A long and painful history has taken the form of the FIFA World Cup: a major international sporting event that was supposed to be an opportunity for nations to showcase their talent and showcase their ambitions for a bigger, more prosperous future.
But in the wake of a year of protests, a number of countries have decided that the sport is not worthy of their attention.
As the tournament approaches its conclusion, a different kind of tension looms.
The most significant change has been the announcement of a new format for the tournament, a move that has prompted some criticism from fans, with some commentators suggesting that the tournament has been hijacked by a small number of rich countries that are trying to control the destiny of the world’s sporting and economic landscape.
The change has led some pundits to argue that the World Cups have become the perfect vehicle for wealthy nations to exert their influence.
They argue that it is important to showcase the best talent from the developing world and to give the rich countries the ability to reap the rewards of their success.
And the World Chess Federation, the governing body for the sport, has said it wants to continue the tournament as a showcase of the sport in developing countries.
There is also the growing question of whether or not the World Championships will even be the tournament in the first place.
It was originally announced as a six-team tournament, but in the end, only two of the five countries that were to take part will be hosting the tournament.
In 2019, the United States and China will play in the tournament for the first time.
With the decision to cancel the tournament due to the political unrest, the future of the World Championship is in doubt.
If the world does end up with a world championship, the question remains: will the rich world get a bigger share of the pot?
This is an excerpt from “Who Owns the World: The Hidden History of the Globalized Games?” by Chris Karpinski and Chris R. Smith.