

Potassium Enjoyer
2.6K posts









We need an investigation as to why FIFA explicitly set out to increase the "inclusivity" of the 2026 World Cup teams and decrease the number of European players. I have the documents demonstrating that the intense Africanization you are witnessing in this World Cup is NOT a result of talent but a concerted effort by FIFA to bring about "greater global representation in the World Cup...through slot reallocations favoring non-European confederations, and rhetoric around inclusivity" Here are the documents: a. theballbusiness.com/fifa-world-cup… b. carleton.ca/profbrouard/wp… FIFA approved the expansion of teams from 32 to 48 teams starting in 2026 in order "to increase participation, particularly from Africa, Asia, and the Caribbean." FIFA frames this as making the tournament "more global than ever" and reducing thereby "Euro-centrism" in soccer = reducing the fact that Europeans and White guys like Messi have dominated the sport for a century. This should not surprise us: FIFA officially promotes "diversity," "inclusion," "anti-discrimination," and human rights in official policies, World Cup strategies, and campaigns. The goal of FIFA and Western multiculturalism is the marketing of football as a "universal, multicultural sport." They will never allow a winning White team again. Only teams that are not as good will be allowed to be White so you can see them lose against negrofied teams. The New York Times reported this on June 5: how FIFA set out to elevate African and reduce Europe: nytimes.com/athletic/73248…



Yes, let's discuss France. 1. There are countless examples of all-white or almost-all-white teams outperforming in soccer, such as Croatia, Argentina, Uruguay (ruling out "it's just because they're rich" explanations), Denmark, Portugal, the Netherlands, Iceland's "golden generation"... You could just as easily make the opposite argument. 2. Is an almost-100% black team "diverse"? 3. As we are seeing this year apparently black footballers while very good in many places are apparently bad at shootouts so you could argue it's why France lost in 2022 to all-white Argentina team. 4. In 2002 France was heavily favored to win and yet lost in the knock-out stages, subsequent reporting showed it was because of ethnoreligious strife within the team. Could diversity not always be a strength? 5. In 2006 France famously lost to all-white Italy team after Materazzi insulted Zinedine Zidane's mother and the latter chimped out, something which only befuddles people who have never interacted with Maghrebi Muslims (interesting that in spite of major public pressure Zidane has always refused to apologize for his chimp-out). 6. The audience for soccer in France has been slowly taken over by the audience for rugby which was a very niche sport when I was a child; although nobody wants to say this outloud the reason is obviously that rugby is white-coded while soccer is non-white-coded. In French culture, soccer has gone from a factor of social unity that transcended class/culture/geography/etc. to a factor of class/race division. French soccer is probably dead over the long run because people are watching less and less. 7. See below for how France achieves such excellent "diversity"




In fact the shooter seems to have been a Kurd or an Arab with Turkish citizenship and also a member of the Miri Clan. He shot up the shelter over a custody dispute ahead of a meeting he was supposed to have with his (I guess estranged) baby momma and child.





Much is being made over the penalty kicks but simply in general the German and Dutch teams overall lack class and aura. Not sure I’d even blame diversity since Portugal and Spain also somewhat struggle here while France does not.



Now do France. The argument falls apart. The French team has been ethnically diverse for quite some time. They have been one of the world’s best international teams for a decade. Winners in 2018. Runners up in 2022 (lost on penalties). Favourites for this World Cup.



