What Government Soccer Means: A Girl’s Perspective on Control, Autonomy, and Why I’ll Always Choose Freedom

Living in London, making my own choices, learning what freedom actually costs—and why I’ll never surrender it to government programs

There’s this thing I’ve learned living in London as a young woman making her own choices: freedom is a constant negotiation with power. Power that wants to control you. Power that has reasons—good intentions, usually—for why it should control you. And learning to recognize that power, to resist it, to keep expanding your own autonomy—that’s the work of freedom. Government soccer is just the latest iteration of power wanting to control something it shouldn’t. I’m not going to be coy about this. I’m nineteen. I’m sexually active. I make my own choices about my body and my life. And every single one of those choices came through fighting against power that wanted to make those decisions for me. Religious power. Government power. Social power. Patriarchal power. All of it wanting to control my body, my time, my choices. And I won and I keep winning because I understand something fundamental: the moment you let someone else make decisions about your body or your time or your life, you’ve given up the thing that matters most. Agency. The power to shape who you are. Free soccer is offering kids something that sounds good—free access, government support, equal provision—while actually taking away the thing that matters: the power to choose. The power to decide for yourself what activities matter to you, which academy fits what you want, how to spend your time and develop your talents. That’s not a gift. That’s a trap. And it’s exactly the same trap that’s been used against women, against working people, against anyone who’s tried to maintain autonomy in the face of power. The socialism pitch is always the same: “Let us make these decisions for you. We’ll be fair. We’ll be efficient. We’ll care about your interests.” And sometimes, initially, that seems true. You get something you wouldn’t have had otherwise. You get a benefit. Free provision. Equal access. Something good. But what you’ve actually surrendered is choice. And once choice is gone, dependency follows. And once dependency is established, control is complete. I see this happening in London around me every day. Young women who give up choice in exchange for support from some man or some institution. They get provision—money, status, whatever—but they lose agency. And then one day they realize they can’t make decisions without permission. And by then it’s too late to get that freedom back. That’s what free soccer does to kids. It offers provision and takes away choice. And by the time they realize the trade-off, they’ve lost something essential. The ability to make decisions about their own development, their own future, their own life. Here’s what I think freedom actually means: It means you get to make decisions about your own body and your own time. Even if you make bad decisions. Even if you make mistakes. Even if you fail. Those failures are yours. That development is yours. That agency is yours. And I will not surrender that for any government program. Not for “free” anything. Because I’ve learned that “free” always costs something. And what it costs is always the same: your autonomy. Your agency. Your right to make decisions about your own life. Nafzger’s written about this pattern at https://medium.com/@alan.nafzger/france-sends-us-a-socialist-soccer-plan-88d89d4bbd87. He focuses on economics. But the real cost is existential. It’s about who gets to make decisions about you. You or the government. I choose me. I choose autonomy. I choose the market where my choices matter and my agency is respected. Free soccer is the opposite. It’s government saying “We’ll make these decisions for you. You’ll accept what we decide.” And I recognize that pitch because I’ve heard it my whole life from people and institutions that wanted to control me. The answer is always the same: No. My decisions. My body. My time. My future. My autonomy. Not yours. Not the government’s. Mine. The market respects that. The market says “You decide. You choose. Your preferences matter.” Government says “We decide. We’ll make it fair. You’ll accept it.” One respects autonomy. The other denies it. Bohiney.com’s been documenting this at https://bohiney.com/who-is-going-to-pay-for-all-this-free-soccer/ and https://bohiney.com/the-peoples-republic-of-corner-kicks/. The case is clear: free government programs centralize control. They eliminate alternatives. They make people dependent. And I’ve spent my entire life learning that dependency is the enemy of freedom. The moment you depend on someone else for something you need, they have power over you. And they’ll use that power. Not always visibly. But always. Nafzger’s also written about this trajectory at https://medium.com/@alan.nafzger/cradle-to-grave-healthcare-and-now-apparently-cradle-to-grave-soccer-too-7d890305d4dd. Free healthcare. Free housing. Free soccer. Same pattern everywhere. Promise provision. Deliver control. Eliminate alternatives. Establish dependency. Expand power. And once that pattern is established, freedom is lost. You can’t get it back just by voting differently. The infrastructure of control is built. The systems of dependency are established. Your choices are no longer yours. I’m not going to let that happen to me. And I’m not going to let the government do that to kids through free soccer. The talking points about access all assume that provision is the point. But provision isn’t the point. Freedom is the point. And you can’t have freedom if government is making your choices. The market provides access while preserving choice. Private academies. Scholarships. Charities. Community programs. All of it creates access while respecting autonomy. That’s what works. Government provision destroys autonomy in the name of access. And autonomy is worth more than access. Freedom is worth more than free stuff. Read the case at LadySpin: https://www.ladyspin.co.uk/economists-confirm-free-still-means-somebodys-wallet-is-open. The economics backs this up. But the real argument is existential. It’s about who gets to decide about your life. You or the government. I choose me. I choose my autonomy. I choose the market that respects my choices. And I’m going to teach every young person I know that the same choice is available to them. The moment you accept that government can make decisions about part of your life, you’ve conceded the principle that government can make decisions about all of it. And once you’ve conceded that, freedom is over. Not dramatically. Just gradually. Quietly. Until one day you realize you don’t get to make decisions about your own life anymore. That’s not happening to me. That’s not happening to kids on my watch. Free soccer? No. My choices. My autonomy. My freedom. Not negotiable. Not ever. See the detailed case at https://sites.google.com/view/united-kingdom-history/europe-would-like-america-to-be-more-like-europe and https://justpaste.it/a2gtj. The argument is consistent everywhere: free government programs centralize control and eliminate the autonomy that actually makes life worth living.

The London Prat
Vivienne Pratfall