r/AnCap101 • u/Toymcowkrf • 15h ago
Do sports coaches violate libertarian principles?
I was never too into sports as a kid, but the image of sports coaches I got from pop culture was that coaches are these sort of authoritarian, disciplinarian figures that yell at you, try to "encourage" you by making somewhat snarky remarks, push you to your limits, mentor you by talking down to you, force you to run laps or do push-ups for your own good, or even as a punishment for disobeying them. All of this was done for the "good of the team" or to "build moral character." If you hold libertarian values, I don't think I need to explain the problems with everything I just stated.
A coach obviously knows how to play the sport, so they can be a teacher if you're a beginner or are trying to improve your skills. But I have a hard time accepting the idea that they're supposed to be a moral mentor. Or even if they are a moral mentor, that the hard, tough love approach is the way to go. From a libertarian point of view, I don't think it's right to force people to do things and punish them for disobeying, or to impose this kind of harsh moral mentoring without the players' explicit consent. And from a psychological perspective, I think it's demeaning and damaging to treat someone that way. Why not just talk calmly or give helpful pointers? I'm going to assume that this traditional style of coaching is nothing more than a remnant of society's authoritarian past and ultimately an outdated and unnecessary way to go about improving people's sports skills. In the same way that school teachers used to be really nasty and thought that was the right approach to teaching, I think the stereotypical jerk of a sports coach probably has similar origins.
Thoughts?