Dec 10, 2025–I was attending a political rally when a high school basketball game broke out.
Not really, but the two are connected.
As a lifelong fan of roundball, I occasionally drop in on a random high school game just to enjoy the level of play and skills of the players. I enter the gym without a team to support. Sometimes I just like the creatures they choose as mascots.
During the first half, I sit on the visitor side, because there is usually more room.
When the ball goes up, the commentary from my fellow pine-polishers begins. It is usually insightful coaching guidance from people who have never jammed a finger. Actual comments:
- Play defense!
- Shoot the ball!
- Rebound!
- Run!
Then comes the helpful fans who insist on assisting the officiating crew, for no pay whatsoever. They are shouting:
- She walked!
- That’s a foul!
- Call it at both ends!
- She stepped on the line!
- Over the back!
The most unsettling supporters are those who fling comments meant to embarrass players on the opposite team–taunts such as “air ball!” and “overrated!”
After half time, I switch sides and sit with the home team. You know what is different?
Nothing.
All the same comments are being made, just directed at players wearing the dark uniforms.
Forget for purposes of this column that these types of so-called fans are rude, ignorant of the game, and unforgiveable for yelling at teen-agers trying their best. What struck me is that behavior at a high school basketball game is identical to the dynamics of political debate.
No matter which side you see yourself on, politics is never about reaching a conclusion or identifying the best form of government, or even justifying your position. Like watching a high school basketball game, politics is simply about choosing a team. Jet or Shark, Yankee or Rebel, Gloomocrat or Grumplican, we are all on a team, usually assigned to us by our parents, by the media, or by the loudest talker in the quilting circle.
The insight I formed in those bleachers that night in the gym is that at all levels of competition, from T-Ball to Friday night lights to elections to war, we justify our beliefs by de-humanizing our opponents.
When you are able to visualize those other guys as evil incarnate, you are better able to attack them. It has been happening throughout human history, in politics, war, marriage, and baking contests.
If while reading this you are shouting, yeah, but my thoughts are well-considered and I have facts and I’m rational, let me ask you this: which team do you support in the Super Bowl and why? I’ll bet you don’t have a well-considered, fact-based, rational answer. And if you think you do, try convincing the guy supporting the other team. Nothing you say will change his mind. That’s politics, too.
This is the classic case of “seeing two movies on one screen.”
The test of so-called non-bias is to ask someone across the aisle to articulate your argument for you. Then try to articulate their argument. You don’t have to believe it, just be able to describe it. If you can’t even verbalize the opposition’s viewpoint honestly, you might be brainwashed.
You can workshop this back at the basketball game. I like to switch sides in my mind, and try to figure out how I would approach the game if I were coaching the other team. This is difficult to do, like wearing a jacket you ordered from China that zips on the wrong side. It forces you to consider if your hotly-held views are based on facts, or built on bias.
It’s not going to change which team you root for, but it might make the game more intriguing.