Satirical Weekly Review: Games, Sets and War: Wimbledon Excludes Russian Tennis Players from Tournament

This week’s insight you do not need to hire a market research institute for this is: Open letters are more of a vogue than ever before. Then there is the question: Is not Fynn Kliemann, the sweet, slightly spoiled sense influencer, perhaps not quite down in the lower edge of her sweet surfer-boy image of a father Theresa who cares for nothing but charity? And then, of course, the intellectual balancing act of the hypocritical fighters of the libertarian morass of the dilemma: Should Russian tennis professionals be excluded from the Wimbledon tournament? As you can see, this is going to be a quick review. Monothematic was yesterday. This week has been a cornucopia of absurdities. And that does not even include Sahra Wagenknecht.

But first and foremost: the organizers of what is probably the most famous tennis event in the world, the Wimbledon tournament, have decided, due to Russia’s progressive violations of international law, that Russian athletes are not allowed on the sacred English lawn in London. elite tournament this year.

It is now the case that very few Russian tennis professionals make military decisions in the Russian government at the same time or belong to Putin’s closest advisory circle in war tactical strategy meetings. The decision therefore immediately led to violent expressions of indignation across all meaningful communication camps.

From the constantly outraged AfD catalysts, who traditionally feel more comfortable on Russian soil than on democratic soil, to a bunch of professional colleagues like Novak Djokovic or Rafael Nadal, to the bubble-relevant explanations from the self-improvement department. Suddenly everyone agreed: Except for the poor Russian tennis pros, yes, of course, it’s going too far.

The single tennis professional from Russia, of course, did not order the war against Ukraine, nor did he intend to make his mark on the Feltball festival with a “Putin Forever” jersey on the Wimbledon green. Nevertheless, I believe that there is no alternative to exclusion. The argument that athletes can not give up and are now prevented from doing their work for no reason can hardly be surpassed in the form of hypocrisy.

Where was the call for job separation and nationality when FIFA excluded Russian football professionals from the 2022 World Cup? Some part-time debt service experts say a football team represents a country, but a tennis player does not. Individual destinies before team destinies. Aha. So a football team does not consist of 23 young professional athletes?

By the way: Wimbledon takes place every year, a World Cup only every four years. Mathematically, the tennis pro may be back in twelve months. Football professional in four years at the earliest. Well, perhaps this skewed evaluation selection also plays a role in the World Cup taking place in Qatar and one sometimes wishes that the German national team, which in a fit of marketing brilliance now only acts as “The Team”, would refrain from participating. .

But forget it: if the self-appointed public representatives of the public discourse in their liberal-hysterical euphoria of ingenuity have decided that there are differences: free. However, you should also prepare an argument if someone ever asks you why you think it’s unfair that high paid tennis millionaires should sit out in a tournament just because their country slaughters civilians and Europe threatens nuclear war while they do not care with the millions of unpopular Russians who have completely lost their jobs and are facing economic ruin due to Western reactions to the war.

When virtually all global players like Starbucks, McDonald’s or Daimler stopped doing business in Russia and closed their stores, people who were at least as little to blame for the war in Ukraine as Russian tennis professionals lost their jobs. Except that they do not have a comfortable pillow to compensate for their job loss. Why do you feel sorry for millionaires but not ordinary people?

Duchess Kate as a propaganda catalyst

The exclusion of Russian individual athletes from tournaments such as Wimbledon also has several political levels, which surprisingly do not play a role in the immediate kneeling reception of the gooders from Twitter’s VIP world balcony. Ironically, with the discourse candidates, who otherwise take pride in illuminating a process from absolutely all sides.

As it is: Many connoisseurs of the Russian sports system say unequivocally: If one does not conform to the regime in Russia, one can under no circumstances succeed in sports, just like in the GDR. For grants and opportunities to practice your sport, show your loyalty to the government to the tips of your hair.

If, unexpectedly, no Russian professionals are present, a few Russians who have been brainwashed by Putin’s media synchronization may ask themselves if all that Putin is doing in Ukraine is not so amazing and fair. Moreover, Putin and his propaganda industry would immediately reinterpret the successes of Russian tennis professionals at Wimbledon as a victory against the hated West and as a symbol of the Russian system’s superiority over evil capitalism. Culminating with the communicative meltdown of image-driven public perception, when Duchess Kate was to hand over the trophy to a Russian athlete last Sunday in front of hundreds of millions of TV viewers. What would such images say to the already sufficiently manipulated Russian citizens?

Open letters, open questions

What Alice Schwarzer would say to them now seems clear: Putin is only still at war with Ukraine because the Ukrainian government’s warriors have still not made themselves capitulate. Even the violent reactions to her open letter did not make Putin’s best propaganda power on German soil rethink, but rather radicalize it. Schwarzer followed up in some memorable interviews that generations of behavioral scientists and historians will enjoy. Culminating in a phrase that can hardly be surpassed in terms of fact-immune perpetrator-victim-conversion ideology: “I regret that Volodymyr Zelensky does not stop provoking”.

Yes, that’s how I looked too. Imagine such an argument among the Allies who liberated Europe in 1945. Despite historical responsibility, which is greater in Germany than in other EU and NATO countries, Schwarzer ultimately mocks: How dare the President of Ukraine not have given up and surrendered a long time ago. If wars could be won through unrealistic aggressor polemics, Alice Schwarzer would have secured world peace.

Now, also because I had to experience “Anne Will” and a Harald Welzer, while writing the lines for this text, which apparently fell into a pot of arrogance potion as a child, I wrote myself so much in rage that I for the third topic is no longer a place. Maybe I’ll pick up Fynn Kliemann, Robin Hood of medical masks, again next week. Before then, he must have learned that Vietnam is not a city in Portugal after all. In this sense: Fine Kliemann.

After criticizing the open letter co-signed by Alice Schwarzer, the feminist again commented on the war in Ukraine and criticized Ukrainian President Selensky. According to Schwarzer, this “would not stop provoking”. (Photo credits: picture alliance / Henning Kaiser / dpa | Henning Kaiser)

Leave a Comment