[dragonwriter]

> I don't see that as the proximate cause of most conflicts throughout history.

No one said it was the proximate cause of most conflicts throughout history. Nor have conflicts in general stopped since sports became popular, nor were conflicts in general part of the discussion.

What was asserted upthread was that sports was an outlet that prevented "small-scale skirmishes". I simply pointed out that, in fact, professional sports are -- and this is true globally -- well-known as focuses of small-scale skirmishes and social violence, rather than an outlet which prevents them.

[ansible]

Ah, are you talking about modern-day football hooligans?

When I say "small-scale skirmishes", I'm talking about relatively small border conflicts and the like that last less than a year and kill tens to hundreds of people. As opposed to regional or national conflicts where the casualties get into the thousands or much higher.

[ZenoArrow]

Are you talking about football in the American sense or to describe soccer?

I can't speak for the rest of the world, but in the UK football hooligans are a dying breed. There have been a few Hollywood films made about UK football hooligans, but it's more about the situation at it was in the 70's/80's.

I'm not an expert on it, but it strikes me it was born out of boredom. You'd travel to an away match, see some goalless draw, and had wasted your weekend. The scrap may have started as some sort of consolation prize. Anyway, now the games are televised, prices are more expensive and the audience has become broader so the environment that bred it has gone. Some firms still have a reputation, but it's increasingly irrelevant.

I wonder what fuels the hooliganism where you are.

[ansible]

Are you talking about football in the American sense or to describe soccer?

No, I was asking if dragonwriter was referring to football (soccer) hooligans from the UK or other countries. Argentina guys in particular seem to get pretty rowdy, and there have been murders too.

But there isn't any sort of hooliganism where I am, I was just trying to figure out what dragonwriter was talking about with regards to pro sports being the focus of conflict. Which I don't see being anywhere close to the level of conflict (like actual war) that I was talking about.

[ZenoArrow]

Okay then, in that case I'd say sports aren't the focus for conflict, they're a convenient excuse for it. Fighting is always its own domain, other surrounding factors are just window dressing.

That's my opinion anyhow.

[dragonwriter]

> When I say "small-scale skirmishes", I'm talking about relatively small border conflicts and the like that last less than a year and kill tens to hundreds of people.

Football skirmishes that kill people on that order aren't unheard of, and I know of no evidence even suggesting that the popularity of professional sports even correlates with (much less causes) a reduction the kind of small-scale skirmishes you discuss (even before considering whether the degree of such effect is offset by violence directly associated with sport.)