The serious answer is that, in the unlikely event that Australia did manage that sort of perpetual hegemony you (might) get an arms race effect where everyone gets better but Australia remains the best.
And to an extant that’s what happened in the 80’s and 90’s where after two or more decades of being beaten by Australia, England and South Africa did something about it. This in turn has provoked what I hope is a strategic response from Australia to up their own game (although I fear that it might be a combination of lesser, more temporary effects including just random variations in luck().
There remains the competition for second place and all the other (more or less) meaningful bi-lateral competitions.
There is also the prestige and excitement of taking part. Again, a real world example is the soccer World Cup. Costa Rica aren’t going to win it. They have no chance – but it’s just great to be taking part in one of the world’s greatest events. And they get to play three former winners of the World Cup in their group matches.
The final serious point is that intention is not the same as attainment. The positive benefits that come from genuinely intending and attempting to a hegemonistic position are more important and more certain than the benefits to be had from achieving such a position. The point is to try, not necessarily to succeed. The process is more important than the outcome.
The process yields mass involvement in intra and inter community activities and the participation in some form of civic society. It promotes equality of opportunity. It gathers people round a benign national foundation myth (We’re the human being who are best at cricket because we work bloody hard at it. Rather than we are the only real human beings because of !Reasons.) And so on.
On a more appropriately frivolous note.
Did anyone stop fighting the Spartans? What is the only human response to the statement that Quintus makes in the first act of Gladiator?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2013-12-10 03:38 pm (UTC)And to an extant that’s what happened in the 80’s and 90’s where after two or more decades of being beaten by Australia, England and South Africa did something about it. This in turn has provoked what I hope is a strategic response from Australia to up their own game (although I fear that it might be a combination of lesser, more temporary effects including just random variations in luck().
There remains the competition for second place and all the other (more or less) meaningful bi-lateral competitions.
There is also the prestige and excitement of taking part. Again, a real world example is the soccer World Cup. Costa Rica aren’t going to win it. They have no chance – but it’s just great to be taking part in one of the world’s greatest events. And they get to play three former winners of the World Cup in their group matches.
The final serious point is that intention is not the same as attainment. The positive benefits that come from genuinely intending and attempting to a hegemonistic position are more important and more certain than the benefits to be had from achieving such a position. The point is to try, not necessarily to succeed. The process is more important than the outcome.
The process yields mass involvement in intra and inter community activities and the participation in some form of civic society. It promotes equality of opportunity. It gathers people round a benign national foundation myth (We’re the human being who are best at cricket because we work bloody hard at it. Rather than we are the only real human beings because of !Reasons.) And so on.
On a more appropriately frivolous note.
Did anyone stop fighting the Spartans? What is the only human response to the statement that Quintus makes in the first act of Gladiator?
http://www.doublecoveragefootball.com/2013/11/quintus-movement.html
Finally, I think this is an aphorism of Sun Tzu, the surest victory is to make the enemy give up.