The Qatar World Cup Is a Celebration of Authoritarianism
By consenting to Qatar's illiberal policies for residents and guests alike, FIFA has further besmirched its already tainted reputation.

The clearest sign of authoritarianism may be when people of different classes are not afforded the same rights and privileges. Do you have to have a position of political or culture power, or have a connection to someone who does, to be free? Does the state dictate what you consume, who you love, or where you workāunless you're special?
Qatar, which for the next month will host the World Cup, the world's most-watched sporting event, has clearly failed those tests.
The examples of petty authoritarianism on display in Qatar in the immediate run-up to the tournament and over the first few days of the competition have been numerousāthough they pale in comparison to the human rights abuses that piled up as the tiny Middle Eastern state built the stadiums and infrastructure necessary to host the event. By allowing Qatar to host the tournament, and by consenting to the country's leaders' illiberal policies for residents and guests alike, the FĆ©dĆ©ration Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) has further besmirched its already tainted reputation.
The most visible (though not the most egregious) sign of this World Cup's illiberalism may be the rules surrounding alcoholic beverages. For years leading up to the World Cup, Qatar's plans included vague promises about loosening the country's strict prohibitionist rules to let football fans imbibe. There were plans for special "beer zones" in and around the eight World Cup stadiums, for example.
Then, just two days before Sunday's opening match, the Qatari royal family issued a new edict: No beer at the stadiums. There is one location in Doha, Qatar's capital city, where beer will be sold. Unless, of course, you bought special tickets for hospitality suites built into every stadium. There, the suds will flow for the well-connected and wealthyāwho always have an easier time getting what they want in an authoritarian state.
Ecuadorian fans responded by chanting "we want beer" as their national team thrashed Qatar in the opening match on Sunday. British tabloids reported that some England fans were trying to smuggle beer into their team's opening game against Iran on Monday morning, though it is unclear whether any of them actually succeeded.
Budweiser, whose parent company reportedly paid $75 million to be named the "official beer" of the World Cup, tweeted (and subsequently deleted) criticism of the last-minute Qatari decision. Later, the brand's official Twitter account posted a photo of the surplus supplies of brew and promised (or perhaps threatened, depending on your view of Budweiser) to send the excess beer to the winning nation.
The most embarrassing response belongs to FIFA President Gianni Infantino, who on Sunday defendedĀ Qatar's decision to spit in the face of a major sponsor and thousands of fans.
"I think personally, if for three hours a day you cannot drink a beer, you will survive," Infantino told reporters, according toĀ The New York Times. "I think for what we Europeans have been doing around the world for the last 3,000 years, we should be apologizing for the next 3,000 years, before starting to give moral lessons."
Pu-leeze.Ā Europe's historic authoritarianism is no excuse for Qatar's modern-day authoritarianism. If FIFA wants to help repair that history, it could do so by standing up for liberal values and refusing to kowtow to regimes that refuse to grant some of the most basic human rights to its own citizens. And not just in Qatar: This tournament comes on the heels of World Cups in Russia, where free speech does not meaningfully exist, and in Brazil, where residents were forcibly displaced to build stadiums.
"Don't criticize Qatar," Infantino added. "Criticize FIFA. Criticize me, if you want. Because I'm responsible for everything."
Happily. It was clear from the moment in 2010 when Qatar was awarded this World Cup that FIFA made a mistake. It's a mistake that cost thousands of people their lives.
The migrant workers that built Qatar's World Cup stadiums and associated infrastructure face tight constraints on their freedoms and work in dangerous (and sometimes lethal) conditions. Calling attention to those conditionsĀ is made more difficult by the country's illiberal free speech laws. Anyone caught broadcasting or publishing "inflammatory propaganda, domestically or abroad, with intent to harm [Qatar's] national interests" can be subjected to five years in prison and fines of up to $25,000 under Qatari law, The Athletic reported in June.
Qatar is not only trying to suppress its own citizens' free speech. It's trying to extend that chilling effect to the rest of the world during an event that will be watched by an estimated 3 billion people.
So give credit to the BBC for opening their coverage of the tournament on Sunday, with English footballing legend Gary Lineker calling attention to "accusations of corruption in the bidding process," "the treatment of migrant workers who built the stadiums," and Qatar's lack of equal rights for gay people and lack of free expression rights for everyone:
Gary Lineker's opening monologue at the start of BBC's coverage of the FIFA World Cup in Qatar ā½pic.twitter.com/71xyfXpBWc
— Chamatkar Sandhu (@SandhuMMA) November 20, 2022
Infantino and FIFA may not like it. The Qatari government certainly won't like it. But being accepted into the international communityāand Qatar clearly sees the World Cup as its coming-out party (pun definitely intended)āshould mean recognizing human rights, at a minimum.
And if you want to host a big party, be willing to let your guests have a drink.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
>>consenting to Qatar's illiberal policies for residents and guests alike
Britney Griner on line 2 ...
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I'm now creating over $35000 dollars each month simply by (ins-09) doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
Just open the linkāāāāāāāāāāāāāāā>>> http://Www.RichApp1.Com
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit..
š AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)> http://WWW.WORKSFUL.COM
And itās rich that Boehm writes an article like this but we t say shit about the J6 detainees even if he has a mouthful of it. Along with the rest of the Reason collaborators.
I am making $92 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $16,000 a month by working on a laptop, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply.
Everybody must try this job now by just using this website. http://www.LiveJob247.com
Hey,
The World Cup has always been held in either May, June, or July, but this one was moved to November and December because of the hot climate in Qatar.
Regards: small evil eye tattoos
Stay-at-home mom Kelly Richards from New York after quitting her full-time job managed to earn an average of between $6,000 and $8,000 a month freelancing at home...
Here's how she did it..............>>> onlinecareer1
I get paid over 190$ per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought Iād be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what Iāve been doing..
HERE====)> http://WWW.RICHSALARIES.COM
Eric's just mad they prohibited the gay armband.
Leftists are cancer.
I have even managed $20,000 per calendar month by simply working some easy tasks from my apartment. As I had lost my office career, I was very disturbed but luckily Iāve discovered this best on-line career thatās why Iām capable of earning a thousand USD just from home. Each person can avail this best offer & collect more greenbacks online
HERE====)> http://pay.hiring9.com/
What a dilemma this must be for you Nazis. The Qatari regime is fascist, but you still want to gas them all.
Dave, Daveā¦ā¦ cāmon man, youāre the Nazi. And a stupid one at that.
Beats your kind of armband, Doogin Hooligan Putineer!
"I think for what we Europeans have been doing around the world for the last 3,000 years, we should be apologizing for the next 3,000 years, before starting to give moral lessons."
Rational thought, democracy, lifting millions out of poverty? Fucking monsters.
Billion, not millions.
Whatever he's talking about, I had nothing to do with it. I'm not that old, or that powerful.
Obviously, he's talking about the Moops colonializing Iberia.
Get back in your bubble
Wonder exactly what he is talking about when he used that number. If he's referring all the way back to the Roman and Hellenistic empires, he may want to educate himself. Yes, the Romans were brutal conquerors but no more brutal than the people they conquered, and they didn't always utilize massacres and such, they often offered clemency and generally allowed their conquered people much more freedoms then similar empires at the time.
In fact, Rome took a pretty hands off approach to how it governed it's conquered provinces as long as they paid taxes and didn't openly rebel. As long as they acknowledged Roman rule, Rome allowed them lots of leeway, especially in terms of culture and religion. They didn't force Romanization but it happened rather organically. Yes, there were Roman Governors and such, but they didn't really interfere with internal politics unless it threatened Roman rule.
Additionally, there was much less violence after conquest then in unconquered areas, and conquered provinces were much more economically successful than unconquered areas. Rome didn't do this out of altruism but rather because they realized that it was more beneficial for provinces to be prosperous to allow them to pay more taxes, buy Roman goods and sell Rome goods. There are multiple records of provinces successfully getting there taxation reduced because it was to heavy a burden. Rome knew it was better to have prosperous provinces in the long run than to break them in the short run.
The largest counterpoint to the idea of Rome ruling as tyrants is that there were few rebellions and those generally only during the generation right after conquest and during periods of strife within Rome itself. Additionally, as Rome began to decline and abandon their provinces, the provinces resisted becoming independent and did everything to maintain the Roman system. In fact, the provinces didn't gain independence through rebellion, instead they were abandoned as Rome fell prey to forces from outside the Empire. Further, many of these provinces tried the recreate the Roman Empire after it's demise. Notably, the Holy Roman Empire.
As for the crusades, that always ignores the four centuries of Islamic conquests of Europe and Christian Kingdoms that led to the crusades. This includes almost all of North Africa and the Horn of Africa. It also ignores the continued conquests of central and eastern Europe after the Ottoman Turks defeated the Byzantine Empire. But we all know that narrative is more important than historical accuracy.
It also ignores how European empires accomplished their success, which was heavily based upon working with internal divisions and native allies to build their colonies, even during the Roman era. In fact after Augustus, Rome only added two new provinces to it's empire, and even Augustus and Julius didn't conquer every province they could and often chose diplomacy over warfare to achieve their goals. Roman leaders were extremely pragmatic about conquests and only felt conquest was justified if it was profitable and then only if dominance couldn't be achieved via other means (alliances and diplomacy, although over time Rome did incorporate many of it's allies into the Empire, usually bloodlessly). Many allies were never incorporated because it was more beneficial to Rome to maintain them as independent, client states.
Yep, those terrible Euros, even the Romans, who did terrible things. Like not eating people in conquered countries. Unlike the locals.
I'm so glad every other country but those dastardly European/western ones did nothing that would necessitate an apology. They are blameless angels and continue to be, despite active slavery, indentured servitude and throwing people off buildings for wrong think.
Here's another asshole who needs to give up anything linked to European sources in the past 3000 years. After that, I might listen to him.
Abolishing slaveryā¦
Exactly! The enlightenment happened because of western civilization. Now whites are supposed to apologize for making a better life, which politicians have screwed up, for the world? Itās not the capitalist system, itās the idiots in government thatās making life difficult for everyone.
Whoever Europeans ow an apology to (more likely each other by now,) it is damn sure not a bunch of Islamofascist Totalitarians who werenāt even around 3000 years ago!
Fuck this Politically Correct Woke bullshit!
OK, and where was Reason during those days in 2020 when many state governors (and all blue state governors) unilaterally shut down their states and tried to dictate what commerce could/could not go on? Or is dictatorship OK when it's done by Democrats in the name of Covid?
Spreading covid fear propaganda
Where were you? No reading Reason, obviously.
According to the new narrative, that is all Trump's fault.
See Olympics, Australian Open, Canadian Hockey, etc. This doesn't seem like something that is too out of the norm.
I've decided that I will not be watching or paying any attention to this particular World Cup tournament.
But, that has more to do with the obvious corruption in the bidding process and the whole imported slave labor thing than it does with whether they can sell beer at the stadiums or wear rainbow armbands. Speaking of which, is the USMNT required to change its logo back to the non-rainbow variety?
Also the time of year and time of day that the matches are played aren't great for watching from North America.
Iāve decided that I will not be watching or paying any attention to this particular World Cup tournament.
Same here. Mostly because I don't like soccer.
It's up against NFL and NCAA football.
I'll watch when convenient, but don't much care.
Millionaires playing a kids game.
Please do explain why some radical idiots insist on inserting Gay aggressive politics in world wide sporting event.
WHO HOPPEN? Did a gay gunman mow down a congregation of devout mowhammedan girl-bulliers?
It happens right here in the USA to a limited number of Americans.
The state (federal government) determines where (or if) you are allowed to work. The state determines the type of occupation you are allowed to perform. The state determines who you are allowed to be friends with.
That happens right here in the USA. For example: innocent Americans wrongly blacklisted after 9/11 arenāt allowed to make a livelihood working on high rise buildings (ie: high demand job with few applicants). John Ashcroftās abuses of the federal āMaterial Witness Statuteā continue some 20 years later.
Relatives of intelligence personnel (that never signed up) are literally born into slavery and indentured servitude. Relatives cannot choose not to work for the intel agencies. There is no government-watchdog or IG that will end these practices right here in the USA! Letās start at home before judging other nations!
It is about soccer. Not politics. Stop trying to inject it. They already did with the LGBT shields. Just let soccer be soccer.
Just let soccer be soccer.
Can't be soccer without drunken hooliganism.
Well. Not true this year.
We can't 'let soccer be soccer' when it's taking place in a morally bankrupt setting. The fact is that FIFA is corrupt, Qatar is a vile regime known for human rights abuses, and the majority of the world's population are not welcome ot attend for one reason or another.
It is obviously a scandal that overwhelms the sporting event.
(FIFA) has further besmirched its already tainted reputation.
As far as I can tell, all the board members of FIFA are former UN representatives. It's not possible for their reputations to be "further besmirched", like a pig that's fallen into a septic tank and burst into flames.
āThe Ugly Americanā in its newest form: arrogant liberals assuming that their world view is the only correct world view; that liberal licentious polices are good and all other policies are bad.
The level of intolerance of other cultures should disqualify this author from future public stages; he is a bigot and disrespectful of other diverse cultures. Respect diversity.
Your argument would hold more water if (a) you didnāt just engage in wanton name-calling and (b( Qatar hadnāt agreed to certain conditions upon acceptance of their bid, and backed out of those agreements with just days left to go. One would say Qatar engaged in a bait-and-switch. Are you OK now if the argument is framed in the context of holding up the terms of a contractual agreement?
Fuck off. Go tell the Qataris about diversity.
Note to foreign readers: Trumpanzee Mises Caucus Tea Party ani insist on spewing in the comments section behind masques.
Go get āem tiger!
Well, if 'culture' is the standard of morality, then not only could you not condemn another culture, you could not even condemn your own. The Founding Fathers, the Abolitionists, supporters of gender and LGBTQ+ equality, or any other supporters of Individual Rights would all be moral outlaws with Cultural Relativism.
All this, of course, assumes that you're serious about this above statement.
You will drink No-alcohol beer and be happy.
Even Klaus Schwab would raise Hell at that thought. š
I went to a sleep clinic and a soccer game broke out.
Televised soccer: Europe's equivalent to a test pattern.
Jed Clampett didn't drink beer either, but that didn't stop Mr. Drysdale from sucking up to that oil millionaire.
Not the best example. Jed Clampett drank Granny's 'shine and described it thus:
"Edge? This stuff'll strip paint!" š
And Granny smoked crawdads after she "got a little pot." š
Smoking Crawdad with a Little Pot
https://youtu.be/XOkrg-BWXgA
And let's not forget Jed Clampett's Libertarian quote. Get 'em, Jed! š :
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/aa/14/ed/aa14edd89525793b097baf02da1e36c3.jpg
Qatar has a royal family? This authoritarian of European descent wants to know when their next election day is.
In my opinion, "Budweiser-- Official Beer of Sharia Qatar 2022" just doesn't cut it as a topnotch advertising tagline.
Well, actually the royal family made this decision in 2010, but their mail in ballot was only discovered last week.
I think soccer players would be number 28 on Mark Twain's fire rescue list.
Maybe Budweiser thought they were sponsoring a Real Football tournament?
Stay-at-home mom Kelly Richards from New York after quitting her full-time job managed to earn an average of between $6,000 and $8,000 a month freelancing at home...
Here's how she did it..............>>> onlinecareer1
Herbert Hoover went to a ball game before the 1932 election that threw God's Own Prohibitionists under the bus for the next 6 administrations. As soon as the crowd knew he was there, everyone in the stadium chanted "WE WANT BEER." Anything religious fanatics hate can't be all bad.
Did he keep his beer in the Coolidge?
He had a machine that made Eis in an hour. š
Rumor has it, his beer of choice was Miller Genuine Taft!
I would think it would be
JohnSam Adams. šWhatzisname at Anheuser Busch wrote a letter demanding that the feds keep robbing and shooting people over weed. Once their product was legalized, "the" law became a valuable ally in shutting down the competition. Nazi see, nazi doo.
You know who else played host to a prestigious international sporting event despite a less than stellar human rights record?
Did he make cuckolding into a sport after that? š
Kudos to Qatar for demanding that its cultural norms be respected within its own country.
Their Islamic religIon demands the cultural norms of Qatar for this entire Planet.
Fuck the Qatari Islamofascists and fuck their Western sycophants...including you!
Yeah, the only ones who are allowed to push their cultural norms on the rest of the world are globohomo!
soccer is retarded
Okay, admittedly I'm not a professional sports fan. I sometimes enjoyed play games in my younger days, and enjoyed watching friends and family play organized sports occasionally, but even so I think this article is silly. FIFA corruption and the business of professional sports couldn't matter less to me. Many people, including myself, might like to travel to exotic places - even those with despotic societies - without supporting their rights violations thereby. Likewise, FIFA holding international sports competitions in Qatar does not automatically imply support for religious tyranny. The NBA playing games in China does not imply support for the tyrannical regime or communist idealogy.
So should FIFA not have held the event at Qatar or not? It seems like Boehm is hedging his words even while he expressed moral outrage.
The argument for WC at Qatar is the same for free trade - in the long run, it's bad for these countries to be shut out and isolated. Their people will benefit from interaction with the west.
All of that is true. But at the end of the day, the money from WC and trade will fund and enrich the regime committing atrocities. China, where modern day slavery occurs, takes 70% or more from ticket sales. Hollywood says nothing.
At the end of the day, it's about money. This is why capitalism takes a beating in the lefty circle. There's little inequitable about the system, but given freedom, most companies will deal with crappy human beings to make more money. Why is Budweiser sponsoring this? They would drop Kanye if they had a deal with him.
"The clearest sign of authoritarianism may be when people of different classes are not afforded the same rights and privileges."
No, the clearest sign of authoritarianism is when nations refuse to tolerate any diversity of opinion and impose their will upon a world that doesn't want it.
Notice how Qatar has no issue sending their players to our illiberal nations, but we freak out as soon as the shoe is on the other foot. They aren't afraid of cultural exchange transforming their culture and laws. Why are we?
So are you saying we should adopt their culture and prohibit alcohol entirely and homosexuality punishable by death?
That's about the stupidest interpretation of what awildseaking said that I can imagine.
Sport at the administrative level seems to accrete the wannabe's, the never were's , pervs, and pompous hang arounds. The higher you go in sport, the worse it can be. FIFA is a prime example. Too bad, chasing a soccer ball around the field is just fun.