American football, for example, is the clearest example of a dictatorship in sport. After all, you have one self-important and strutting bloke, the polished and preening quarterback, calling all the shots down to the minutest detail - even as six big guys in front of him are given the key role of ensuring that the MAN doesn't get whacked by any one of the insurgents who are out to get him.

Golf, meanwhile, would be an aristocracy, composed as it is of individuals answerable only to themselves, whose common feature is splendid wealth, garnered principally while spending balmy days doing three-fifths of bugger-all.

Aussie rules is sheer anarchy with the major rule being that there are no rules to speak of, and even such rules as there are may be ruthlessly ignored with few serious consequences.

Do you get the drift?

Cricket, is of course socialism, turning on the definition once provided by William Temple, the Archbishop of Canterbury, which had that sport pegged as "organised loafing", which is closest to socialism, while rugby union is democracy - a complete shemozzle, whereby, though someone is nominally in charge, everyone still does pretty much whatever they like, within certain broad guidelines.

OK, so you are with me now?

The question we are are asking today however, is this: if all sport in 2017 was boiled down to a general political philosophy, would it, by nature, be progressive or conservative?

I'll give you a moment or two to think, and then write your answer down, while I pass the time pondering my clear-cut case.

Dum-de dum, dum-dum. Ready? Got it? Pens down.

The answer is ... progressive. I say that sport and sportspeople are with a few exceptions - and here's a special hello to you, Margaret Court - by their nature in favour of change and not clinging to a past long-gone.

(I know, I know, the hemlines of my own political philosophy might be showing, but what do I care?)

Look at the evidence.

In America, see the extraordinary support in recent times from basketballers and footballers leading the charge on taking a knee to support the Black Lives Matter campaign. Even with overwhelming pressure brought to bear by the White House and more recently such owners as the Dallas Cowboys' Jerry Jones, the solidarity by the players, black and white, in seeking positive change has been remarkable. And yes, there have been many NFL footballers who decline to take a knee, but in terms of loud voices from American sports people raised in support of Donald Trump, they remain a tiny minority.

In New Zealand's flag debate, where did the most famed sportsperson in the country stand? Why, Richie McCaw was public in support of the view that NZ could do better than have the flag of another nation emblazoned as the principal feature of their own flag, and he received wide support from fellow sportspeople for doing so.

Here in Australia, the current issue is of course same-sex marriage, and of course we have had all of the AFL, NRL and ARU, among many sporting organisations coming out strongly in favour of the progressive view that everyone living beneath the Southern Cross should have equal rights when it comes to marriage, regardless of their sexuality. That view has received massive support from sportspeople, with everyone from David Pocock to Ian Thorpe and Ian Roberts being very public in their support. On Monday they were joined by 16 people across 13 sports, including Benji Marshall, Anna Flanagan and Emma McKeon, who have released online a series of clips with all of them giving variations of "yes". Another online campaign with more Australian sports stars will be released on Thursday, under the hashtag of #SkinIntheGame, again pushing the "yes" side.

And yes, I know that Israel Folau has gently lined up on the "no" side of the debate, but can you tell me anyone of note in the world of sport, who is also under 50, who is with him?

My point is this.

I respectfully submit that those who so vociferously criticise sportspeople lining up with progressive causes - saying sport and politics shouldn't mix, blah, blah - just don't get it. Big-time sport is more than just tries, goals and trophies. It is a collection of people, mostly young people, who are by their very nature, brave, confident and far-seeing. I say that, generally, those who prosper in sport are those who are young, fresh and prepared to try new ways. If they are really going to crack things wide open they must not think that something must continue to be done, just because that is the way it has always been done, but rather, embrace change. I say that, therefore, what goes with that sporting territory is a tendency to back progressive, not conservative causes.

And I finally contend that history judges sport well for that very reason and that beyond their sporting achievements, the likes of Jackie Robinson, considered the first black American baseballer, Muhammad Ali, Peter Norman, Nicky Winmar, Billy-Jean King, the 1995 Springboks, Ian Roberts and Ian Thorpe can all take an even deeper bow because they aligned themselves with social progress and even helped pioneer it, before the rest of the mob followed.

Being progressive goes with the territory of excelling at sport, and is to be applauded, not derided.

Fire at will. See if I care.

Twitter: @Peter_Fitz