes we can be extremely mean to someone, just because they are different.  The best advice I have ever been given is to give people the benefit of the doubt.  To often we don't.

            The book Black like Me is a story about a man who is white, who dyes his skin black.  The book is placed in the 1960's.  This was the height of the Civil Rights Movement for blacks.  For centuries, blacks had been treated as second-class citizens.  They had been free since the Civil War ended, but they were not allowed to vote, they were forced to accept segregation.  They lived in poverty, with little chances for advancement.  They endured all of this because of the color of his skin. 

            Just as the white people judged the blacks solely based on skin color, the people of today still label people.  We label them based on religion, race, and their looks.  I don't believe that all judging is wrong.  But when we label an individual based on these things, it is wrong.  But if I know a black person, and do not like them, that is not wrong.  It is wrong to place a stereotype on people. 

            I know I sometimes make generalizations about people.  There are a lot of people of Latin America ancestry that go to the local high school.  I often make comments about them, such as, “Why do they come to America if they won't leave English?”  I hardly ever hear them speak English, which is the official language of the US.  I don't really like the people I term as “Mexicans.”  I don't personally know any of them, so I guess I am in the wrong.  I need to give them the benefit of the doubt.

            After the Civil War, blacks were termed as dumb.  The whites thought that blacks were inferior to the whites.  So they placed a stereotype on all blacks.  It didn't matter how smart a black was, he was never given a chance.  The whites did not take the time to get to know any blacks, because of the stereotype. 

            In modern America, if a person is Muslim, we tend to think of them as a terrorist.  We don't know that, but that is what we associate them with.  We hear a lot on the news of how Muslims from the Middle East are terrorists.  There are many good Muslims.  We just need to take the time to get to know them.

            I do not believe that we label people based on the race or religion.  I believe we label them with their looks.  I know I label people all the time at school.  There are a lot of boys who often have hair longer than girls.  They wear black all the time, and they just look empty.  I label these kids as druggies.   This may or may not be true.  I don't know that for a fact.  But they drink energy drinks, listen to loud music, and look like kids I don't want to be around.  So I believe this kind of labeling to be OK.  I should not say these kids are bad, because I don't know that.  I should just judge whether I want to be around them or not.

            I label the girls who wear tight or revealing clothing as sluts.  I don't want to hang around them.  They show to much of their bodies.  They hang around bad kids, and I don't want to hang around them.  I label all of the big, strong kids as jocks.  They are the ones who play football or basketball.  They normally are very stuck up, and think they are better than other people.  But I have gotten to know many of these kids.  They are often really good kids.  I just make the mistake of labeling them before I get to know them. 

            So a lot of the labeling I do at school is about the kinds of people somebody is.  But I could be totally wrong.  A kid who dresses a certain way is not always good or bad.  Some of the girls who dress slothfully are really nice.  They are fun people to be around.  The jocks are normally very  nice people.  They just are good at sports, which causes a lot of people to look up to them.

            Often times people have bad posture.  I know I sometimes slouch when I am sitting.  The ones who are always sloched tend to be the kids who don't have friends.  I guess people think they are dumb or something.  I know a kid who slouches all the time when standing, but he is an awesome kid.  I try very hard not to label such kids, because my posture is not the best

            I have noticed that if I really try to get to know someone, my usual impressions of them changes.  Society as a whole is used to judging people by their first apparent.  It drives me crazy when watching a movie with friends, and an attractive woman is on the screen, and all my friends are “I want to marry her.”  I hate this because there are few women who are actually virtuous people.  I realize I am judging by doing this, but if a woman is on a movie nowadays, she is probably not virtuous.  It drives me crazy, but I do it too.  I believe it is human nature to judge people.  I don't think judging people is wrong.  We should just strive to get to know that person.