News Article: Don Cherry Fired

[PeterSidorkiewicz]

I’m sorry that you missed the point entirely, them being ignorant or not isn’t the issue, and you’re not in a position to say who’s willful or not. The very nature of coming to a similar support conclusion to another viewpoint is the point. You can’t just paint everyone who support DC with the same brush.

Well I suppose you can, but then you’re not much different in the end now are you?

That’s ok, I won’t be offended if you skip on by. I’m not impressed by your posted opinions either, so we’re good I think.

1. You seem to have interacted with a lot of people who support Don Cherry, or have read their viewpoint of why they support Don Cherry's statement. Can you give me a couple examples of differing view points of people supporting what Cherry said? IE different view points coming to the same conclusion

2. After someone states those viewpoints, are you saying I am not allowed to form an opinion of said person for expressing their view?

3. Are there THAT many different POV's of people who support Don Cherry that I need multiple brushes?

Also, I get your point, its a simple point. Don't judge people based on their views, which I fundamentally disagree with. A person views is exactly what makes up a person.

 

[Sensfan4life]

Then those people are just willfully ignorant I guess.

IMO you write a whole lot, but you say very little.

I'll take "defining characteristic" for $2000 Alex.

 

[stempniaksen]

Some of the arguments in this thread are flying precariously close to "some very fine people on both sides" argument. Sometimes sitting on the fence is just that, but other times it can be seen as making a choice.

None of the views in this thread seem particularly outlandish (didn't go all the way back mind you) but I can also see how some would think that those "willing to see out both sides of the argument" are being purposefully dense (not saying they are, just that I can see why that may be the perception).

The only bit about Cherry I'll throw in is that I don't really see the "point" of him in 2019. The game has seemingly passed him by, the "world" has mostly passed him by. You could argue he was entertaining I suppose, but I'm not convinced he was bringing anything useful to the table these past couple of years. I do wish his "goodbye" came a little more graciously, but anyone who didn't see this exact situation playing out had their head in the sand. Don Cherry and "woke" culture sure as heck don't mix.

 

[Ice-Tray]

More disappointed that you think there is justifiably more than 1 right side of things when it comes to something like this in the year 2019 but not surprised in the least. A differing topic I could understand your point but not something so clear as the hate exhibited in this scenario.

You’re barking up the wrong tree here, I’m not your man here in this discussion. I never made any Trump-like claims concerning race driven conflict.

You’re projecting your opinions of ‘this issue’ on me. I have deliberately avoid discussing my personal opinions in any terms because I’m more interested in how the discussion is unfolding.

You can’t be offended at my opinions on ‘the issue’ because I have chosen not to share them online, simply put.

What I have pointed out is how much the idea of grouping and “these people”, have been used to describe people throughout the divisive discussion.

Where your reading comprehension, or my clarity or words, has failed in regards to my posts is that I have never argued that there are two sides to racism (I can’t stress this enough, so that if you take nothing else away from this post, take this). I was pointing out how each side bears such similarities in that they group each other, they both claim moral superiority, and neither side seems at all concerned with education, understanding, consensus building, or any kind of bridge building at all. In fact there seems to be a concerted effort to keep things divisive, and be the winner.

A post such as mine even gets turned to be used as a weapon for an opinion that is not related to what I wrote.

I guess in the end these kinds of divisive topics, and unmoderated interactions on social media serve little purpose. I mean at the end of the day the goal should be to educate and open minds of people who may need it, and to try and broaden horizons to build a more inclusive society, not shout the loudest or win the discussion.

 

[Ice-Tray]

1. You seem to have interacted with a lot of people who support Don Cherry, or have read their viewpoint of why they support Don Cherry's statement. Can you give me a couple examples of differing view points of people supporting what Cherry said? IE different view points coming to the same conclusion

2. After someone states those viewpoints, are you saying I am not allowed to form an opinion of said person for expressing their view?

3. Are there THAT many different POV's of people who support Don Cherry that I need multiple brushes?

Also, I get your point, its a simple point. Don't judge people based on their views, which I fundamentally disagree with. A person views is exactly what makes up a person.

My point was to be cautious about judging people before you know or understand their views. I drew that conclusion by how quickly battle lines were being set up by people between defined groups. It was ironic, dangerous, and worth discussion in my opinion.

That’s very different from what you wrote. I don’t agree with what you wrote.

Im not sure why you’re getting hung up on the DC support thing. It’s very simple to see after scanning some of the comments. Lots of people feel bad that he was fired, some people support his views on poppies, some support him because of his fierce patriotism, some seem to just have some long term nostalgia, and while I didn’t see anything in so many words, undoubtably some supported the suggested views on immigrants or “you peoples” etc... my point was that not all of the supporting messages out there have anything to do with immigration, racism, xenophobia, etc...

Again the irony of the idea that “those people” who show support for Cherry are racist xenophobes.

Anywho, clearly not getting a discussion in here.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Some of the arguments in this thread are flying precariously close to "some very fine people on both sides" argument. Sometimes sitting on the fence is just that, but other times it can be seen as making a choice.

None of the views in this thread seem particularly outlandish (didn't go all the way back mind you) but I can also see how some would think that those "willing to see out both sides of the argument" are being purposefully dense (not saying they are, just that I can see why that may be the perception).

The only bit about Cherry I'll throw in is that I don't really see the "point" of him in 2019. The game has seemingly passed him by, the "world" has mostly passed him by. You could argue he was entertaining I suppose, but I'm not convinced he was bringing anything useful to the table these past couple of years. I do wish his "goodbye" came a little more graciously, but anyone who didn't see this exact situation playing out had their head in the sand. Don Cherry and "woke" culture sure as heck don't mix.

Just to be clear if you’re referring to me. I have no interest in discussing ‘both sides’ I described how both sides have seemed to behave in the same manner.

Also, I am not fence sitting, I have strong opinions on these issues, but see zero point in discussing them with anonymous people on the internet where there is zero accountability. Taking a macro look at how the social conversation has unfolded is interesting internet talk in my opinion. Clearly no one else is interested in this.

Again, just if you were referring to me.

 

[PeterSidorkiewicz]

Just to be clear if you’re referring to me. I have no interest in discussing ‘both sides’ I described how both sides have seemed to behave in the same manner.

Also, I am not fence sitting, I have strong opinions on these issues, but see zero point in discussing them with anonymous people on the internet where there is zero accountability. Taking a macro look at how the social conversation has unfolded is interesting internet talk in my opinion. Clearly no one else is interested in this.

Again, just if you were referring to me.

Instead you are.....having a discussion with anonymous people on the internet but you instead want to speak from a sociological or psychological standpoint staying away from any opinion whatsoever in a thread about Don Cherry being canned.

 

[16w]

It is about Remembrance of what transpired in World Wars, mainly. "Lionizing" may be your interpretation, but Remembering the sacrifice is what it is supposed to be about. I guess the military guy in the stands did not give his best, only those you described can do that? As well as diplomats i guess?

The U.S. is what it is, and Canada is its own sovereign nation, and sometimes going to Afghanistan or wherever, whether in active duty or peacekeeping all require people who give their best, even their lives , to protect people from tyranny, dictators, and you are welcome to not share their contribution to society. I guess their sacrifice allowed you that right

i can remember just fine. that's precisely why i don't stand up for people who have a vested interest in keeping the business of war profitable.

the problem with the idea that Canada is doing peacekeeping or freeing the world from tyranny is that it becomes a never ending game of picking and choosing which injustice to fight. there is so much shit that goes on daily around the world (things the Canadian government turns a blind eye towards), so why draw the line here but not there? the eventual outcome from sticking your nose into another country's problems is that nothing changes. The taliban still terrorize Afghanistan and this despite Canadian involvement? a lot of blood shed for nothing or are you telling me their sacrifices personally make you feel safer now?

it costs a lot to police the world, it doesn't win friends and it costs a lot more emotionally on the families of soldiers who die in combat overseas. while Canada spends nearly the least on their military with only 1.3% of the GDP, Japan is the lowest at 0.9% and it's written into their constitution that they renounce war. this is what any peace loving nation needs to aspire to.

i don't expect the military to dissolve...but one voice of dissent helps maybe stop one person joining the military, and over time maybe a hundred more tax dollars are diverted towards hospitals, schools and infrastructure. minor victories are acceptable in asymmetric warfare.

What about when these same folks pick up a shovel to dig your ass out of a flood, or shepherds your grandma to a community support station so she doesn’t have to sit home for a week in the winter with no power after an ice storm, is that worthy enough to get your butt out of your seat?

it doesn't get me out of my seat because that's their job. it's no more noble than the people who stock the grocery store shelves. i know plenty of people who helped out in the floods and weren't being paid to do so. when was their night?... i must have missed it.

the military obviously love the attention, otherwise why would they feel the need to dress up in uniform when they come to a hockey game? i'm sure that desert camouflage will blend in nicely at the stadium.

my point is that government groups can be organized to help out people in need without involving a military organization that adheres to a strict chain of command whereby you have been psychologically indoctrinated to be unable to refuse orders.

however minimal the odds may be, when you are no longer in a position to have a say in whether you decide to take another person's life, there is something rotten. don't you think you would lose a piece of your humanity agreeing to these conditions?


i'm not displeased whatsoever at Canadian policy. life is too interesting to worry about the government of all things. it is what it is. i just don't stand up. that's all.


and i still think Don Cherry is one of the good ones...

 

[PeterSidorkiewicz]

My point was to be cautious about judging people before you know or understand their views. I drew that conclusion by how quickly battle lines were being set up by people between defined groups. It was ironic, dangerous, and worth discussion in my opinion.

That’s very different from what you wrote. I don’t agree with what you wrote.

Im not sure why you’re getting hung up on the DC support thing. It’s very simple to see after scanning some of the comments. Lots of people feel bad that he was fired, some people support his views on poppies, some support him because of his fierce patriotism, some seem to just have some long term nostalgia, and while I didn’t see anything in so many words, undoubtably some supported the suggested views on immigrants or “you peoples” etc... my point was that not all of the supporting messages out there have anything to do with immigration, racism, xenophobia, etc...

Again the irony of the idea that “those people” who show support for Cherry are racist xenophobes.

Anywho, clearly not getting a discussion in here.

But you clearly are in a discussion here...

I mean all of the reasons you listed still don’t address the issue of supporting specifically the words that came out of Don Cherrys mouth.

 

[PeterSidorkiewicz]

And that’s the issue. Either you support the words that came out of Dons mouth or you don’t. Don did not misspeak, he has already said he meant exactly what he said.

 

[JungleBeat]

The military loves attention.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Instead you are.....having a discussion with anonymous people on the internet but you instead want to speak from a sociological or psychological standpoint staying away from any opinion whatsoever in a thread about Don Cherry being canned.

You got it. I thought it was interesting.

Edit: want to keep it civil, my apologies thread.

 

[Another Mr Lizard]

I’ve heard it’ll be Sean Avery hosting sloppy night in Canada this Saturday...

 

[PeterSidorkiewicz]

You have 3 possible responses to what Cherry said:

1. You support what he said
2. You don’t support what he said and you think he should have been fired
3. You don’t support what he said but you don’t think he should be fired.

#3 is the most interesting to me because it’s fun reading the excuses as to why a known bigot should stay on the airwaves.

 

[Ice-Tray]

But you clearly are in a discussion here...

I mean all of the reasons you listed still don’t address the issue of supporting specifically the words that came out of Don Cherrys mouth.

Whats your point exactly? I have no interest in weighing in on supporting DC’s opinions or not, I’m not sure why that’s a stumbling block requirement to engage in conversation in here.

I brought up what I thought was an interesting irony growing out of the general conversation. It turns out that you don’t want to engage in that discussion, and that’s fine.

 

[Ice-Tray]

i can remember just fine. that's precisely why i don't stand up for people who have a vested interest in keeping the business of war profitable.

the problem with the idea that Canada is doing peacekeeping or freeing the world from tyranny is that it becomes a never ending game of picking and choosing which injustice to fight. there is so much **** that goes on daily around the world (things the Canadian government turns a blind eye towards), so why draw the line here but not there? the eventual outcome from sticking your nose into another country's problems is that nothing changes. The taliban still terrorize Afghanistan and this despite Canadian involvement? a lot of blood shed for nothing or are you telling me their sacrifices personally make you feel safer now?

it costs a lot to police the world, it doesn't win friends and it costs a lot more emotionally on the families of soldiers who die in combat overseas. while Canada spends nearly the least on their military with only 1.3% of the GDP, Japan is the lowest at 0.9% and it's written into their constitution that they renounce war. this is what any peace loving nation needs to aspire to.

i don't expect the military to dissolve...but one voice of dissent helps maybe stop one person joining the military, and over time maybe a hundred more tax dollars are diverted towards hospitals, schools and infrastructure. minor victories are acceptable in asymmetric warfare.




it doesn't get me out of my seat because that's their job. it's no more noble than the people who stock the grocery store shelves. i know plenty of people who helped out in the floods and weren't being paid to do so. when was their night?... i must have missed it.

the military obviously love the attention, otherwise why would they feel the need to dress up in uniform when they come to a hockey game? i'm sure that desert camouflage will blend in nicely at the stadium.

my point is that government groups can be organized to help out people in need without involving a military organization that adheres to a strict chain of command whereby you have been psychologically indoctrinated to be unable to refuse orders.

however minimal the odds may be, when you are no longer in a position to have a say in whether you decide to take another person's life, there is something rotten. don't you think you would lose a piece of your humanity agreeing to these conditions?


i'm not displeased whatsoever at Canadian policy. life is too interesting to worry about the government of all things. it is what it is. i just don't stand up. that's all.


and i still think Don Cherry is one of the good ones...

I mean I’d stand up for garbage collection people game, teachers game, or disgruntled government worker game.

I guess it’s just the spirit of it, versus the blatant protest of staying seated.

Your last paragraph is two thumbs up my man.

 

[Chabot84]

It really isn't. Literature, film, and TV push boundaries more than ever before. People are more free than ever to live their lives how they want to live them, without being judged or cast out by society.

The only way in which things are more censored is that you have a hard time keeping a job if you publicly denigrate large groups of people. Is that really such a bad thing?

You pretty much proved my point. People are free to do whatever they want because people are now so sensitive that I literally couldn’t even offer my honest opinion on something here in a public forum without offending half the readers here. Hence I won’t offer it.

 

[RAFI BOMB]

Out of curiosity, are the people on here that are upset about what Cherry said also upset about the comments by Jess Allen? I understand that they are different situations I am just curious if people are upset about all acts/comments that could be interpreted as prejudiced or just certain ones. For anyone that sees an issue with what Cherry said but has no issue at all with what Jess Allen said could you please explain why Cherry's comments are unacceptable and why Allen's comments are acceptable. Thanks.

 

[DrEasy]

Out of curiosity, are the people on here that are upset about what Cherry said also upset about the comments by Jess Allen? I understand that they are different situations I am just curious if people are upset about all acts/comments that could be interpreted as prejudiced or just certain ones. For anyone that sees an issue with what Cherry said but has no issue at all with what Jess Allen said could you please explain why Cherry's comments are unacceptable and why Allen's comments are acceptable. Thanks.

Meh, I don't get upset by speech easily. Discourse that is divisive and simplistic can come from all ends of the political spectrum, and is more revealing about the biases of the speaker than about any truth in the world. We already knew about Cherry's bias, and now we know about this CTV panelist's bias. Neither is very interesting, so I'm moving on. Life is too short to waste listening to pre-formatted thinking.

 

[maclean]

Also here is the Don Cherry rally. Gee does this fit a certain type of box?

View attachment 276941

Surprised at the balls of the couple of people who showed up without hats. These folks come here to our land of ice and snow, the least they could do is spend a couple bucks on a toque.

 

[robsenz]

Surprised at the balls of the couple of people who showed up without hats. These folks come here to our land of ice and snow, the least they could do is spend a couple bucks on a toque.

This post is so incredibly offensive to me right now.

 

[AchtzehnBaby]

This one is done.

Thanks for sharing all the interesting POVs