Hockey, Movies & Politics

[August1991]

Why do people choose sides? Why are there fans?

I have been thinking about this question this for some time, and I wondered whether to put it in the Moral/Religious section. For better or worse, I opted for the Federal section. If you'll bear with me, I'll explain why at the end of this diatribe (rant?).

Step One

Let's be honest, if you are an Edmonton Oilers fan and you scream and yell in front of a TV during an Edmonton Oilers game, the Edmonton Oilers are no more nor less likely to win the game. Your screaming will make no difference. Even if you go to the Edmonton hockey forum and scream and yell, it will make no difference. (If you had not gone and not been there to yell, would the Edmonton Oilers have lost the game?)

Nevertheless, there are many, many hockey fans. People who not only love watching the game, but also choose sides - fans. Many years ago, I recall sitting in a bar in Red Deer Alberta and as people came in and looked at the TV, they announced "it's the Stamps game" or "it's the Eskimo game". (Believe me, I thought I had landed on the planet Mars, but I digress.)

Step Two

Movies. People choose to be fans of movie stars or movie directors, and follow the success of their favoured stars. Weekend box office figures are weekly news on google.

Step Three

Once again, let's be honest. If you are a Liberal voter, your vote will not change anything in the result on election night. The NDP is filled with partisans who want to change society, make a difference. But the fact is that one vote will not make a difference. (Knock on doors? Like missionaries? In modern Canada?)

My question or thought is why do people choose sides? Their individual action makes absolutely and obviously no difference in the grand scheme of things. Yet people do (and they even knock on doors to tell others about their choice!)

For awhile, I thought it was precisely that, a question of announcing something about one's self. If you tell others that you vote NDP, or support the Boston Red Sox, or think Mel Gibson is a good guy, then you say something about yourself. But many people keep their opinions about such things private, yet nevertheless they choose sides in their mind. Choosing sides is not always about showing something to others.

So I have no obvious answer about why people choose sides. Maybe it's just more fun to watch a hockey game when you want one side to win.

-----

No one really knows what democracy is but some define it as "everyone gets one vote". Well, broad-based suffrage is relatively new. Voter turn out is declining. I'm not surprised. It seems to me that people vote for political parties the same way they choose movie stars and hockey teams. It obviously makes no overall difference how one person votes but it makes the game or movie more interesting to watch if the person chooses sides.

The Right's response to this problem is to say government doesn't work - politicians are corrupt. The Left argues that we are ultimately all together in this boat and we have to find a way to work this out. "Think globally, act locally."

If democracy with universal suffrage is to work, if Canadian federalism is to work, we must figure out why one person bothers to choose sides.

Lastly, I am irritated by this forum's debate style recently. It seems that too many fanboys are posting one liners. To name names, Terrible Sweal, BigDude, ScottBrison, TheLiberal are like the fans at a hockey game who wear shirts and hold up signs. Hey guys, why bother? Your actions will not change the result of the game in any way whatsoever. [To be accurate, BigDude at least post links to good news articles.]

[The Terrible Sweal]

Lastly, I am irritated by this forum's debate style recently.  It seems that too many fanboys are posting one liners.  To name names, Terrible Sweal, BigDude, ScottBrison, TheLiberal ...

August, I have rarely heard a more pompous whinge. You don't like hearing from posters who don't agree with your stance that Liberals are evil. Whoopee. At least none of us squirrel away a nasty snipe like yours here at the end of a longwinded disjointed spew.

[Argus]

Lastly, I am irritated by this forum's debate style recently.  It seems that too many fanboys are posting one liners.  To name names, Terrible Sweal, BigDude, ScottBrison, TheLiberal ...

August, I have rarely heard a more pompous whinge. You don't like hearing from posters who don't agree with your stance that Liberals are evil. Whoopee. At least none of us squirrel away a nasty snipe like yours here at the end of a longwinded disjointed spew.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think August, after Kimmy, is the best poster here in terms of intelligent, moderate and thoughtful posts that don't insult anyone's intelligence.

You, on the other hand, are one of the more insult-prone, juvenile and venom-filled posters who rarely contributes much of value.

[Riverwind]

August, I have rarely heard a more pompous whinge.  You don't like hearing from posters who don't agree with your stance that Liberals are evil.  Whoopee.  At least none of us squirrel away a nasty snipe like yours here at the end of a longwinded disjointed spew.

August did not complain about my posts which include a lot of pro-Liberal statements. Don't try to dismiss the criticisms from August as pure partisanship.

[Redneck Savage]

Good point August!

I think it is a guy thing that makes us want to get others to see our point of view. We will yell & scream to get the last word, in hopes that you will change your opinion. Many good arguments are brought forth, but most people on this forum have a party in mind and nobody is going to sway them!

It goes from there and becomes a pissing contest and we try to convince the others of who is the most corrupt politician.

For many of us righties, it is frustrating to hear pro Liberals like Brison & THELIBERAL(aka:MORON) tell us how clean their party is and that anyone who disagrees with them is WRONG. Most of what is posted here is what we have gathered from the media and lots from the Gomery Inquiry and it appears to be damning testimony, yet Brison & THELIBERAL will argue and trash anyone who brings this up. They are both a negative on this forum for their tactics and makes it tough to enjoy a good debate.

Sweal is a long-winded postaholic who just likes to see his name on anything, whether or not it has any substance whatsoever.

Kimmy & August seem to be the forum elite, who are very insightful and in no way insulting.

If the forum could rid themselves of some of these trolls & instigaters it would make this quite enjoyable!

[The Terrible Sweal]

You, on the other hand, are one of the more insult-prone, juvenile and venom-filled posters who rarely contributes much of value.

I don't insult people. As for contributions of value, you simply disagree with my values and I yours. Trying to build that disagreement into a critique is merely an attempt to silence a POV you disagree with. One you cannot argue effectivley against.

[The Terrible Sweal]

Now, Argus, if you want insulting ...

Good point August!

I think it is a guy thing that makes us want to get others to see our point of view. We will yell & scream to get the last word, in hopes that you will change your opinion. Many good arguments are brought forth, but most people on this forum have a party in mind and nobody is going to sway them!

It goes from there and becomes a pissing contest and we try to convince the others of who is the most corrupt politician.

For many of us righties, it is frustrating to hear pro Liberals like Brison & THELIBERAL(aka:MORON) tell us how clean their party is and that anyone who disagrees with them is WRONG. Most of what is posted here is what we have gathered from the media and lots from the Gomery Inquiry and it appears to be damning testimony, yet Brison & THELIBERAL will argue and trash anyone who brings this up. They are both a negative on this forum for their tactics and makes it tough to enjoy a good debate.

Sweal is a long-winded postaholic who just likes to see his name on anything, whether or not it has any substance whatsoever.

Kimmy & August seem to be the forum elite, who are very insightful and in no way insulting.

If the forum could rid themselves of some of these trolls & instigaters it would make this quite enjoyable!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Melanie_]

Sorry for the fanboy (girl?) one liner, but this thread sounds like my daughter's sixth grade class.

[Guest eureka]

It was a pompous whinge and unworthy of you August. Your thoughts are interesting and there is much that could be said about them. That sentence that Sweal took exception too spoils the mood: as evidenced by the juvenile responses.

Melanie is right. However, you raise some interesting questions that could bear examination if anyone really has an interest in learning something.

One liners have their place where something posted deserves no more Would you have had Bob Hope and most other American "comedians" kicked off the stage?

[shoe-in]

Lastly, I am irritated by this forum's debate style recently.  It seems that too many fanboys are posting one liners.  To name names, Terrible Sweal, BigDude, ScottBrison, TheLiberal ...

At least none of us squirrel away a nasty snipe like yours here at the end of a longwinded disjointed spew.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

lol

"People who know little are usually great talkers, while men who know much say little." - Jean Jacques Rousseau

[Argus]

It was a pompous whinge and unworthy of you August. Your thoughts are interesting and there is much that could be said about them. That sentence that Sweal took exception too spoils the mood: as evidenced by the juvenile responses.

Melanie is right. However, you raise some interesting questions that could bear examination if anyone really has an interest in learning something.

One liners have their place where something posted deserves no more  Would you have had Bob Hope and most other American "comedians" kicked off the stage?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Interesting that both you and Sweal misspell a common word, the same word, in the same way. I wonder if it's possible that you and Sweal are one in the same.

[The Terrible Sweal]

It was a pompous whinge and unworthy of you August. Your thoughts are interesting and there is much that could be said about them. That sentence that Sweal took exception too spoils the mood: as evidenced by the juvenile responses.

Melanie is right. However, you raise some interesting questions that could bear examination if anyone really has an interest in learning something.

One liners have their place where something posted deserves no more  Would you have had Bob Hope and most other American "comedians" kicked off the stage?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Interesting that both you and Sweal misspell a common word, the same word, in the same way. I wonder if it's possible that you and Sweal are one in the same.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I dont see any misspelling in eureka"s post.

[Guest eureka]

Something I never do, Argus, is comment on another's spelling or grammar. Who knows, they might be dyslexic or unfortunately educated. Or they might be Argus.

I noticed in a number of places a certain word I would like to see you spell. It may be principals or principles: your meanings are never too clear whatever the spelling, so, perhaps, you are spelling it correctly.

But, thanks for the compliment.

[kimmy]

Argus, "whinge" isn't a misspelling, it's a word in its own right. It's like "whine", but sounds more sophisticated. Call people "whiners", and you sound uncreative. But call them "whingers", and you sound sophisticated. I'd only heard British people use "whinge" before now, but that's one of the wonders of the Internet. You can learn slang from all over the globe! For me, the internet has shattered the illusion that the British are classier than us Colonials.

Bob Hope? No, I don't believe he should have been kicked off the stage... but I don't believe you'd have found Bob Hope on the stage at a debate society or academic forum. He'd have kicked himself off that stage, or more likely never got on it.

There are certainly messages that deserve only a one line response (or none at all). However, if I've gone to the trouble of thoroughly articulating a position, and somebody replies with a one-liner about Gurmant Grewal's tape-recorder or so on, I don't think that's constructive in the least. It's just partisan boosterism. The mentality is "well if she made a point for her side, then I've gotta make a point for my side, even if I don't have anything relevant to say." In this respect, it's much like August's comparison to sports-fans.

What is it about Canadian politics that provokes this spirit of "boo-yah!" combativeness?

-k

[Guest eureka]

All politics the world over are "boo-yah" combativeness in the public face, Kimmy. Here, we do try to dig a little deeper, but that will not stop the combativeness breaking out. Sometimes, too, it adds to the amusement and lightens up what could be otherwisw deadly dull.

Not that I was ever a fan of Bob Hope or most American humourists. The one-liners reflect the attention span of the average American audience.

[Newfie Canadian]

What is it about Canadian politics that provokes this spirit of "boo-yah!" combativeness?

Alas kimmy, I don't think Canadian politics has a monopoly on that attitude. Multi-party cooperation appears to have gone the way of the Great Auk just about everywhere.

I suspect the root cause is that which makes the world go around: money.

To win you need money, to stay in power you need money, stay in power long enough, you'll have money, or the means outside of politics to get it. Witness Brian Tobin for example.

With such a prize, is it any wonder politics has degenerated into the petty and sometimes juvenile circus that we see every night on the news?

I digress.

[The Terrible Sweal]

What is it about Canadian politics that provokes this spirit of "boo-yah!" combativeness?

Tories.

[Argus]

Argus, "whinge" isn't a misspelling, it's a word in its own right. It's like "whine", but sounds more sophisticated. Call people "whiners", and you sound uncreative. But call them "whingers", and you sound sophisticated. I'd only heard British people use "whinge" before now, but that's one of the wonders of the Internet. You can learn slang from all over the globe! For me, the internet has shattered the illusion that the British are classier than us Colonials.

Ah, interesting. But that really doesn't affect my suggestion. No one uses terms like that. Odd they would both even know what it meant, let alone use it. They both have the same bitter, venomous left wing politics, and share the same bigoted, simple-minded view of Americans. Sweal = Eureka? Has there ever been a topic where they disagreed?

[The Terrible Sweal]

Argus, "whinge" isn't a misspelling, it's a word in its own right. It's like "whine", but sounds more sophisticated. Call people "whiners", and you sound uncreative. But call them "whingers", and you sound sophisticated. I'd only heard British people use "whinge" before now, but that's one of the wonders of the Internet. You can learn slang from all over the globe! For me, the internet has shattered the illusion that the British are classier than us Colonials.

Ah, interesting. But that really doesn't affect my suggestion. No one uses terms like that. Odd they would both even know what it meant, let alone use it. They both have the same bitter, venomous left wing politics, and share the same bigoted, simple-minded view of Americans. Sweal = Eureka? Has there ever been a topic where they disagreed?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Just to put a end to your peurile speculations, I'll tell you ... Eureka and I disagreed fairly vehemently on SSM.

[Argus]

Ah, interesting. But that really doesn't affect my suggestion. No one uses terms like that. Odd they would both even know what it meant, let alone use it. They both have the same bitter, venomous left wing politics, and share the same bigoted, simple-minded view of Americans. Sweal = Eureka? Has there ever been a topic where they disagreed?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Just to put a end to your peurile speculations, I'll tell you ... Eureka and I disagreed fairly vehemently on SSM.

Why is my speculation puerile? Are you going to try and take the position that some posters don't have alter-egos, sometimes used to back them up in arguments, sometimes simply for trolling?

If not, then there's nothing puerile about speculating on who might be whose alter ego, especially when two characters are fairly similar and make similar lapses. I'd say that of all the posters here, the most venomous and bitter are you and Eureka, and share - virtually - identical politics.

[PocketRocket]

MELANIE hit the nail on the hea when she said this thread reminds her of her daughter's sixth grade class.

I disagree somewhat; all this *wingeing* is more typical of a bunch of 3rd grades.

FYI, ARGUS, while this is my first use of the word in a forum, I have read it many times as I am a fan of a few British satire/comedy writers.

One of the reasons I don't use it in speach is simple, I'm not sure how to pronounce it, and have been to lazy to search it.

Can't we try, just for a while, to quit with all the bullcr*p insults and posturing, people???

[The Terrible Sweal]

Why is my speculation puerile?

Why? Because you are immature. How? Let me count the ways ...

First, like anyone lacking perspective or experience, you cannot distinguish important stylistic differences between writers, and so your speculations are not likely to be accurate.

Are you going to try and take the position that some posters don't have alter-egos, sometimes used to back them up in arguments, sometimes simply for trolling?

Second, you resort to imperfectly logical rhetorical diversions in support of your speculations.

If not, then there's nothing puerile about speculating on who might be whose alter ego,

Third, your speculations are driven by emotions around who you disagree with, rather than a sensible assessment of other posters actual posts.

... especially when two characters are fairly similar and make similar lapses.

Fourth, despite facts to the contrary, you persist in folly rather than adjusting yourself.

I'd say that of all the posters here, the most venomous and bitter are you and Eureka, ...

Fifth, your thinking is solipsistic and self-exceptional.

[I miss Reagan]

Argus, "whinge" isn't a misspelling, it's a word in its own right. It's like "whine", but sounds more sophisticated. Call people "whiners", and you sound uncreative. But call them "whingers", and you sound sophisticated. I'd only heard British people use "whinge" before now, but that's one of the wonders of the Internet. You can learn slang from all over the globe! For me, the internet has shattered the illusion that the British are classier than us Colonials.

Ah, interesting. But that really doesn't affect my suggestion. No one uses terms like that. Odd they would both even know what it meant, let alone use it. They both have the same bitter, venomous left wing politics, and share the same bigoted, simple-minded view of Americans. Sweal = Eureka? Has there ever been a topic where they disagreed?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hmm, makes sense to me although I figured Sweal and Takeanumber were one and the same. I tend to group the venom spewers together under "the usual suspects" category.

[The Terrible Sweal]

Venom, eh? Y'know what venom is? Venom is hating the poor or the few or the weak and exacting cruel policies at their expense. Venom is calling a formr colleague a whore when she dissents on principle. Venom is using falsifed tapes to besmirch reputations. Venom is tarring a whole group based on evidence applicable to only a few.

Venom is waging a campaign of false accusations because you don't agree with other posters. Venom is exploding with insults when your points are demolished.

Venom? Yeah, we know all about it.

[RB]

lighten up folks

why can't we all just get along?