Excerpt from the book „A New World is Possible“ by Dunja and Ljubodrag Simonović, Belgrade, 2007. E-mail: comrade@sezampro.rs

SPORT AND PEDAGOGY „Sports Pedagogy“

Thomas Arnold, the most influential reformer of the British system of education in the XIX century, was one of the first to proclaim Hobbes' principles bellum omnium contra omnes and homo homini lupus est, disguised in Christian moralistic rhetoric, the fundamental pedagogical principles. Social Darwinism became the basis of the «elitist» pedagogy which was eagerly accepted by Pierre de Coubertin, who built on it, discarding the Christian veil, the foundations of his «utilitarian pedagogy» that became the indisputable basis for physical education both in the fascist Germany and in the whole «civilized world». Its basic aim was not «disciplining of the body», but confrontation with senses, Eros, spontaneity, imagination, and the creation of a sado-masochistic character, which means the mutilation of a child's personality and his fitting into the model of a submissive and usable subject. Coubertin clearly indicated that the aim of physical education is not to produce a physically healthy person, especially not a child's cultural development, but to destroy the libertarian (self) conscious and to create a «positive» man. Hence he discards the maxim mens sana in corpore sano and opts for the maxim mens fervida in corpore lacertoso. Coubertin's sports pedagogy seeks to produce «masters» and is guided by the following views: «The battle at Waterloo was won on the sports fields of Eton», ascribed to Wellington, and «Restore the colonial glory of France!» («Rebronzer la France!») These views are corresponded by the following view: „Upon the fields of friendly strife are sown the seeds which, on other days, on other fields, will bear the seeds of victory.“ (1) – held by the American general Douglas MacArthur, which was and still is the undisputed guiding principle of the sports pedagogy in the USA. «Sports pedagogy» established upbringing without education. It is one of the basic reasons why it does not have a theoretical part: its aim is not to enlighten the young and cultivate their body, but to produce a ruthless belligerent character and an «iron body». Instead of promoting spontaneity, imagination, pleasure, «sports pedagogy» promotes productivism, utilitarianism, masochism... «The habit of obeying the commands» represents one of the basic principles both of Coubertin's «utilitarian pedagogy» and of the bourgeois «physical education». A pursuit of virtue (arete) is the basis of the ancient paideia, on which the ancient ideal of human existence is based. Physical motion is the expression of a spiritual motion based on man's endeavours to fit into the cosmic order. The

ancient conception of cosmos and man's cosmic essence is corresponded by a holistic approach to man as the unique physical, ethical and esthetic being, whence follows the principle of a harmonious development of human faculties as one of the basic elements of ancient eurhythmics. In the Hellenic world, the Olympic agonistes was modeled after the cosmological and not after the anthropological conception. At the same time, physical exercises became a peculiar service to gods, which Coubertin himself pointed out claiming that «by chiseling his body with exercise as a sculptor chisels a statue” the athlete in antiquity was “honouring the gods”.(2) Prevails the spirituality of the bodily movement that arises from a “religious feeling” which pervades the whole life. Instead of insisting on a muscular body, as is the case in sport, the highest challenge for physical exercises in antiquity was a geometrically constructed bodily proportion, corresponding to the ideal of a closed and final world and representing the basis of the Hellenes’ racial (self) recognition. The ruling model of the physical and the spiritual, as well as the principle of a harmonious development of the physical and the spiritual, were derived from the dominant conception of the world which originated from the very essence of the Hellenic society and their strivings to preserve the established order: the ancient physical culture was of a conservative character. In addition, in antiquity there was no principle of “greater effort”, the dominant principles being “measure is the best” (metron ariston) and “nothing too much” (meden agan), as well as the principle of “beautiful and good” (kalokagathia). Instead of polis and a spiritual vault, represented by the Olympic gods, as the basis of human self-determination and mediators in interpersonal relations, the basis of man’s “self-conscious” and mediator in “interpersonal” relations in sport is the animal world, degenerated by a technical world: a sports competition is of a Social Darwinist and progressistic character. In Rousseau’s pedagogy, man’s relation towards another man is mediated by man’s relation towards nature and towards his own body as his immediate nature. A natural motion is becoming the motion of one man towards another (homo homini homo). This man is not denaturalized and thus dehumanized; he is not deprived of impulses, affects and senses; it is a complete man, who is in nature and in unity with his natural being; who aspires to a universal body as the expression of his universal life-creating powers... In Rousseau, (as well as in Goethe, Schiller, Klopstock, Pestalozzi, Fit, Guts Muths and other philanthropists), a «return to nature» is the preparation for living in society: nature becomes man's ally in the fight against the ancien régime. He seeks to free man from a patterned behaviour which kills his vividness, to make him independent from his childhood so as to enable him to develop his personality though his own life-creating activism and the experience acquired in this way. To liberate man from spiritual tutelage and help him acquire the character of an independent and free person – this is the basic purpose of Rousseau's «return to nature»: a natural movement becomes the synonym for a free movement. Rousseau: «Those constant exercises, left to the guidance of nature, strengthen the body and not only do they

not blunt the spirit but, on the contrary, create in us the only kind of reason for which the period of childhood is capable of, and which is most needed at any age. They teach us to recognize the real use of our forces, the relation of our body to the bodies around us, and the use of natural tools within our reach suited to our organs.» (3) Speaking of the «ancient nations», Rousseau emphasizes the importance of «gymnastic exercises» for the «bodily and spiritual strength which makes those nations so different from today's people.» (4) By way of a free movement, man is connected with nature and is humanized as a cultural and natural being, since nature is not for man only an immediate existential space, as it is for the animal, but is a space where he can realize his working skill and spiritual powers. Most importantly, a «return to nature» means to return man to his natural being which has been alienated from him by the development of civilization. A faith in the possibility of actualizing the true human nature is the basis of Rousseau's relation towards man. What makes Rousseau's «savage» «noble» is the capacity to become human. It is precisely this potential humanity that makes man human and, through Emil and upbringing and education, it becomes reality. Class society degenerates man, while towns and prevailing forms of movements mutilate him and kill his naturalness and humanity. It is no accident that Rousseau does not speak of an escape to nature, but of a «return to nature». Rousseau finds in nature a living environment which enables man to develop his authentic human powers and become noble. Rousseau's «return to nature» involves an uncorrupted humanity based on the existential unity of man and nature. Rousseau's «good savage» is actually an idealized picture of man who has developed his human powers, unlike the aristocracy whose natural and human powers were degenerated by its parasitic life. Rousseau’s pedagogical conception is based on natural production and manual labour, which means that there are no technical and scientific spheres which are alienated from man and which mediate between man and nature. The skill man acquires does not become the power with which man seeks to control and use nature, but with which he can be completely united with it. Emil does not seek to become the «master and owner of nature», but to live in nature using his cultivated natural powers. Between man and nature there is no civilizatory mediation: nature itself produces mimetic impulses which man spontaneously absorbs with his senses and they condition his (natural) behaviour. The immediate challenge is not an a priori knowledge and the skill acquired in that context, but natural circumstances, and by meeting that challenge man gains experience and develops his human powers in the form of a skill which enables him to act freely. Human movement is by its character a cultivated natural movement by which man simultaneously develops his natural and human being. «Sports pedagogy» is a radical conflict with the ideal of cultivating the human nature. It emphasizes the «disciplining» of man, which means the suppression of individual dispositions, repression of the body, and man's development after the model of an instrumentalized «citizen». Instead of the conscious of an emancipated man, the conscious of a subject is created.

Unreasonable Social Darwinist («competitive») physical activism aimed at quantitatively measured performance, which mutilates man's playing being, represents even today the basis of «physical (sports) education». In sport, man's «will to power» is, in fact, the realization of Social Darwinist and progressistic spirit: sports competition does not produce cultural goods, nor does it develop man's cultural being; it destroys it and creates a civilization without culture. In «sports pedagogy», human can-be is not based on the development of man as a universal creative being of freedom, but on the development of the ruling order: man is reduced to a tool used by capitalism for the realization of «progress». Rousseau seeks to liberate man from the fetters of a repressive civilization and to develop his authentic human powers; sport seeks to «liberate» man from the emancipatory heritage of mankind and create a «civilized» barbarism. Sport is a capitalist way of dealing with man's playing being, while «sports pedagogy» is a technically perfected drilling. In sport, a dehumanized science and technique are directly expressed, without the mediation of a pedagogical humanistic heritage. «Sports pedagogy» is not based on the ancient techne, but on the modern technique, particularly on that tendency in its development which seeks to turn technique into a means for the abuse of nature and submission of man. Sport does not insist on the development of man's creative powers, but on the development of a belligerent character and aggressive muscular body, as well as on the cult of «intensive physical exercises» which systematically mutilate the body and create a sado-masochistic character. Instead of a playing skill, sport is dominated by a belligerent and destructive technique which becomes a tool for beating the «opponent» and achieving a record. It «disciplines» man by instrumentalizing his body and turning the erotic charge into aggressive muscular energy and murderous will. Horkheimer and Adorno emphasize in the «Dialectic of Enlightenment» that gymnasts and athletes have always had a close affinity to killing. They see the body as a moving mechanism, parts and joints, and flesh as the clothing of bones. They treat the body and move the limbs as if they had already been wrenched. (5) Ernst Bloch speaks in a similar tone: «…physical exercises, without the presence of the mind, ultimately means: to be the cannon fodder and, before that, a murderer». (6) Sport does not aim at the softness of movement and harmony of the body, at a variety of bodily expressions showing man's spiritual wealth – but at the development of physical strength («iron body») and the creation of a (self) destructive combative character. Bodily movement is separated from the spiritual, sensual, erotic and visionary, from society as the community of people, from nature, history and culture – without which there is no specific human movement. Sport and physical drill become a way of producing physically and mentally degenerated people who are prepared to destroy themselves in order to achieve the given end – and who find «pleasure» in it. The destructive instrumentalism, based on the absolutized principle of performance (profit), becomes one of the most important forms of the capitalist degeneration of

man: instead of the Christian «prison of the soul», the body becomes an iron fist with which «progress» eliminates the obstacles on its way. Unlike the classical bourgeois pedagogical concept, which sought to turn man into a loyal and usable citizen by suppressing the authentic natural and human (potentially creative) abilities (the so called «disciplining of the body»), modern sports pedagogy, using the results of science and developing its own means and methods, destroys man's authentic natural and human qualities – distorting them genetically. In spite of insisting on the «perfectioning» of personality, sports pedagogy discards the principle of the universal and harmonious development of physical powers of man as a universal creative being. The ideal of the sports body is not a creative body, nor is it the body in antiquity based on the principle of kalokagathia according to a geometrically constructed cosmos; it is the body as a highly-specialized machine. In sport, man has entirely become a „one-dimensional“ (Marcuse) being. The fatal character of a one-sided physical exercise was pointed out by Schiller: „Indeed, athletes are created by gymnastic exercises, but beauty – only by a free and coordinate exercising of all parts of the body». (7) In sport, there is no room for the principle of measure and optimum effort, which takes into consideration one's specific body, health and personal integrity. In his «utilitarian pedagogy», Coubertin attached primary importance to the principle of «greater effort» which is the most important means for overcoming man's «lazy» animal nature, developing a ruthless combative character of a bourgeois and creating a positive man. Nature and body become a technical means for achieving inhuman ends. As far as using competition as a pedagogical means is concerned, Rousseau is strongly against competition, giving priority instead to the love of man over the love of fame: «Especially, let all the vanity stay far away, all competition, all love of fame and all the feelings that make us compare with others. As these comparisons are never made without a certain feeling of hatred being aroused in us against all those that deny us the primacy...» (8) In this context, man does not try to «compete» with nature or to «conquer» it, and from this follows Rousseau's relation to the body. The basis of «happiness» is not a conflict with one's natural being (body), but a free and spontaneous development of the body, spirit, senses, mind, skills... Nature, life and freedom are at one. We find in Rousseau the most important elements of sports pedagogy – courage, stamina, self-initiative – but the way they are realized does not turn people into enemies and does not turn man against nature (body), as it is in sport; it rather turns people into friends and teaches man how to respect nature and his natural being. Today's capitalism imposes a new anthropological model which corresponds to the destructive nature of the «consumer society». Instead of the model of «man-beast», suited to the original spirit of capitalism (homo homini lupus), the prevailing model is that of «man-(self) destructor». Man's being reduced to the beast has been overcome in sport itself. Today's coaches do not try

to stir in man a competitive («animal»), but a fanatical self-destructive motivation: in sport, violence is of an instrumental and destructive character. The most important element in a coach’s «work» is no longer a psychological manipulation by which sportsmen are turned against opponents, but an attempt to make them use increasingly monstrous dope and accept increasingly monstrous medical «treatments». The main challenge for the contemporary «champions» is not «rivalry» and thus aggression directed towards the opponent, but their readiness to destroy themselves and thus their aggression to their own body. Sport is marked by a (self) destructive sublimation. The elementary human needs remaining unsatisfied; the «negative» energy is directed towards the «opponent», record, conflict with one's own body. Sports pedagogy is no longer aimed at winning; it is now an education aimed at performance (record) – and it is corresponded by the «philosophy of performance» (Leistungsphilosophie). Instead of liberty and ever greater probability of human survival, a dehumanized and denaturalized «progress», as another name for the process of capitalist reproduction based on the principle «Money does not stink!», becomes the highest «pedagogical» challenge. Modern man realizes only a fraction of his intellectual and spiritual capacities and, in addition to that, capitalism mutilates his (potential) universal creative being and turns him into a specialty-idiot. Instead of developing his mind and his artistic talents, man is reduced to the ruling model of a «new» man (cyborg), in whom memory and operationalized intellect are being developed (manipulative dehumanized intelligence) – which is but one of the forms in which modern capitalism deals with «traditional» man. A humane civilization, by developing a pedagogical model which is not based on deprivation and repression, but on emotional closeness between people and mutual respect, as well as on education through life itself with its creative character – will enable the development of man's creative powers from an early age. In a future society, the highest pedagogical challenge will not be a dehumanized «progress», but the development of man's creative being and of society as a brotherly community of emancipated people.

School – Faculty

The civilization deprived of culture is corresponded by upbringing without education, which means pedagogy deprived of humanistic essence. Under the influence of «globalism», «physical culture» was expelled from school and «physical education» was introduced, which indicates the unity of the body and a positive character, the «spirit» being a synonym for character. The name «physical education» implies that it is the body that should be educated, whereas it is about a repressive model of physical exercises mutilating man both physically and mentally and turning him into a «citizen» suited to the nature of the ruling order.

This is contained both in the principle mens sana in corpore sano and in Coubertin's principle mens fervida in corpore lacertoso. The highest challenges of «sports pedagogy» - «overcoming the human», «perfectioning» and the like insist on the development of man's physical powers, and not on the development of interpersonal relations and on the overcoming of the existing world. Hence «sports pedagogy» discards the principles without which modern society cannot be imagined: Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood. Basically, it is about a development of human powers reduced to establishing interpersonal relations which are the embodiment of the ruling spirit and involve a struggle with the idea of future. «Sports education» is marked by physical one-sidedness, which corresponds to the model of school that abolishes the right to individual difference and seeks to «produce» certain «profiles» of experts who meet the demands of a dehumanized technological development. Man's submission to the established order is mediated by the development of technological processes, so the impression is being made that «technical world», as an autonomous phenomenon, is to be «blamed» for the established processes of specialization (an increasingly early selection and mental and physical mutilation of children), and not the capitalist order that turns science and technique into dehumanized and destructive forces. The whole system is marked by competition and elimination based on (destructive) performance. The most important task of «sports education» is not only to subordinate a child's physical development, starting from an increasingly early age, to a particular sport, but to deal with the critical mind and subordinate his spiritual development to the requirements of the absolutized principle of performance and the maxim homo homini lupus. «Physical education» should contribute to the development of an aggressive and ruthless individualistic combative-productivistic spirit in young people – according to the spirit of the «New Age» (neo-liberalism). That is why Hobbes, Arnold and Coubertin are still relevant, and Rousseau, Goethe and Schiller are not. Instead of sociability based on solidarity and tolerance, there is a «sociability» reduced to a merciless struggle between the «opponents» for acquiring the highest social values and for survival. It is about imposing on children, from an early age, a Social Darwinist model of life, that is to say, about the reduction of the human community to a «civilized» menagerie, the teacher of «physical education» being the embodiment of the ruling «competitive» spirit of the order and the body technician, while the coach is the whip of capital. The acceptance of the order in which survival and social status are achieved through a ruthless fight is the basis of modern sports (physical) education. The spiritus movens of man's physical activism is not his fear of repressive authority; it is his fear of being beaten in the increasingly ruthless struggle for a place under the sun. Physical education was, and still is, one of the earliest forms of children's repressive socialization. The ruling «pedagogical principles» have always served to support the bars of the cage, and not to make room for free individual development. Instead of being a means for developing versatile and creative people, «physical education» is becoming a means for physical, spiritual and

social mutilation of young people. Just as upbringing involves a certain type of education, so education involves a certain type of upbringing. Education that produces «specialists» involves upbringing the aim of which is not the creation of a versatile and proud individual who will have a (critical and change-oriented) relation to the world departing from his (human) needs, but of specialty-idiots who (by their mutilated positivistic minds) become the ideal means of capital and alienated centers of political power for realizing their own interests. The instrumentalization of the body becomes the instrumentalization of man. The typical examples are the so called «top sportsmen», who are dehumanized (decultivated) «physical workers» ready to mutilate and kill their «colleagues» and mutilate and destroy their own organism – only to acquire «fame» and money. They become a spectacular embodiment of the supreme values of «sports education» and as such the «idols» of young people. As far as space is concerned, sports centers become modern temples and thus a means for man's enclosure into the spiritual horizon of the capitalist civilization. In the gloomy barracks (which will become a model for the construction of gyms in schools and at universities) and with the help of militaristic drill, the vividness of spirit and imagination is lost. Sports stadiums and centers take man away from nature, and sport is an activity that destroys in him the feeling of belonging to nature. Even in those sports that take place in nature, nature is reduced to a «competitive space» and thus has a technical character. The repressive pedagogy of «physical education» of the bourgeois society (which first appeared in barracks and includes jamborees) has become the model for the pedagogy of «physical education» in the countries of «real socialism». To an authoritarian system corresponds an authoritarian school to which corresponds an authoritarian «physical culture». In the so called «socialism», the role of school was to produce loyal «socialist citizens»; today, the role of school is to produce loyal «capitalist citizens». The purpose of the then physical culture was to produce, by way of a repressive model of physical exercises, an «average» citizen, who is «part of the community» and who obeys the authority of the ruling political will embodied in the state. The development of a «new» capitalism brought about the atomization of people, based on the fight for personal interests. Society is no longer a community of people the integration of which is dictated and ensured by the totalitarian political and economic power of the state (the ruling party), but a conflict of private interests according to increasingly ruthless «rules of the game», based on the principles homo homini lupus and bellum omnium contra omnes. The basis for ensuring survival and acquiring a social status is not only the loyalty to the ruling political will, but also the loyalty to the ruling principle of monopolistic capitalism «Big fish devours small fish!». By attacking the (authoritarian) «socialist collectivism», the ideologues of capitalism do not seek to overcome it by advocating an authentic community, but to deal once and for all with the very ideal of community based on solidarity and social justice. Instead of creating a humanistic civilization, school becomes an instrument for creating a capitalist

civilization based on the absolutized principle of profit. «Physical education» becomes an instrument for adjusting life to the rhythm dictated by the increasingly faster operation of capital, increasingly higher risk of living, new requirements imposed by the development of technique and, in that context, increasing domination of the so called «intellectual» over physical forms of labour. In contemporary capitalism the autonomy of the faculty as a scientific (pedagogical) institution has completely been abolished and it has become a tool for realizing the strategic interests of the ruling order. This can be seen from the changes in the names of the faculty: the «Faculty of Physical Culture» has changed its name into the «Faculty of Sport and Physical Education», or the «Faculty of Sport». As sport is becoming an increasingly important instrument for depolitization of the oppressed and for «making money», the pressure on the faculties to become «scientific» service to sports associations and clubs which «do business» according to mafia principles, is becoming greater. Professors, who have become «expert consultants» in sports organizations, use the authority of the faculties and their titles in order to obtain «scientific» legitimacy for the increasingly ruthless destruction of people in sport. Students have become hostages, and an increasingly important source of financing, of the interest groups which hold control over the faculties. The critical mind is abolished as well as the cultural heritage and an immediate relation between sports show-business and the faculty is being established. In this context, the difference between sport and physical culture is abolished and thus a possibility of establishing a critical distance to sport from the aspect of libertarian physical culture and of creating a humane physical culture. Sport is deprived of its historical and social essence and becomes a phenomenon sui generis, which by way of humanistic rhetoric («peace», «happiness», «progress», «beauty» ...) obtains a mythological character. In this way, its propagators are no longer responsible for the consequences of sport when it comes to physical and mental health of young people and to the ruling (destructive) order produced by it. «Sports pedagogy», as it is taught at faculties, is not marked by a humanistic, but by a technical education. Instead of subjects which emphasize physical movement as an expression of man's libertarian-creative nature, prevail sports and technical subjects, which use man and his body as a means for realizing inhuman ends. The faculties do not produce pedagogues, but experts for particular sports and body technicians whose «pedagogical work» is reduced to physical and mental mutilation of young people. Instead of humanization, physical and mental drill, based on (inhuman) science and realized by technical means, becomes the basis of contemporary pedagogical practice. Man is abolished as a biological and humane being, and reduced to a mechanical being. As far as the division in physical culture, sport and recreation is concerned, it is conditioned by physical abilities, and ultimately, by the existing division of labour and the nature of the ruling (Social Darwinist) existential and value model, and not by the development of man's playing being. We are dealing here, only apparently, with three value models based on physical powers. In this division,

physical culture corresponds to the upbringing of children for the ruling order; sport corresponds to a «mature» phase in life in which man openly «fights for a place under the sun»; recreation is meant to preserve health and prolong life once man leaves the fight for survival. It is not a humanistic, but a functional and instrumental conception. Basically, sport, which has become the industry of death, is the supreme value challenge. As far as the «General Theory of Physical Education» is concerned, it is a way of putting under the same roof physical education in schools, sport and recreation. The idea is to build, by way of positivistic disciplines, such a «theoretical» bastion around sport which will prevent any «attacks» on sport from the point of view of the emancipatory legacy of physical culture, art, pedagogy, sociology, philosophy... The conflict between sport and physical culture is basically a conflict between a repressive civilization, whose sport is a condensed ideological expression and which is based on the Olympic (oppressive) principle, and a (possible) humanistic civilization based on the Promethean (libertarian) principle.

«Physical Culture»

One of the most fatal characteristics of the philosophy of sport is that it completely devalues the movements of physical culture which developed on the best humanistic traditions of the ancient physical culture, Christianity, Renaissance, Enlightenment, popular cultures, French Revolution, emancipatory legacy of bourgeois society – and which are opposed to sport. Sports theoreticians cover the area of physical culture by the term «sport» in order to conceal the character of sport as a concrete historical phenomenon and prevent the creation of the foundations for establishing a critical distance to sport from the aspect of a (genuine) physical culture. In that they are similar to Coubertin, for whom sport is physical culture in the real sense of that word, while between sport and physical culture only theoretical differences can be made. «Physical culture» offers the possibility of a principally different relation to man than that offered by sport and «physical education». It indicates that culture is the source of the relation to the body and that bodily movement is a natural movement refined by spirit. Sport is marked by the movement of one man against another man, the absolutized principle of performance, the principle of «greater effort», industrial mimesis and militaristic drill; physical culture is marked by the movement of one man towards another, development of the cultural being, principle of «optimum effort» (in that context, a difference between tiredness and exhaustion is made), physical movement as a way of cultivating man's natural being... It is about the development of Eros, imagination, the esthetic, the visionary, spontaneity, tolerance, solidarity – which is opposed to the production of robotized beasts who fight for survival, as is the case in sport. Physical culture

is the most complex pedagogical field as it involves the development of man as a whole – his physical, cultural and social being. It is no accident that physical culture was attached such importance in the ancient paideia, which had a holistic approach to man. Contrary to the modern bourgeois pedagogy, where there is no conflict between physical culture and sport, in the ancient Greece, with the appearance of democracy, the aristocratically based Olympic agonistics was questioned from the point of view of the citizen as a political and rational being. The insistence on a cultural (historical) character of the body and bodily movement is based on the attempt to overcome the dualism between the body and the spirit which is characteristic of «physical education». From this follows that «physical culture» is acceptable only conditionally – if it involves the development of man's spiritual and intellectual powers, cultivation of the body and development of interpersonal relations. This is not to say that culture is quite another world, independent of the ruling relations and values, but that culture, unlike sport, offers a possibility of stepping out of the existing world, which means that it has a liberating and creative potential. As a cultural sphere, physical culture essentially contains this possibility – which need not be realized, and this applies to culture in general. The bourgeois (as well as the so called «socialistic») «physical culture», which reached its climax in barracks and «jamborees», is a bodily drill which destroys personality and produces a submissive conscious. It is no accident that «physical culture» in schools has not had its theoretical part, which means that the young have not been given an opportunity to realize the true nature of sport and physical exercises and develop a conscious relation to their own body as the integral part of their personality. Hence the need to emphasize the difference between repressive and libertarian physical culture which seeks to realize it’s cultural, which means its libertarian and creative potential. Libertarian physical culture is opposed to a given model of the body, as the criterion for determining «beauty» and other bodily (human) qualities, like “Barbie” and «sporting body», which are contemporary (global) forms of a fascistic approach to the body (man) according to the model of the destructive «consumer society». Libertarian physical culture involves a socially engaged man, and thus is a political activity par excellence. It seeks, on the grounds of a libertarian creative mind, to resist the attempts at the creation of an atomized society, where man is to another man but a means for satisfying his private (pathological) interests, and to resist the «technical civilization» based on the absolutized principle of (quantifying) performance. The road to a genuine physical culture leads through the liberation of the body and movement and, ultimately, through the liberation of man from the bonds of the repressive and destructive capitalist civilization. Instead of fighting for a new «model» of physical culture, we should fight for a new society with versatile and creative people, who will have a completely developed creative body; instead of «acquiring the habit» of behaving in a particular way, which involves the uncritical adoption of an a priori normative model, we should develop the need of one man for another and, in that context, a developed playing personality. Physical

culture is the supreme creative manifestation of man as a playing being according to the principle «everyone according to his own abilities» (Marx). Hence it’s most important part is to get acquainted with the nature of exercises and plays: how they can affect man's character and conscious, what social (interpersonal) relations they produce, what is their true nature… It involves the development of a creative activism aimed at the development of interpersonal relations, and not the development of a dehumanized productivistic activism and the spirit of competition and hatred, as is the case in sport, on the basis of which various forms of social pathology are being developed. The establishment of brotherly relations between people makes repressive institutions, which find their justification in man's «selfish and aggressive nature», meaningless, and these are in fact the characteristics of a «model citizen» ascribed to man by the ruling ideology as his anthropological determination. The level of the development of capitalist society is measured by numerous forms of a commercialized bodily activism; the level of the development of a humane society is measured by various forms of a free (creative) bodily activism. Essentially, libertarian physical culture means elevating the entire life-creating capacities of a society to a higher level.

Pedagogy of Libertarian Physical Culture

The relation to physical culture should be seen in the framework of its relation to school, while the relation to school should be seen in the context of the current development of society. The current tendency is to eliminate school as an educational institution and turn students into specialty-idiots. The tacit aim of the «course of reforms» leading us to the «modern world» is to submit every segment of life to the circulation and reproduction of capital. The neoliberal project of the development of capitalism as a global order involves dealing with national cultures, libertarian traditions of mankind and with a reasonable man who is capable of understanding his real needs and of establishing a critical and change-aspiring distance to the ruling order. It is all about the destruction of the critical and creative mind and reducing it to operationalized intellect. Instead of creating a humanistic civilization, school is becoming a means for creating a «technical civilization», which is a modern form of the «civilized menagerie» created by capitalism. In that context, physical culture is expelled from school and «sports education» is introduced, which is reduced to a physical and mental mutilation of young people. The «liberation» of students from uniform physical exercises, which once prevailed on lessons of «physical culture», proceeds by way of «sports competition». Exercises mechanizing the body and creating a militaristic spirit are replaced by a dehumanized and denaturalized playing skill and a ruthless combative individualism. Desk-mates are no longer «comrades from the same ranks», performing the same «task», but are «opponents» in the «struggle for a

place under the sun». Instead of developing versatile and creative personalities, teachers of sports education become body technicians and slave drivers and as such are the long arm of mafia organizations in the form of sports clubs and political clans. If we bear in mind that school is a social institution and that the nature of society determines the nature of school, then there is no point in speaking of a «new» school without mentioning a new society. There is no «free and open school» in a society where the entire life is submitted to the operation of capital and manipulation carried out by alienated centres of political power; in a society where knowledge (reduced to «information») is not a road to the truth, but a commodity on the market and as such is a means for destroying man's libertarian dignity and the emancipatory heritage of mankind. There can be no «freedom for school» if society is ruled by the tyranny of capital, repressive institutions and corrupted political clans. There can be no «freedom for students» at schools if there is no freedom for man in society. The struggle for a “new” school can make sense only if at the same time it is the struggle for a new society. The pedagogy of libertarian physical culture includes the following: (1) Theoretical part. It includes the child's becoming aware of itself as a free, creative and social being and thus the development of the body as an integral part of its personality. The child should be aware of the purpose of physical culture and be able to make the difference between a libertarian physical culture and repressive forms of physical activism. Teachers should explain the nature of the body and its functioning and should help young people to respect their own body which marks their human authenticity. Young people should learn that a proper diet, physical activity and exercising are not only the preconditions for a proper development of their body and preservation of health, but also for a proper development of their personality. It is about directing young people towards an active social life, and not towards a narcissistic obsession with their own body and loneliness. (2) Body hygiene. On classes of physical culture young people should learn the proper physical exercises they should do every day. Teachers should teach them by way of demonstration and correction. This offers a lot of possibilities for implementing scientific discoveries. Floor exercise and apparatus that contribute to the development without risk of injuries should be insisted upon. The basic principle of physical health is an adaptive and creative agility. The work with young people should develop a need for everyday physical exercises. As far as gyms are concerned, instead of a military atmosphere, gyms should have a libertarian and friendly atmosphere. Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood – this should be the banner in every school gym and in that spirit murals and stained glass windows should be made... (3) Return to nature. The teachers of libertarian physical culture should initiate a return to nature, which is not only our immediate existential, but also a historical, esthetical and global living space. The purpose of a return to nature is

not to «conquer» it, as is the case in sport, but to preserve it and to cultivate young people. Only in nature can man attain his natural being. The struggle for a healthy man becomes the struggle for a healthy living environment: in healthy nature – healthy man (homo sanus in natura sana). The teachers of libertarian physical culture should launch a campaign within which every school should be responsible for preserving one part of the environment; every child should plant at least one tree every year; students should explore nature, take care of animals and draw ecological maps; schools should develop brotherly relations with villages and pupils should help old people's households... Here we depart from one of the most important postulates of Rousseau's pedagogy: if a child is to become a good man, it should be given the opportunity to do good acts. (4) Folk dances and other forms of dances. It is a traditional form of social activism which returns man to his cultural being and is the most authentic expression of man's playing nature. As far back as in the ancient Greece people realized the importance of music, in addition to gymnastics, for man's cultivation. (5) Plays. Libertarian physical culture does not discard playing skills in sport; it rather tries to cultivate them by creating new (artistic) plays which, instead of a ruthless rivalry, will be characterized by cooperation and tolerance. It means that boys and girls, as playing beings, will be able to play together – which will lead to the abolishment of segregation according to the gender, on which sport is based, without which there is no humane society. As far as desirable physical abilities are concerned, libertarian physical culture does not emphasize strength, speed and stamina, but creative agility, which means a creative body which is in unity with man's creative spirit. It is the basis for the development of a creative skill that is not characterized by the movement of man against another man, as is the case in sport, but by the movement of man towards another man. Instead of striving for a body-machine and mechanical motion, based on the absolutized principle of quantitatively measurable performance, libertarian physical culture strives for an artistic body and artistic motion. Instead of being the bodily mechanics, physical culture should become the bodily poetics: bodily motion should express man's poetic being – a poetic motion of man towards another man. The development of a rich creative personality, humanisation of man's natural being and society as the community of free people – these are the ultimate aims of libertarian physical culture. School is an institution which can carry out an organized campaign aimed at saving children from bodily and mental destruction. It should become a spiritual workshop, open 365 days a year, where every child can have a chance to develop its talents and socialize in a way which will help them develop their cultural being. Since physical culture is a pedagogical area which, together with art, offers a good opportunity for the development of bodily, spiritual and social being of young people and enables man's return to mother nature which is increasingly bleeding – it deserves to have a special place in the system of education.

The struggle for libertarian physical culture means the struggle for teachers who are strong advocates of the libertarian and cultural tradition. They should acquire a broad humanistic education, which will enable them to understand the nature of man as a universal creative being of freedom, they should be aware of the difference between the true physical culture and repressive (destructive) forms of physical activism, and they should become the creators of a rich culture of movements used for cultivating man's playing being. Humanistic education includes: (1) Man's libertarian self-conscious as a historical and social being, which means man's awareness of his universal creative powers and unalienable human and civil rights. (2) Awareness of social causes of injustice and processes that cause the destruction of life. (3) Awareness of the existing possibilities of the development of society and eradication of the causes of injustice and destruction. (4) Idea of a society that should be striven for. Instead of being silent participants in the destruction of children and employees of sports clubs, teachers of libertarian physical culture should become the carriers of Promethean fire and as such the leading figures in education. Their primary role should not be to have the classes of physical culture, but to initiate, organize and conduct various activities of pupils, inside and outside school, like Vasa Pelagić, the great Serbian «popular teacher» whose work represents extraordinary lessons in physical culture as the means for building a physically fit, spiritually rich, nationally proud and socially active individual.

«Humanization of Sport»

Can sport be «humanized»? For Coubertin, this question is meaningless since, for him, Olympism, which is the quintessence of sport, is the «cult of humanism», meaning the «cult of the existing world». If we depart from the modern concept of humanism, based on the guiding principles of the French Revolution, sport deals with the emancipatory legacy of modern times. Sport is not the symbol of a humanistic civilization; it is rather a form in which the «technical civilization» deals with the objective possibilities of creating a humanistic civilization. Sport is not characterized by humanistic challenges, but by a technical mimesis, technocratic efficiency, functionality and the absolutized principle of quantitatively measurable performance... A sporting body is the symbolic manifestation of the «technical civilization». The «perfect work of the machine» is the mimetic impulse arousing an «esthetic» inspiration in a sportsman. Not only does sport step out of the existing world, it steps out of the living world as well.

Sport is a radical conflict with the ancient ideal of man's existence, as well as with the humanistic heritage of the Renaissance, Christianity, aristocratic and popular culture and philanthropic and dancing movements. At the time when sport was becoming an institution, it was Tissié who saw in sport a «muscular primitivism» and a conflict with Western humanistic traditions. Sport eliminated all forms of physical culture which were connected with classes, social strata and peoples. By way of the absolutized principle of quantitatively measurable performance the basic forms of a free physical activism, whose purpose as a human activity can only be grasped within the concrete cultures in which they appeared, are reduced to sports events. A leveling took place on the basis of «objectivized» quantitative criteria, which led to their losing the quality of a natural, cultural and individual human expression. Instead of expressing their life force as natural beings, of being representatives of their cultures and manifesting their peculiar human, which means creative (spiritual) powers, people, in the form of «sportsmen», became denaturalized and dehumanized storm troopers of political centers of power and moving billboards of capitalist companies. Victories and records express a degeneration of the original natural, cultural and individual needs and man's degradation to the tool for fulfiling political ends and material interests. Instead of the triumph of cultures, we are witnessing the triumph of colonial and destructive spirit of the capitalist «internationalism». By the institutionalization of sport, at the end of the XIX century, a repressive institutionalization of citizens' free (non-working) physical activism took place: sport became a tool for physical and spiritual integration of people into the ruling order. Instead of a free individual, a loyal and usable «citizen» «was obtained»; instead of a class-based integration, a «supraclass» - «national» integration was established; instead of affirming the national cultures, of being a form of the struggle for freedom (of workers, colonized peoples, women) and the development of individual human powers – «free» physical activism in the form of sport becomes a battlefield, where the most powerful capitalist corporations fight between themselves, and a means for conquering the world. Countries which «lag behind» as far as historical development is concerned, have accepted sport as one of the ways of bridging the gap between them and the developed capitalist world and of becoming part of the «modern» civilization. The development of capitalist proprietary relations in villages and disintegration of the traditional social organization; atomization of society according to the principles homo homini lupus and bellum omnium contra omnes; development of trades, industries, commerce and, based on that, growth of towns and working force which had to be controlled after the official working hours; endeavour to «discipline» population in villages and prepare them for industrial work; to homogenize society on national basis (so that the struggle of workers from the field of class struggle can be transferred to the field of the «struggle for national interests» under the patronage of the bourgeoisie in the form of military structures) – all these led to the disappearance

of the traditional forms of libertarian (cultural) physical activism and to the development of sport. The development of capitalism as the order of destruction led to the degeneration of the original spirit of sport, which became a populist circus-like entertainment. Instead of developing faith in the «eternal values of capitalism», sport has become an instrument for suppressing the discontent of the oppressed and for their idiotization. For the leading theorists of sport, like the American sociologist Allen Guttmann, the future of mankind cannot be imagined without sport. It is, in fact, only another way of saying that there is no future without capitalism, which means that capitalism is “the end of history“ (Fukuyama). At the same time, they proclaim sport the most important means in the struggle for a «humane society», meaning the «perfectioning» of capitalism. To try to make sport the most important means for combating drug-abuse, alcoholism, violence and other pathological forms of young people's behaviour, is as justified as to try to eradicate mosquitoes with atom bombs. Sport is not a product of man's libertarian and creative practice; it is an institutionalized destructive violence and as such is the production of the ruling relations and values in an immediate form – which are the origin of all evil. It degenerates man by submitting him to the existential interests of the ruling order and by creating an ecocide conscious. Sport adds fuel to the flame of capitalism, which, if it is not extinguished, will turn the world into a completely burned place. Even among those who are well-aware of the fatal consequences of the development of sport, the prevailing tendency is to separate «professional» and «amateur» sport and thus save sport as a pedagogical method. They do not treat sport as an institutionalized value model which is a concrete historical product and which, in its original form, is the ideology of liberal capitalism, but proclaim it an idealized projection of universal human values and thus the supreme «humanistic» challenge. By doing this, they come close to the views of Coubertin, Baillet-Latour, Diem, Brundage and other fervent champions of «amateur sport» - the most reactionary and militant ideologues of capitalism – who saw in the «moral» values of sport its primary pedagogical significance. It should not be forgotten that Coubertin, who insisted that sport should obtain a religious character (like the ancient religio athletae), called professional sportsmen «circus gladiators» and proclaimed money the «greatest enemy of sport». By the end of his life Coubertin accepted the sports (capitalist) reality and gave to professional sportsmen the dimension which had been reserved only for amateurs. This, however, does not change the essence of his Olympic philosophy, which insists on sport as a (positive) «religion» that is beyond both Christianity and «ethnic» religions, which, according to him, are ranked lower in terms of value than Christianity. Interestingly, at the time of the development of commercialism and professionalization of sport in the West, the ideologues of «real socialism» elevated amateur sport to the highest possible level and turned it into one of the chief ideological means for criticizing the «rotten capitalism». This is one of the

main reasons why in the Soviet Union the «morally clean» Coubertin became a mythological figure, in spite of being one of the most militant opponents of socialism and a fanatical champion of fascism. By an ideological hocus-pocus, Coubertin has turned, from a zealous anti-communist into the mascot of «real socialism». It is only when the destructive tendencies of the development of capitalism are fully understood that we can see the disastrous consequences of dividing sport into a «bad» professional and «good» amateur sport. The upbringing by way of sport involves such a way of thinking that glorifies destruction and renounces the idea of future – which is not only a libertarian, but the basic existential imperative. At the same time, it is the kind of upbringing which turns people into enemies – destroying young people's hope that a humane world is possible, as well as their need for such a world. The question is, in fact, what existential and value model should be adopted: should we struggle for sport which develops the spirit of destruction and degenerates man or for those forms of physical activism which develop man's cultural, creative, physical, social and visionary being?

x x x

Footnotes

(1) In: Jack Scott, The Athletic Revolution, 21.p.The Free Press, New York, 1971. (2) Pierre de Coubertin, “The Philosophic Foundation of Modern Olympism”, In : Pierre de Coubertin, The Olympic Idea,131.p.Discourses and Essays,Carl Diem Institut,Ed,Pub.and Copy by Karl Hofmann Verlag,Schorndorf bei Stuttgart, 1966. (3) Žan-Žak Ruso, Emil ili o vaspitanju, 120.p. Valjevo-Beograd, 1989.(4) Žan-Žak Ruso, Еmil, 122.p.(5) Max Horkheimer, Theodor Аdorno, Dijalektika prosvjetiteljstva, 247, 248.p. (6) Compare: Еrnst Bloch, Das Prinzip Hoffnung, 33-42 Kapitel, First part, 524.p. (7) Fridrih Šiler, O lepom, 136.p. Kultura, Beograd, 1967. (8) Žan-Žak Ruso, Emil ili o vaspitanju, 250.p.

x x x