Jules Boykoff’s Red Card comes at a time when the 2026 World
Cup has already revealed the profound corruption within global capitalism.
Hosted by the United States, Mexico, and Canada, the tournament has become a
platform for militarisation, xenophobia, financial greed, and the overt display
of American dominance. Therefore, Boykoff’s book is especially relevant. It
provides a comprehensive list of abuses, including FIFA’s internal corruption
and the blatant profiteering by the host countries.
However, the book’s political structure—highlighted right in
its title—is fundamentally flawed. “Sportswashing” is not a neutral analytical
category but an ideological tool. It originates in Western liberalism to
criticise the misconduct of rival nations while concealing the far greater
crimes of imperialist powers. Boykoff’s dependence on this framework, combined
with Dave Zirin’s role as the introducer, guarantees that "Red Card"
remains confined within the pseudo-left sphere from which it originates.
The book highlights symptoms of capitalist decay and exposes
corruption, yet it hides its root causes. While condemning abuses and lamenting
exploitation, it does not address class rule or imperialism, offering no
revolutionary alternative. Essentially, it is a critique that ultimately
supports the very system it criticises.
The 2026 World Cup: A Case Study in Imperialist Barbarism
Boykoff’s Red Card honestly
details the authoritarian measures surrounding the 2026 tournament. The
information is striking: ICE agents at every stadium, transforming venues into
extensions of the US deportation system. Dynamic pricing has skyrocketed ticket
costs — starting at $10,990, with one reportedly listed at $2.3 million. Iran’s
team was prevented from spending a night on US soil, a petty act of
geopolitical spite. The Haitian team’s Vertières symbol was forcibly removed,
erasing the only successful slave revolution in history. Somali referees were
detained and expelled, held for eleven hours without reason. Meanwhile, a “FIFA
Peace Prize” was awarded to Donald Trump, a grotesque distortion of reality.
These incidents are part of a consistent pattern: turning a
global sporting event into a tool for state repression and imperialist
propaganda. The 2026 World Cup is not just commercialised; it has become
militarised. It is not only corrupt; it exhibits outright authoritarian
tendencies. Boykoff documents these facts but doesn’t explain.
The Ideology of “Sportswashing”
Red Card's main flaw lies in its dependence on the idea of
“sportswashing.” This term, widely promoted by Western NGOs, academics, and
media, claims that authoritarian regimes use sports to improve their image. It
has been frequently used against Qatar (2022), Russia (2018), China (2008), and
Saudi Arabia’s LIV Golf project. However, the 2026 World Cup reveals the
shortcomings of this ideological approach.
This idea is not merely insufficient; it is ideologically
toxic. It hides the true forces behind global power, sustains Western
imperialism's moral claims, and distracts from the capitalist system that has
turned sports into a multimillion-dollar tool for exploitation and propaganda.
“Sportswashing” isn't just a descriptive term; it's a strategic political tool.
The Liberal Origin of the Concept
The term did not originate in Marxist theory but rather in
Western think tanks, human-rights NGOs, and media aligned with US foreign
policy interests. It belongs to the same ideological toolkit as terms like
“authoritarianism,” “rogue states,” “malign influence,” “hybrid warfare,” and
“democratic values.” These are not neutral labels; they serve as geopolitical
signals that justify the actions of imperialist powers and portray their
opponents as threats.
The brutality is not concealed; it is flaunted. The Haitian
team is ordered to remove the symbol of the only successful slave revolution in
history. The Iranian team is barred from sleeping on US soil. ICE agents patrol
stadiums. Ticket prices reach $2.3 million. A Somali referee is detained and
expelled.
The phrase 'what is being washed' is misleading; nothing is
actually being cleaned. The violence is the actual focus. The idea falls apart
because it was never meant to analyse imperialism, only to conceal it. In
section IV, the double standard becomes clear: Qatar and Russia are labelled sportswashes,
but the US isn’t. Western media in 2022 held Qatar accountable for migrant
worker deaths to criticise a geopolitical rival. Meanwhile, U.S. actions in
Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Yemen—costing hundreds of thousands to
millions of lives—were not called 'sportswashing' or 'human rights abuses'
related to sports. This double standard shows how the concept is used
selectively to serve Western foreign policy goals.
The Class Function of the Concept
“Sportswashing” is not just hypocritical; it serves a
specific ideological purpose. It individualizes systemic issues by shifting the
blame for corruption onto “bad regimes,” ignoring the broader global capitalist
system. It moralizes politics by replacing analysis of class relations with a
focus on virtue and vice. It diverts attention from imperialism, with US and
allied crimes hidden behind moral condemnation aimed at rivals. It obscures the
involvement of Western corporations—such as Nike, Adidas, Coca-Cola, Visa, Fox,
Comcast, and JP Morgan—that are the real profiteers. Lastly, it depoliticizes
the working class. In essence, “sportswashing” functions as a bourgeois
mystification.
The Pseudo‑Left’s Embrace of the Concept
The pseudo-left, including figures like Dave Zirin, Jacobin
writers, and the academic “sports activism” community, has eagerly adopted the
term. This is no coincidence. The pseudo-left tends to dismiss class analysis
in favor of identity politics, aligns with the Democratic Party's foreign
policy goals, moralizes politics rather than analyzes it, and replaces
revolutionary strategies with activism. "Sportswashing” seamlessly fits
into this ideological framework, enabling the pseudo-left to appear radical while
supporting the geopolitical narratives of the US government.
The United States Is Not “Washing” Anything
The US is not hiding its
crimes behind the World Cup; instead, it is using the event to promote them.
The genocide in Gaza is openly defended rather than concealed. The offensive
against Iran is being escalated rather than softened. The militarization of the
US–Mexico border is celebrated openly instead of being disguised. The shift
toward authoritarianism is being normalized rather than mitigated. What is the
supposed 'washing'? The brutality is not hidden; it is displayed proudly.
“Sportswashing” Is a Tool of Imperialist Hypocrisy
As WSWS writers like Peter Schwarz have highlighted, the
Western media’s criticism of Qatar’s migrant worker policies was never
genuinely about human rights. These outlets remained silent on the over a
million deaths caused by US-led wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria.
The term “sportswashing” is used as a geopolitical weapon rather than a sincere
ethical critique. Boykoff adopts this perspective uncritically, which causes
him to overlook a key point: the core issue isn’t authoritarianism, but imperialism;
not corruption, but capitalism.
Dave Zirin and the Politics of the Pseudo‑Left
Having Dave Zirin, the sports editor of The Nation, as the
introducer highlights a political stance. Zirin symbolises the American
pseudo-left: he is radical in speech but reformist in action, and his politics
are aligned with the Democratic Party. While he condemns racism, exploitation,
and corruption, he does not see the working class as the revolutionary force
that can end these issues. His approach favours ongoing protest rather than
socialist change.
Zirin’s framework considers racism and sexism as independent
systems, separate from capitalist social relations. This approach enables him
to criticize injustice without questioning the underlying economic structures
that cause it. Zirin supported Bernie Sanders, whose role was to direct
working-class frustration within the Democratic Party. However, his critique of
sports capitalism does not advocate for the working class to disconnect from
the Democrats and form an independent political movement. Boykoff’s book,
introduced by Zirin, shares these limitations.
What the Book Cannot Say: The Marxist Explanation
A truly groundbreaking
analysis of the 2026 World Cup must begin with these fundamental assumptions:
1. Sport as a Social Product of the Working Class: Football is not merely a
bourgeois invention but a collective cultural creation of the working class, later
exploited by capital. 2. FIFA as a Tool for Global Finance Capital: FIFA's
corruption is not just individual misconduct but results from its structural
connections to media monopolies, financial institutions, corporate sponsors,
and the geopolitical interests of major imperialist countries. 3. The 2026
World Cup as a Political Event: It highlights the intertwining of sport with
political agendas, state repression, the use of mega-events to normalize
militarization, the subordination of culture to capital, and the ideological
mobilization of nationalism to divide workers. These insights fall outside the
conceptual scope of Boykoff and Zirin.
Conclusion: A Book That Reveals the Crisis but Conceals
Its Cause
Red Card presents a contradictory stance. It passionately
condemns the barbarity of the 2026 World Cup but fails to propose solutions.
Its liberal perspective doesn’t address imperialism's realities and instead
directs anger toward reformist dead-ends. While highlighting corruption, it
neglects to critique the capitalist system that sustains it. Overall, Red Card
isn't a radical critique; it underscores the ideological limits of the
pseudo-left. The working class's goal isn't to reform FIFA or combat sportswashing
but to overthrow capitalism, which has turned every facet of life, including
sports, into a space of exploitation, repression, and profit.
