I believe a curious case of “Warrior-or-Pillager?” can be found in the figure of the Hooligan.
Figure 1.1
I will start by explaining the two most common representations of the Hooligan. First, and perhaps most widely known, is the crazy football (as in soccer) fan; what I will call a Type-1 Hooligan. This group has a violent and uncontrolled manner of fighting which involves the breaching of security fencing, annihilation of event security, and eventual confrontation of rival factions. Though this sounds more like the routine of a Pillager, I argue that they are Warriors. This is simply because they fight for nothing other than the spirit and support of their team (and perhaps slightly because of beer). Their dress is most often a shirtless painted torso, painted face, and jeans or warm-up pants. Ocassional accesories may include flags draped over the shoulder and/or a pint of beer in a plastic cup (see figure 1.1).
Figure 1.2
Continuing on, I will now explain what I call a Type-2 Hooligan (figure 1.2). These Hooligans are most often Irish men between the ages of 12 and 36. Their behaviors include bar fighting, breaking windows with rocks or bricks, theft, bullying, impregnation of girlfriends at inappropriate times, and boxing. Their dress generally consists of dirty jeans or wool pants, grey sweaters and turtlenecks, pierced ears (left ones only), and scarred eyebrows. Footwear varies between combat boots (or very high Doc Martins), converse high tops, and old running shoes. Hats are either skullcaps (a.k.a. beanies) or
newsboy caps.
Now here is an interesting thought. This group of hooligans is, in my opinion, a class of Pillager. This is because they act out of greed and general maliciousness. At no time do they commit an altruistic act (unless they are sucking up to someone such as a parent or teacher to get away with a minor crime). This brings me to my next point: I believe altruism is a key factor in the analysis of Warriors and Pillagers. I challenge anyone to think of a Pillager that acts in an altruistic manner, or vice versa.
So to sum up my entry, here is a simple breakdown of my argument…
1. There are two subcategories of Hooligans: Type 1 and Type 2.
2. Type 1 Hooligans are Warriors and Type 2 Hooligans are Pillagers.
3. Within the larger category of Hooligan we find both Warrior and Pillager.
4. Altruism may be a universal factor in the distinction between Warrior and Pillager.
Is this simply a case of two groups who incorrectly share a name? Or do people refer to both groups by the same name because the line between Warrior and Pillager is so faint in this circumstance? And, could this be because they do not view altruism as an important factor in the distinction between Warrior and Pillager?
- T Henry Barth
