If You Had Money; Protecting The Integrity Of Man

Let's do a blog study shall we?

Assume there are 10 people in a room each with some money. Now, let's say a person representing the state comes in and asks each person to voluntarily give up some of their income for a project he argues is for the greater good.

How many do you reckon would give and how much of their money would they donate?

The answer (whatever it may be) to me, is the natural state of man. What they give is what the government should be content with. Their decision making should be based on that. Anything beyond that is confiscation.

***

With a fever, my daughter sat limp watching soccer on me today. She asked me questions about the game along the way. One of them was "who was the guy in red?" I explained to her that was the referee. "What does he do?" she replied. "He makes sure everyone plays within the laws of the game" I explained.

Then it hit me. There was one guy running around (likely for a total of 15-20km) ensuring the law of the pitch is upheld among 22 competitve professional players each trying to gain an upperhand to achieve victory.

He has two linesmen running up and down the sidelines flagging for offsides and fouls to help out, but their contribution is limited given they basically have a birds eye view and are off the field of battle.

One man alone to assure the sanctity and integrity of the match is maintained.

With the game evolving as it has - it's a much faster tempo now - controversies are sure to happen (as they always have) but with the stakes so high and with technology where it is, a referee mistake is on youtube within minutes.

As a result, far more people are implicated into the game as they never been. To help refs out in this difficult situation, it's been argued some form of technology (in the form of video replay) should be introduced to aid a ref in controversial situations - like a foul resulting in a penalty or red card or a goal. Another idea is to add a second ref. Hockey does it and so far the flow of the game hasn't slowed as a result.

Soccer, however, may pose a more challenging thing. Soccer is already a "slow" paced game thanks to the amount of ground to cover. Adding a second ref may slow the game down further - especially if two refs call games differently. And we all know the subjective level in soccer sometimes overtakes the objective. "In the opinion of the referee..."

It's not crazy to conclude we may in fact watch two games in one.

Which made me think about the government. Isn't this what the state tries to do when it wants to "protect" people? It adds "refs" in the form of department and agencies. Of course, someone can counter and say, relative to the size of our population, government lacks resources and therefore it's a lot like having just the linesmen. To which one, I suppose, can counter the counter with "well, maybe the government should stop over reaching."

To me, if it were a soccer game, it would be equivalent to having five refs on the field each sending mixed messages and adding needless confusion hastening the loss of fluidity in a match.

Which made me think about this quote:

"...In a complex system it is not always possible to predict what the consequences of any change will be, at least with the present state of knowledge. This means that seemingly small changes in ecosystems can cause large effects, while huge changes might leave the system pretty much as it was..."

Hazen, Trefil, Science Matters.

This can apply to not only science but sports and politics as well.

We're constantly tinkering with "ecosystems" of all kinds.

It may seem on the surface smart to add a few refs to govern 22 men but is it really? Soccer has lasted 100 years and still its presence evokes passion and interest like no other sport. It reflects life with all its glory and inglorious moments.

One ref is enough. What he needs is a technological aid and to learn to integrate the linesmen more. As for the government, I'm not sure what more (if at all)  it can do to help protect people's rights and privileges without injuring the fluidity of man's actions and activities.