The best sport in the world

I would like to dedicate my last blog to my favourite sport: ice hockey. The internationally most popular sport is obviously football, and there is no point denying it. However, popularity is a matter opinion, and I find myself estranged from the majority in this matter. Football is nice, but hockey is better! I will now try to explain why it is the best sport in the world.

First of all, it is a team sport. Although individual sports have their charms, there is nothing as exciting as watching or participating in team sports. For the participants, they joy of victory and the depression of defeat are enhanced, because of the close emotional ties to the people you train with every day. This heightened state of emotion is also transferred to the fans and spectators, who share the emotional stress of their team, witch makes team sports more exciting to watch. Also, the dimension of co-operation most often makes team sports more difficult to perform, since you do not have only yourself to depend on. Hence, the effort to win is, most often, greater in team sports than in individual sports, witch makes victory sweeter.

Secondly, hockey belongs to the family of team sports I will call "Ball/Stick-and-ball sports". The more perceptive of you should have notice that there are no balls in ice hockey, but that’s not the point. Hockey players try to force an object into a goal, which is close enough. The beauty of ball/stick-and-ball sports is that you have to control something that is not part of your body while trying to get past your opponents without losing it. This demands, from each player, a level of external control at the same time as they need to maximise the potential of their own bodies. This make these kinds of sport the most interesting to both watch and play.

Lastly, the level of body contact, the speed of the game, the amount of goals scored, The size of the field and the length of the matches are just right in the game of hockey. For example, the size of the football field is to large, to many goals are scored in team handball and basketball, and the level of body contact in floorball are to low. Note that I enjoy watching these sports very much – there is no question that they are awesome sports – but in my opinion, hockey bets them all. Aside from the reasons listed above, the reason why I think so might be that ice hockey is one of the rare sports in which Sweden is amongst the best in the world. Team Sweden, or "three crowns", is the reigning Olympic champions, and in a few weeks the Detroit Red Wings will (hopefully) have won the Stanley cup for the second time in a row with eight Swedish players out of 29. The team captain, Nicklas Lidstrom, was the first European captain to win the Stanley Cup.

All in all, it is my firm opinion that ice hockey is the most entertaining sport to watch, and hence I claim that it is the best sport in the world, in my opinion of course.

The security versus privacy scale.

Benjamin Franklin once wrote: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." That was his opinion. I doubt that mothers that has lost their children to rebels or terrorists would agree. For some, freedom is the most important thing in the entire world, whilst others might feel that freedom isn’t worth squat if you don’t feel safe. I find myself wedged in the middle, as usual. Total freedom isn’t good in my opinion. A society needs laws to control the population. But the most important question remains: where will the population draw the line?

There will always be crazy maniacs threatening the common man in civilised societies. They might be locals who recently passed the line to insanity, or they might be foreigner whose objective is to destroy the government. The big danger is when these crackpots are organised, well led and have a clear mission. With this line of thought it is the governments duty to disrupt the privacy of people suspected of crime.

However, I am not particularly convinced by the rants of certain activists that claim that this kind of laws directs governments towards a totalitarian rule. This is always a risk in democracy: if an extraordinary charismatic person takes advantage of the system in the right time and place, he may legally seize power by himself. This happened in Germany when Hitler became dictator. But as long as there is political parties in opposition highlighting this danger, and it takes at least two elections before the government can change the constitution, we can cast aside parties with dangerous ambitions. In the same way, the people in democracies may get rid of governments who crosses the line and sacrifices too much freedom for security.

I believe that the government should always try to find this line. That means, in effect, that they should try to improve people’s safety, even if the means slightly reduces the freedom of the population. If they go to far, there will not be a second term. But if they find a good balance, they might get reelected and may continue to try improving the safety of the population.

In the end, it is a question of how you value freedom compared to security. Simply by living in a society, we have lost a good deal of freedom. No serious society will ever make it legal to shout "FIRE" in a crowded cinema when there is no fire, even if freedom of speech is one of the fundamental principles of democracy. Personally, I value safety very close to freedom, which means that I can tolerate plenty more surveillance of the population than there is in Sweden today.

Grading in primary school

Now, I’m not an expert in this subject, far from it. I’m not up to date regarding the latest scientific studies and theories, which, if I were, would probably change my views on the subject. There are lots of people that are smarter and more informed than me that are discussing this issue as I speak (or write, rather). However, it has been a while for the most of them since they were in primary school themselves, so they can’t rally relate to th children of today. They might have children of their own, but that’s not the same. For me, it has been around 10 years (wow) since I finished primary school. I received my first grade in the 8th grade, but personally, I think that it was to late. I think grades in the later part of primary school do more good than harm.

One of the main arguments against this, taken from the teacher’s blog, is that children should be allowed to be children for as long as possible. I agree to some extent, but not completely. Life is hard, and children need to be taught this. School itself is an institution that confirms this. By forcing children to school in the first place, we take away big parts of the freedom of childhood. Nevertheless, I think that seven-yes-olds aren’t ready to be graded and understand the consequences, while ten-year-olds are much more capable of dealing with grades. This is why I believe that grades from the 4th or 5th grade and up are beneficial on the whole.

Grades serve a purpose. It forces teachers to put their estimation of a pupil’s progress on paper. It is very definite and is a good reference point for teachers and parents discussing the performance of the child in question. If the child has performed well, there is not a problem. If the child has performed badly, however, a level of finesse is required. It is true that an insecure child might fall into a negative spiral when confronted with harsh facts. That is why focus must be not at what has been less satisfactory, but rather on all the possibilities of improvement.

Also, grades make the pupils realise that school is important. It isn’t just another place to meet friend and be rude to adults. If they prioritise other things, there will be consequences. If they are introduced to grades before the oh so turbulent puberty, they might learn to prioritise right. As it is now, in some schools it is cool to get bad grades. Why? I don’t know exactly, but a hunch is that when faced with teenage problems first and then grades, the grades will fall in the holes between trying to fit in and trying to look good for the boys or girls. I’m not saying that grades will ever reach the same level of importance, but it might raise their status a little, if they are introduced earlier.

I think that pupils need to be told that they are performing badly in school without the teachers bitching about it all the time. Sporadic reminders during the semesters and grades at the Christmas and summer brakes – that is the best way for this. At least that’s what I think.

Ignorance of Climate change.

A professor teaching astrobiology at Karlstad University stated in a lecture that the planet still is in an ice age, and that much of the variation of temperature in the past years is standard fluctuation. Now, he did not say that all of the climate changes in the world are caused by these fluctuations alone, merely that according to some research mankind is not the only culprit in the rising temperature. When he had stated this, a student stood up and called him an ignorant idiot. This example shows that even though a lot of people do not take the threat of climate change seriously, there are a few that is so fanatic about it that they do not respect the views of people who disagree with them. This is clearly counterproductive. I believe that this reason – that people take extremely passionate people less seriously – is one of the most prominent reasons why so many does not take climate changes seriously.

My personal opinion is that it shouldn’t matter if we have only ourselves to blame or if we are completely innocent (unlikely). As long as there is a slight chance that we are responsible for the rising temperature, which we very likely are, then we should assume that and take precautions. Certain scientific studies shows that it might not be our fault. This is how science works! Different scientists say different things depending on how they interpret their results, and we should respect their theories. But since in one case we are completely powerless and in the other case we can do something about it, we might as well try to make a difference.

Since I live in Sweden, it is only the attitudes of the Swedish population that I can comment on with acceptable accuracy. In my experience most people are concerned about the environment, but since the effects of climate change isn’t very obvious here, they lack a frame of reference for how bad it could become. When the moderate, practical Swedes hear someone say that we must act NOW, they seem to think: "Wow, slow down, mate. It can’t be that much of a hurry…"

However, this is only one of the reasons for the slow realisation of climate change I can think of. A lot of people is just to comfy driving huge or flashy cars and consumes like there is now tomorrow. Another possible reason might be that making an effort is hard work! People of all classes are much more lazy nowadays, and this spreads to the efforts of protecting the environment. Also, the envy of our neighbours makes it hard for us to take vacations in Norway instead of Thailand, for instance.

I could list more or less obvious reasons all night, but I will finish up with another major factor: the lobbying of huge oil or gas corporations that would simply lose business if to many people tried to conserve resources. These corporations would suffer greatly if to many people shunned their products.

My favourite TV series

It is hard to compare TV series of different genres. If you want to be entertained by a high quality thriller for half an hour, you will probably not choose to watch Family Guy. You are more likely to end up watching 24, Prison Break or Lost, depending on your particular preferences.

My favourite TV series - one of the very few that entices me to watch rerun after rerun, even though I nearly know them by heart – is The Simpsons. How can you not love those hilarious, yellow characters with their overshot jaws? The combination of political and cultural satire, physical comedy, everyday situations and sketches bordering the absurd makes for one of the best quality humour series yet. Just read this quote from when Ralph is told that he is failing English: "Me fail English? That’s unpossible!" This is an absolutely brilliant comment! Or when Homer is surrounded by aliens: "Don’t eat me! I have a wife and kids! Eat them!" These are just a couple of my favourite quotes, which highlights the reason why it is my favourite series – it is very, very funny.

But if I’m not in the mood for comedy, I might want to watch something with action and adventure. I might want to watch MacGyver! This is possibly the coolest series ever to hit television. As long as he has his pocket knife, Macgyver can do anything. Even though it was years since I saw the exciting- and explosion-packed adventures of this clever demolition expert, I remember them very clearly. They were not very relistic, but they were most entertaining.

There are of course other series which has captured my interest, such as Star Trek Voyager, Scrubs and Macken (a Swedish homourseries centred on two mechanics and their gas station). These are very good, but they can not compete with Macgyver or The Simpsons. It will be a while before anything does.

PS.
A Simpsons clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mV1LWhNpTJU&feature=related

The Macgyver intro:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hfzlQKKqVU

Minimum and bonuses when parenting

When a child is raised by loving parents in a secure environment, that child has a good chance of becoming a responsible and respectful adult. Other, more diverse aspects of childhood will probably result in other positive qualities of the child as an adult. For instance, frequent social contacts with other children can make a person comfortable talking in front of an audience, or if the family travels a lot the child might develop an interest in other peoples cultures.

However, to society, these qualities are merely bonuses. As long as you have or is looking for an honest job and obey the laws, there is nothing more required of you.

This reasoning and my opinion that a person should not live just for himself, but for himself and the community, leads me to the conclusion that a responsible, boring person deserves more respect than an irresponsible, exciting person.

Having said that, I, along with most people, also believe that all parents should strive for their children to grow up to be both responsible and interesting people. To achieve this when raising children the three most important factors are experience, experience, and experience. Wherever you live, whatever your social status is or whatever culture you have, you should encourage your children to partake in activities in your neighbourhood and your hometown. When your child come across something that he or she takes interest in, you should take interest in the activity and support your child, with the obvious exception when the activity is destructive in nature. No parent should encourage a child to burn ants with a looking glass just because he wants to.

And this brings me back to my initial point. Experiences of social nature are important for a child, but the most important thing children can learn is respect. If you fail to give your child a sense of respect towards other people and creatures, then I would say that you have failed as a parent.

You can not in any way force your child to become the kind of person you want, although you can lead them in the "right" direction. If your child, after trying a number of social activities, turn out to be a loner who most of all wants to stay home and read books, then you as a parent must use that respect your parents taught you and accept it. As long as your children learns to respect others, do their homework and their assigned share of household chores, then you really can’t demand anything more from them.

That is why I would say that the fundamental responsibility of the adult world is to teach children respect and that the most important thing for a child is to feel his or her parents love and support in a secure environment.