Politics: How dirty is the Dirty Game?

I have never ever known any definition for the word Politics, not that anyone bothers to know i.e. except you are a student of Political Science. I doubt if even "politicians" know what it means, even though they claim to be apostles of the concept. I would also have you understand that i am not going to attempt to define the word or quote a definition from a dictionary. 

What baffles me though is why its called a "dirty game" by almost everybody, so much so that it may be sufficed as the definition of the word. Another definition (probably from some other dead philosopher who gave the phrase for the word ) is that "Man is a Political Animal". If you seriously consider the two aversions of politics, you may see some element of truth to both declarations. 

Even the Good Book (i.e. the bible) says "The human heart is the most deceitful of all things, and desperately wicked. Who really knows how bad it is?" JER 17:9(NLT). It might interest you to know that the bible makes no mention of the word "Politics", amazing isn't?. Now heres a philosopher (it was Aristotle actually; if you cared to ask) confirming the "politicality" of the average human as postulated by a biblical philosopher and prophet; Jeremiah. Is politics really dirty? Could there be Clean Politics? From the first and second descriptions of Politics, we should adduce from these wise men that Politics is a dirty game and since man is a political animal, man is dirty. 

My thought sways on an empty a one-way street,as i consider deeply: How dirty is politics? Is every human political in their lifestyle? Maybe. But really, how dirty is dirty? Let us try and find similarities between Politics and a very common and essential lifestyle. Sports. What kind of sport by concept can we say is dirty enough to be synonymous with politics? 

Chess? Where opponents sit and strategize on how to move pieces within their opposing territories ,consuming foot soldiers of the "enemy" and ultimately deposing the high king and taking over? What do you think? I think its similar, as long as someone is on ground actually destroying the enemies by way of political thugs and violence. Tennis? Where opponents stroke the ball within the set court lines, and where rules MUST be respected. Where as much a disrespectful remark to the umpire is an infringement? What do you think? Nah.....too quiet and too "organized".

Basketball? Where players could function as a team or individual, where swerving is permitted and players can perform solo runs and score points for rising above guards and make incredible dunks. Where players could position themselves at any point on the floor and score amazing three pointers without having to come close to the area of the opponent? Where the limelight can be shone on one person alone? Hmmm. There are some striking similarities if you look at it properly.

Boxing? I would say without having to explain similarities that the game has a lot to do with politics. Like it or not, you will come out with more than a torn lip and a bleeding nose no matter how saintly you are. If thats not dirty and bloody, i dont know what is.

Gymnastics? Weightlifting? Body building? Well, i would say those kind of sports are patronized by young politicians. Its like something compulsory for all start-up politicians to perform before they move up the ladder. You have to swerve and do loops, carry some burdens and build an impressive body structure to be considered serious.

What of Athletics? Running a marathon? Actually following the guidelines of waiting for the blast of the umpires whistle and actually running within your lane alone till you reach the finishing line? Actually flexing muscles and sweating it out infront of millions of viewers rooting and booing? Maybe yes, but running within specified lanes is really a difficulty in politics. Don't even consider the Gentleman's Game of Golf. Its too quiet, focused and thought demanding. Even politicians today; only a few of them actually participate in the game as a stress relaxer. So, out goes that option!.

Ah! The beautiful game of Soccer. Where teamwork is the most important ingredient and skill is secondary. Infact, in this game you need the team to show your skill. A game where everyone works according to the gameplay given by the coach (depends on how respected the coach is) and are ordered around by the captain (depends on who elected the captain). Where defenders defend with their life, attackers score goals, mid fielders are the gate keepers and are occasionally allowed to move up and try their feet at the net.  Where wingers work only to supply the ball to the strikers  alone and not for themselves.

Where players display awe-inspiring dribbling skills and deft passing added to terrific strikes at goal. Whats the flaw with the game in its similarity is the fact that a players role is always going to be his role, a striker will best function as a striker, not a defender. You are who you are, for life. But like other sports of single skill, soccer allows you move from a team to an opposing team and maintain your skill and position. Does that sound something similar to a political lifestyle? Talking about dirt, it can be called dirty because almost all players at one time or the other find themselves on the grassy pitch either in celebration or infringement. But not all players get themselves dirty.

More ironic about the similarities between soccer and politics is that, the key and skillfully active players are usually brought down, other than these are those who voluntarily slide on the pitch in celebration. No player falls on the ground and soils himself. Think about that. Now, are you fully convinced in a similarity between these two games?

Swimming is probably a no-go area because no one wants to get wet, much more doing a breast or backstroke. No "stroke"-ing here please.

Well, as far as dirty games go, politics go so many cousins. But personally, i must admit that the concept for this piece you are reading so intensively came from watching a game of American Football in a movie(The Blind Side). This corrupted offspring of Rugby and a distant cousin of Canadian Football, the sport is one of the most followed sport in the US, following closely behind Basket and Baseball and North Americans and the rest of the world have Walter Camp to thank for it. Still virgin in Nigeria, the game may be odd to the Nigerian public but its a lot similar to Soccer in that it employs the use of 11 players and requires a team taking the ball across the goal line of its opponent to record a score.

If you think soccer is closely linked with politics, i would say American football and rugby is even closer and more preferable to politicians. Why? Its Physical. Physical strength, stamina, quick feet and strong grasp is essential in succeeding in this game. You are allowed to hit (body only), pull down, jump on any opposing player advancing towards your goal mouth with the ball. You work as a team to ensure no one gets within your radar and also that no one stops your man from "running" freely. Its a lot of gruesome dirty in action, one any vintage politician will enjoy; with enough body guard safety equipment (MONEY & CONNECTIONS) to protect sensitive body regions or "investments". 

A player is required to use his body (RESOURCES) to ensure victory for his team (PARTY), and ensure the designated party forward (ASPIRANT) gets to the finish line (ELECTED). Like the winning team of the World Cup is given the trophy as a Team, the reward for victory is equally shared among all the participants (CONTRACTS & POSITIONS). American Football/Rugby is not a beautiful game at all. Trust me. Watch a game for the first few occasions and experience the writhing, nail biting gruesome activity of heavily built (RICH BIG BOYS) men in action.

The question repeats itself, how dirty is the Dirty Game of Politics?