Should Don Cherry Have Been Fired?

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, OftenWrong said:

It seems like you are saying suppressing free speech is free speech. If you cannot see the contradiction in that then
excuse me, but I cannot help you.

I think that people complain about things all the time.  Its allowed.

[OftenWrong]

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I think that people complain about things all the time.  Its allowed.

And you are allowed to complain that my ideas are horseshit, and then come back later saying the same things yourself. Presumably because I am well ahead of you, and in the meantime you have learned.

The reason I said cancel culture will eventually cancel itself is I saw some reference to it the other day in the media stream. People are getting tired of the constant outrage and condemnation, and don't actually give much of a heck about a lot of things anyway. Apathy is a beautiful beach.

[Michael Hardner]

32 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

1. And you are allowed to complain that my ideas are horseshit, and then come back later saying the same things yourself. Presumably because I am well ahead of you, and in the meantime you have learned.

2. The reason I said cancel culture will eventually cancel itself is I saw some reference to it the other day in the media stream. People are getting tired of the constant outrage and condemnation, and don't actually give much of a heck about a lot of things anyway. Apathy is a beautiful beach.

1. I suppose.  Did I do that ?

2. And yet, they just cancelled a major media figure.  Of course it will die out eventually... the Dixie Chicks blackout did, the McCarthy hearings did but the culture will also change, I think.  Amos and Andy got cancelled... in the 50s...

[Moonlight Graham]

There isn't much point in celebrating Remembrance Day in our schools when the students aren't taught or properly taught about most of Canada's key historical events and wars.  To not do so, which we don't, is in fact a huge disrespect to those that fought and were killed/injured/risked their lives for our country.  You can't remember or honour what they sacrificed if you don't even know what they did in the first place.

I shudder to think what % of Canadians born after ~1970 knows the name of our PM who was in office during WWII.

And the Citizenship tests are a joke.  They get you to try to read tons of facts but the actual test is a joke, a buffoon could pass it.

Edited November 23, 2019 by Moonlight Graham

[jacee]

On 11/21/2019 at 7:01 PM, OftenWrong said:

It seems like you are saying suppressing free speech is free speech. If you cannot see the contradiction in that then
excuse me, but I cannot help you.

We all have free speech. If I don't like what you say, I speak up. You may be drowned out ... or fired. Oh well. 

There is no contradiction in that. 

Free speech has consequences. 

I have noticed though that the far right think only they have free speech, and everybody else has to listen to them. Lol  That's ridiculous. Nobody promised anybody an adoring audience. People get booed off the stage all the time. 

Edited November 23, 2019 by jacee

[OftenWrong]

Real suppression of free speech is not done in those ways. It's off topic as well. I don't mind discussing it, but it is against forum rules.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, OftenWrong said:

Real suppression of free speech is not done in those ways.  

Cherry got booed off stage... sad for him, but maybe his piles of money and VHS tapes will give him comfort.

[Rue]

5 hours ago, jacee said:

We all have free speech. If I don't like what you say, I speak up. You may be drowned out ... or fired. Oh well. 

There is no contradiction in that. 

Free speech has consequences. 

I have noticed though that the far right think only they have free speech, and everybody else has to listen to them. Lol  That's ridiculous. Nobody promised anybody an adoring audience. People get booed off the stage all the time. 

Booing people off the stage. You see no contradiction with that and free speech. Right.

[Rue]

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Cherry got booed off stage... sad for him, but maybe his piles of money and VHS tapes will give him comfort.

Booed off stage. Mob mentality. Screaming masses. 

Me I get booed a lot. I take it for what it is worth-often angry emotional reactions at things I have said, often misunderstood. We can all in hindsight look back at our communications and wish we had been clearer. What I can be clear on is that I find people who boo usually emotional and reacting to their anger not using their intellect. People with thought have no need to boo. They are actually quite quiet when people they do not agree with speak. I learned from the people who disagreed with me the ones that remained silent and spoke when I was done were a great role model for me to do the same in reverse. Those are the people that I understood were listening. People who boo do not want to listen so they make noises. 

What happened to Cherry is a sign of the times. It is a shining example of people who do not take the time to listen and jump at anything they think will give them a platform to feel better about themselves by booing or hating someone else.

The people who boo Don Cherry  haven't a clue what he said or believes. They are just another mob and this world has no shortage of mobs and the martyrs they create.

Every two seconds someone chases the next Frankenstein with their pitchforks. Been there done that. Come from a long line of people chased by people who did not just boo but lit  things on fire. Cherry's only mistake is he was on a media that sucks the titties of sponsors.

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, Rue said:

1. Booed off stage. Mob mentality. Screaming masses. 

2. Me I get booed a lot.

3. People who boo do not want to listen so they make noises. 

4. It is a shining example of people who do not take the time to listen and jump at anything they think will give them a platform to feel better about themselves by booing or hating someone else.

5. The people who boo Don Cherry  haven't a clue what he said or believes.  

6. Cherry's only mistake is he was on a media that sucks the titties of sponsors.

1. Yes... when you sign up to be a star on mass media, you are subjecting yourself to the whims of the masses - the ones that are advertised to, passively, bringing the revenues that pay your huge salary.

2. I don't boo you.

3. Mass communication isn't two-way, so the people behind the microphone only get the crudest feedback.  

4.I think that his words were ambiguous enough to cause legitimate concern, and if so he was given a chance to clarify.

5.I think if he clarified he could have stayed.

6.Exactly.  How much do you care though ?  He left his mark and 85 is a ripe age to still have a national platform.   37 years of Coach's Corner.

[OftenWrong]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Cherry got booed off stage... sad for him, but maybe his piles of money and VHS tapes will give him comfort.

Yes, we know. I'm saying it didn't need to happen that way. The same outcome could have been achieved without all the media hysteria, and without disgracing a person with such a long list of accomplishments for Canada, and who is 85, for a slip-up.

Cancel culture is permanent, there is no undo after Cancel. Cancel culture needs to learn a little forgiveness.

 

[OftenWrong]

3 hours ago, Rue said:

What happened to Cherry is a sign of the times.

In addition to all that you said, which I agree with, I think it is a sign of something else. If HNIC had still belonged to the CBC when this happened, I say he might not have been dismissed.Cherry was not booed off the stage. He was dismissed by the corporation Sportsnet. And Sportsnet is a business, it owes no allegiance to Cherry or his legacy, what Cherry might represent in the conscience of  Canadians. There are no folk-heros in corporate culture. There is no history. Places, like Maple Leaf Gardens, no longer exist. Now we have Air Canada Centre, Rogers Centre, Bell Centre. But if they don't give the same funding next year, the place will be renamed. Sorry not ROgers Centre now it's Canadian Tire Centre. Where the hell is that arena Nowhere... it doesn't exist. Corporatism the death knell of culture.

[jacee]

4 hours ago, Rue said:

Booing people off the stage. You see no contradiction with that and free speech. Right.

There is no contradiction. We all have freedom of expression. 

My "BOOOOOO" is my free speech.

Freedom of speech does not mean anybody 'has to' listen to you in public. 

Freedom of speech does not guarantee anyone an adoring public audience. 

That's what the dumb-as-bricks alt-right seem incapable of comprehending. And it frustrates them greatly, because they generally have NO audience, just protesters. No one wants to listen to them, and when frustrated by protesters drowning them out, they become violent. 

Edited November 23, 2019 by jacee

[Michael Hardner]

34 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

 Cancel culture needs to learn a little forgiveness.

Well there is some truth there.  Not so much for Cherry, but others who can't seem to get their "I'm sorry" accepted.  Asiz Ansari did something boorish, but I don't know how he's officially welcomed back.

[jacee]

4 hours ago, Rue said:

Booed off stage. Mob mentality. Screaming masses. 

Me I get booed a lot. I take it for what it is 

You should take the hint: Your messages are not welcome. 

[OftenWrong]

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Well there is some truth there.  Not so much for Cherry, but others who can't seem to get their "I'm sorry" accepted. 

I think I disagree... the whole incident was so fast, from the time he did the on-air show to the time he was dismissed, emotions were running too strong. That is why it's important sometimes to wait during an important event and let those charged up emotions drain away, before reacting.

In my experience as a leader, you need to give people a little time to reflect, and see what they come back with. I'll wager Cherry would have second thoughts about his position, if he had a little cooling off period.

When you get up to microphone you are extremely vulnerable. A person puts their career, their future on the line every time they speak and look into a camera. One slip up and it might be over for you. Both media producers and consumers need protection.

[Right To Left]

On 11/21/2019 at 5:33 PM, Argus said:

I'm curious. Is there a single non-white country in the world that you can hold responsible for its own fate rather than looking for some white people to blame?

The Saudis and the Iranians fight it out in Yemen. White people are to blame. Somali warlords tear the country apart. White people's fault. Sudan is taken over by Islamists. It's all those white people's fault!

Somalia, Yemen and Sudan became shitholes all on their own. The US had nothing to do with it.

1. Is there a single non-white country that has the resources necessary to govern its own fate?  Are they at least able to shoot down all US bomber drones flying over their territories, representing a continual 24/7 threat to people on the ground? 

2. Saudi could not bomb Yemen without continuous and active assistance from the DOD. They don't even have the capacity to refuel their F-15's in the air! And except for claims of covert Iranian support for Houthi rebels, it's a complete fraud to portray this ongoing war crime as a proxy battle between Iran and Saudi Arabia! 

Any Iranian support.....if any, is to aid forces trying to defend themselves from attack and invasion. And, it's not worth opening up.....since it is always ignored, but the constant MSM drumbeat of Houthis as Shia Muslims is also Wrong! For centuries, the Houthi tribes have followed the 'Zaidism' which is mostly closer to Sunni than the Shia branches of Islam, and until the modern era when invading Brits and then Americans, brought with them their literalistic versions of Christian orthodoxy, Muslims did not concern themselves with worrying whether every Muslim in the world was practicing the same way. So, the Zaidis, like the Alawites, Ismailis, and countless other Islamic sects and schools were able to carry out their worship without fear of an Al Qaeda or ISIS equivalent coming after them and killing them for doing it wrong. Like it or not, these retrograde Muslim orthodox movements are a product of Islamic modernism, and are a byproduct of the philosophy and attitudes they picked up from British colonialists who determined that there can only be one right answer to a question or problem, and that answer needs to be written down and followed by all.

3.Again, the US has everything to do with preventing former colonies from developing according to their own aspirations and objectives. That's why the US has a giant state department today! It's taken the place of the British Foreign Office......which has played the junior role in global empire since ending political colonialism. 

[Right To Left]

I didn't even realize I was responding on the Don Cherry thread!  I'll have to leave this topic since I don't see a point to discussing Grapes anymore and don't want to hear what he has to say about politics or hockey!

[Zeitgeist]

1 hour ago, Right To Left said:

1. Is there a single non-white country that has the resources necessary to govern its own fate?  Are they at least able to shoot down all US bomber drones flying over their territories, representing a continual 24/7 threat to people on the ground? 

2. Saudi could not bomb Yemen without continuous and active assistance from the DOD. They don't even have the capacity to refuel their F-15's in the air! And except for claims of covert Iranian support for Houthi rebels, it's a complete fraud to portray this ongoing war crime as a proxy battle between Iran and Saudi Arabia! 

Any Iranian support.....if any, is to aid forces trying to defend themselves from attack and invasion. And, it's not worth opening up.....since it is always ignored, but the constant MSM drumbeat of Houthis as Shia Muslims is also Wrong! For centuries, the Houthi tribes have followed the 'Zaidism' which is mostly closer to Sunni than the Shia branches of Islam, and until the modern era when invading Brits and then Americans, brought with them their literalistic versions of Christian orthodoxy, Muslims did not concern themselves with worrying whether every Muslim in the world was practicing the same way. So, the Zaidis, like the Alawites, Ismailis, and countless other Islamic sects and schools were able to carry out their worship without fear of an Al Qaeda or ISIS equivalent coming after them and killing them for doing it wrong. Like it or not, these retrograde Muslim orthodox movements are a product of Islamic modernism, and are a byproduct of the philosophy and attitudes they picked up from British colonialists who determined that there can only be one right answer to a question or problem, and that answer needs to be written down and followed by all.

3.Again, the US has everything to do with preventing former colonies from developing according to their own aspirations and objectives. That's why the US has a giant state department today! It's taken the place of the British Foreign Office......which has played the junior role in global empire since ending political colonialism. 

Uh , nice try.  Britain encouraged multiculturalism in countries like India because they knew that without it there would be sectarian violence and partition, which did happen with bloodbaths along the way shortly after independence.  The Brits brought political organization and trade law.  Yes there was colonial control, but there wasn’t slaughter of the opposition, which is what happens in many countries when one religious sect/ethnic group takes control of government.  The colonial masters were often preferable to the alternatives, except in more rural/tribal areas with small populations and where lifestyles haven’t changed much in hundreds or thousands of years.  Religious/ethnic tolerance does exist in many parts of the world, but it is also a very western, liberal democratic value.  

[Argus]

3 hours ago, Right To Left said:

1. Is there a single non-white country that has the resources necessary to govern its own fate? 

Dunno. I do know they would cheerfully slaughter any white people who tried to run their affairs for them, and many fought furiously for the right to run their own affairs. If you pick up a gun and demand your independence why should someone else be responsible for correcting the stupid decisions you make?

3 hours ago, Right To Left said:

Are they at least able to shoot down all US bomber drones flying over their territories, representing a continual 24/7 threat to people on the ground? 

When you harbor terrorists who attack another country you are committing an act of war and the other country has the right to retaliate. Don't want US drones in your airspace? You don't need high tech missile defenses. You just need to keep organized terrorists from building large bases in your country.

3 hours ago, Right To Left said:

2. Saudi could not bomb Yemen without continuous and active assistance from the DOD.

Sure they could. If the US refused to sell them bombs the Russians or Chinese or North Koreans would be delighted to step in and help.

3 hours ago, Right To Left said:

They don't even have the capacity to refuel their F-15's in the air! And except for claims of covert Iranian support for Houthi rebels, it's a complete fraud to portray this ongoing war crime as a proxy battle between Iran and Saudi Arabia! 

Sooo. it's not? I mean, the fact the Saudis and Iranians are backing different sides and using their own troops directly STILL makes it our fault??!

3 hours ago, Right To Left said:

Any Iranian support.....if any, is to aid forces trying to defend themselves from attack and invasion.

It was Iranian support which provoked the Saudis to intervene in the first place. Why else would they care?

3 hours ago, Right To Left said:

Like it or not, these retrograde Muslim orthodox movements are a product of Islamic modernism, and are a byproduct of the philosophy and attitudes they picked up from British colonialists who determined that there can only be one right answer to a question or problem, and that answer needs to be written down and followed by all.

The British 'colonialists' ruled over Yemen very briefly (except for Aden). Why is it you don't blame the Ottoman Empire?

3 hours ago, Right To Left said:

3.Again, the US has everything to do with preventing former colonies from developing according to their own aspirations and objectives.

You mean discouraging Muslim theocracies? There are plenty of former colonies around the world which have developed nicely, such as South Korea and Japan, or under the British, Singapore. South American countries were doing well until recently, too. The Philippines was a US colony for a very long time and they went their own way.

[Rue]

23 hours ago, jacee said:

There is no contradiction. We all have freedom of expression. 

My "BOOOOOO" is my free speech.

Freedom of speech does not mean anybody 'has to' listen to you in public. 

Freedom of speech does not guarantee anyone an adoring public audience. 

That's what the dumb-as-bricks alt-right seem incapable of comprehending. And it frustrates them greatly, because they generally have NO audience, just protesters. No one wants to listen to them, and when frustrated by protesters drowning them out, they become violent. 

In regards to 1, yes there is if you believe your freedom of expression means you can prevent someone else from having that same right.

In regards to 2, "Boooo" is not free speech, its shouting down someone else's opinion, see 1 above.

In regards to 3, of course. 

In regards to 4,  you engage in a stereotype "dumb as bricks alt right", you may has used the word  ni...er,  kike, chink, etc. Its a stereotype based on you creating a group and assigning it what  ever negativity you project on it. Then after inventing this stereotype group, you assign it feelings and again stereotype whoever it else you invented and now call protesters. Then you create yet another group called "them" and justify there being violent by blaming it on "protesters drowning them out", which is ironic since your entire response is an effort to justify drowning Cherry out from being able to engage in free speech. Your reference, "dumb-as-bricks alt right seem incapable of comprehending"...is simply creating a stereotype, then projecting on it a negative characteristic which is a subjective projection and not based on any objective evidence or analysis. You projected feelings on this collective stereotype which are again not based on objective evidence but simply your own subjective stereotypes thrown onto this  fictitious group. Then you create yet another sweeping stereotype you also call "them" (presumably due to a limited vocabulary) and justify there being deaf and violent towards people you imagine them to disagree with. That is illogical.

You entire last sentence is illogical based both on its subjective projections and in its nonsensical conclusions, specifically:

1-you are not in the position of knowing what someone else understands or does not understand unless you ask them-you did not, you created a fictitious group and assigned them a disability, i.e., lack of comprehension-fabricating a disabled group does not prove that group exists let alone is disabled as you conclude, its just name calling;

2-Don Cherry most certainly did and has an audience, that audience may or may not agree with what he has or will say,  and it is nonsensical to suggest everyone of that audience is a protester-the fact I agree with him does not mean I protest anything but it does mean I have a different opinion than you-the fact people disagree with others does not make them protesters that is just you again name-calling;

3-of course people want to and will continue to listen to Don Cherry and in this day and age he has many social media platforms he can use to reach his audience-I also tell you that you out and out lie if you stereotype anyone who agrees with Don Cheery as violent and/or a protester as you have.

All you have done is demonstrate the very behavior in your response you condemned Cherry for and that is a blatant contradiction.

[jacee]

42 minutes ago, Rue said:

In regards to 1, yes there is if you believe your freedom of expression means you can prevent someone else from having that same right.

In regards to 2, "Boooo" is not free speech, its shouting down someone else's opinion, see 1 above.

In regards to 3, of course. 

In regards to 4,  you engage in a stereotype "dumb as bricks alt right", you may has used the word  ni...er,  kike, chink, etc. Its a stereotype based on you creating a group and assigning it what  ever negativity you project on it. Then after inventing this stereotype group, you assign it feelings and again stereotype whoever it else you invented and now call protesters. Then you create yet another group called "them" and justify there being violent by blaming it on "protesters drowning them out", which is ironic since your entire response is an effort to justify drowning Cherry out from being able to engage in free speech. Your reference, "dumb-as-bricks alt right seem incapable of comprehending"...is simply creating a stereotype, then projecting on it a negative characteristic which is a subjective projection and not based on any objective evidence or analysis. You projected feelings on this collective stereotype which are again not based on objective evidence but simply your own subjective stereotypes thrown onto this  fictitious group. Then you create yet another sweeping stereotype you also call "them" (presumably due to a limited vocabulary) and justify there being deaf and violent towards people you imagine them to disagree with. That is illogical.

You entire last sentence is illogical based both on its subjective projections and in its nonsensical conclusions, specifically:

1-you are not in the position of knowing what someone else understands or does not understand unless you ask them-you did not, you created a fictitious group and assigned them a disability, i.e., lack of comprehension-fabricating a disabled group does not prove that group exists let alone is disabled as you conclude, its just name calling;

2-Don Cherry most certainly did and has an audience, that audience may or may not agree with what he has or will say,  and it is nonsensical to suggest everyone of that audience is a protester-the fact I agree with him does not mean I protest anything but it does mean I have a different opinion than you-the fact people disagree with others does not make them protesters that is just you again name-calling;

3-of course people want to and will continue to listen to Don Cherry and in this day and age he has many social media platforms he can use to reach his audience-I also tell you that you out and out lie if you stereotype anyone who agrees with Don Cheery as violent and/or a protester as you have.

All you have done is demonstrate the very behavior in your response you condemned Cherry for and that is a blatant contradiction.

Rue, freedom of expression only means protection from punishment by the state - ie, freedom from legal/criminal consequences. 

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from social, employment or political  consequences.

Freedom of speech does not guarantee you an adoring audience, nor an audience at all.

Alt-right demand a public stage and audience silence for creepy crap no one wants to hear anyway? Speech has consequences. They get booed. So do politicians and others. Oh.well. 

If you are as incapable of comprehending that as the alt-right racists, then I can't help you. I am a bit surprised though, as despite frequent disagreement I still thought you had a more developed sensibility.

Edited November 24, 2019 by jacee

[jacee]

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2019/11/24/yes-your-boss-can-fire-you-for-things-you-say-what-recent-controversies-tell-us-about-the-limits-of-free-speech.html

“The victim narrative is that he’s somebody who’s being muzzled, which is absurd, because Don Cherry has a voice, he has a name and he has technology at his disposal. In this day and age, to be taken off a popular TV spot is far from being muzzled. You’re just losing a very privileged platform.”"

[Shady]

On 11/23/2019 at 4:35 PM, Right To Left said:

1. Is there a single non-white country that has the resources necessary to govern its own fate? 

Absolutely, if they're governed properly.  You really have low expectations of non-white people huh?

[DrYouth]

On ‎11‎/‎23‎/‎2019 at 11:07 AM, jacee said:

There is no contradiction. We all have freedom of expression. 

My "BOOOOOO" is my free speech.

Freedom of speech does not mean anybody 'has to' listen to you in public. 

Freedom of speech does not guarantee anyone an adoring public audience. 

That's what the dumb-as-bricks alt-right seem incapable of comprehending. And it frustrates them greatly, because they generally have NO audience, just protesters. No one wants to listen to them, and when frustrated by protesters drowning them out, they become violent. 

Booo....

The problem with the current "cancel culture" left is that they come off as cowardly and controlling.

They insist on firing people they don't agree with .... IMMEDIATELY.

This is something the dumb-as-bricks left seem incapable of comprehending.

Don Cherry was a flawed human... but he also brought a lot of good to his community and his colleagues who obviously respected him.

Cancelling him and mob brow beating him is a sad statement about our country today.

He deserved better.... but he did screw up.... so I don't really disagree with benching him. More dignity though... that is what I'm asking for.