Around the League 2019-20

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Amen

A lot of people in this country think the roughly 50% of people who voted one way are all racists. And the media and social media check-marks feed it.
That's because the actions of the people they voted in support it. You can't stand up to be counted with someone who does reprehensible things and exonerate yourself by saying "I don't support that he's doing X but I'm willing to look past it because he supports Y".
 
Regardless of LW/RW politics and media (ir)responsibility, I think we can all agree that Cherry has a decades-old record of xenophobia. He's absolutely a rah-rah Canadian pride dude too and I enjoy that, but he's made no bones about his dislike for 'the other' of any kind for years and years. That's why he ran out of rope. He gets zero benefit of the doubt for borderline comments. That's no one's 'fault' but his own and attributing it to anything political/cultural but Cherry himself is neither accurate nor productive.

Props to you guys for not getting worked up for what could be inflammatory political comments elsewhere, but let's leave the politics out of it where possible.
While I agree with the major points of your assessment, and I don't excuse Cherry. One for the reasons he is very rah-rah for Canada is because he is Canadian and his show appears on Hockey Night in Canada.

You also have to recall the era he comes from, which was much more nationalistic. He has never been a fan of Russian players. What was going on at the time he was in his mid-thirties or so? The Cold War and also when it came to hockey the USSR vs Canada hockey series. So, yeah Cherry is all about Canada. That shouldn't surprise anyone.
 
That's because the actions of the people they voted in support it. You can't stand up to be counted with someone who does reprehensible things and exonerate yourself by saying "I don't support that he's doing X but I'm willing to look past it because he supports Y".
People vote a certain way for many reasons. So, unless you are into guilt by association (if there actually is any guilt), no American citizen needs to be exonerated for how they vote.
 
People vote a certain way for many reasons. So, unless you are into guilt by association (if there actually is any guilt), no American citizen needs to be exonerated for how they vote.
I disagree. You support people who do terrible things, you are complicit. I'll just leave it at that since I'm sure I've probably already said too much for this place.
 
I, personally, love that he didn't apologize. Is he an old xenophobe? Sure, but he always said what he felt and he didn't compromise it in order to save his job. He's been who he is from the beginning and never changed.

If you want to be the upset woke person over this, look at Sportsnet for continuing to shelter the golden goose until the outrage got to a point where they had to fire him. They knew he would say something that would lead to calls for his firing, but they went ahead and rode the gravy train until it happened.

As for the comment, wet blanket Ron MacLean nodded in agreement during it. He can try to say he didn't catch it but, like, that's the thing: he heard what Don said and it didn't faze him because it seemed harmless. To most people Don and Ron's age, the comment is harmless.

I get that xenophobic comments are harmful. I also don't believe Don Cherry should be treated like he's David Duke. It's sad that the current state of affairs in society is all or nothing: you're either this or this and all nuance is gone.
 
I disagree. You support people who do terrible things, you are complicit. I'll just leave it at that since I'm sure I've probably already said too much for this place.
I disagree, because there are degrees of "terrible things". There hasn't been a perfect human being made yet, at least not to my knowledge. All of us have done something others might "judge" as "terrible things". The court of social justice has no moral authority to claim anyone is guilty about anything related to their politics, or belief system.

Belief systems and speech are not crimes, and should never be considered as such. No one needs to be exonerated.
 
I, personally, love that he didn't apologize. Is he an old xenophobe? Sure, but he always said what he felt and he didn't compromise it in order to save his job. He's been who he is from the beginning and never changed.

If you want to be the upset woke person over this, look at Sportsnet for continuing to shelter the golden goose until the outrage got to a point where they had to fire him. They knew he would say something that would lead to calls for his firing, but they went ahead and rode the gravy train until it happened.

As for the comment, wet blanket Ron MacLean nodded in agreement during it. He can try to say he didn't catch it but, like, that's the thing: he heard what Don said and it didn't faze him because it seemed harmless. To most people Don and Ron's age, the comment is harmless.

I get that xenophobic comments are harmful. I also don't believe Don Cherry should be treated like he's David Duke. It's sad that the current state of affairs in society is all or nothing: you're either this or this and all nuance is gone.

Definitely something we can agree on.
 
I looked it up, and about 21% of Canada's population was foreign-born as of 2017. The immigration percentage in the prairie states has doubled over the last 15 years. So xenophobes like Don are probably freaking out at all the non-white faces (the top three immigration sources for the year 2016 were the Philippines (15.6%), India (12.1%), and China (10.6%)) who look different and have probably only partially assimilated to varying degrees.

For Sportnet, the math is clear - it does not make sense to alienate 1 out of 5 potential customers needlessly - and Cherry's rant was needless.
 
Belief systems and speech are not crimes, and should never be considered as such. No one needs to be exonerated.
bingo

far as i'm concerned you can be a lynch-toting, bible-carrying KKK member if you so choose. it's also my choice to completely disagree with everything you stand for, and that's fine. constitution protects free speech whether or not you agree with it. acting upon those beliefs is another story.

seems the last generation has forgotten that words can't actually hurt you
 
Just an observation, it's f***ing hilarious that this board can civilly and extremely disagree with one another politically but if someone puts Iafallo on the top line I'll kill your family :laugh:

bingo

far as i'm concerned you can be a lynch-toting, bible-carrying KKK member if you so choose. it's also my choice to completely disagree with everything you stand for, and that's fine. constitution protects free speech whether or not you agree with it. acting upon those beliefs is another story.

seems the last generation has forgotten that words can't actually hurt you


On the flipside, I think the youngest generation knows heavily the power of broadcasting due to their involvement with technology and social media and it might not be the messages themselves but that everyone has a megaphone to amplify messages and incite calls-to-action. I feel like the older generation on-air doesn't really seem to feel that impact has changed at all since they've been behind the camera a long time.

Not that Cherry was doing this explicitly--as @BigKing and @KINGS17 point out he's a product of a very different time and was very involved in that context--but I think the reaction you're seeing is to the message being heavily broadcast rather than the message itself. Hell I've told my story plenty of times, the stuff that gets said to me daily/weekly rolls off my back, but it's a very different message and feeling when it's sanctioned by those in any kind of power. In Cherry's case it's a lack of that self-awareness--or his extreme self-assuredness--rather than any sort of maliciousness, I'd like to believe. But it's still a problem for Sportnet when it's a near-weekly occurrence.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: fivehole32
Just an observation, it's ****ing hilarious that this board can civilly and extremely disagree with one another politically but if someone puts Iafallo on the top line I'll kill your family :laugh:




On the flipside, I think the youngest generation knows heavily the power of broadcasting due to their involvement with technology and social media and it might not be the messages themselves but that everyone has a megaphone to amplify messages and incite calls-to-action. I feel like the older generation on-air doesn't really seem to feel that impact has changed at all since they've been behind the camera a long time.

Not that Cherry was doing this explicitly--as @BigKing and @KINGS17 point out he's a product of a very different time and was very involved in that context--but I think the reaction you're seeing is to the message being heavily broadcast rather than the message itself. Hell I've told my story plenty of times, the stuff that gets said to me daily/weekly rolls off my back, but it's a very different message and feeling when it's sanctioned by those in any kind of power.
yeah i mean, definitely. his comments 30+ years ago would've just been a little sidebar at the water cooler in the canadian(only) offices but nowadays it's worldwide instantaneously. as a society, we're probably still all in the learning process when it comes to the true impact of that ability. there's gonna be some overblown stuff just the same as there's underblown and there's gonna be some reactions that are just right. one would hope all those are covered equally but that's not always the case. way she goes. that's largely why i take the route of not getting too involved cause at the end of the day, it's like arguing religion.. you're not gonna change most peoples' minds and they're free to believe what they want.
 
I disagree, because there are degrees of "terrible things". There hasn't been a perfect human being made yet, at least not to my knowledge. All of us have done something others might "judge" as "terrible things". The court of social justice has no moral authority to claim anyone is guilty about anything related to their politics, or belief system.

Belief systems and speech are not crimes, and should never be considered as such. No one needs to be exonerated.

Yes someone might think it terrible if I eat the last klondike bar, but it's not really on par with separating children from their parents and shipping them to another state, for example. I'm not talking about belief systems or speech. I'm talking about actions.

bingo

far as i'm concerned you can be a lynch-toting, bible-carrying KKK member if you so choose. it's also my choice to completely disagree with everything you stand for, and that's fine. constitution protects free speech whether or not you agree with it. acting upon those beliefs is another story.

seems the last generation has forgotten that words can't actually hurt you

Sorry dude but your last sentence is patently absurd. Kids kill themselves over being bullied on social media. Words most definitely CAN hurt people. Educate yourself:

suicide bullying social media - Google Search
 
In Cherry's case it's a lack of that self-awareness--or his extreme self-assuredness--rather than any sort of maliciousness, I'd like to believe. But it's still a problem for Sportnet when it's a near-weekly occurrence.
not trying to call out the edit, i just want to address it cause i think it's a big deal. this is one the biggest struggles i've had in my life, is dealing with people that have wronged me in some way and controlling my response to it.. drilling it down to exactly that, the difference between malice and ignorance has been the key. it's a little introspection that's been really hard for me to learn but i think has given me control over my domain in a way that nothing else has. like, people are gonna say and do horrible things but the only thing you have ultimate control over is your response to it, and i think that's a big key, that little bit of analysis
 
Yes someone might think it terrible if I eat the last klondike bar, but it's not really on par with separating children from their parents and shipping them to another state, for example. I'm not talking about belief systems or speech. I'm talking about actions.
Thousands of Americans who have committed crimes are separated from their children. If the person was convicted of a federal charge, they may serve their sentence at a prison that is out of state.

If the worst you have done is eat the last of the klondike bars in the fridge, you are surely superior to everyone who posts on this site.

Again, speech and belief systems should never be a crime. This nation was founded on that basic principle. Can you educate people regarding the effects their speech may have on others? Absolutely.
 
Thousands of Americans who have committed crimes are separated from their children. If the person was convicted of a federal charge, they may serve their sentence at a prison that is out of state.

If the worst you have done is eat the last of the klondike bars in the fridge, you are surely superior to everyone who posts on this site.

Again, speech and belief systems should never be a crime. This nation was founded on that basic principle. Can you educate people regarding the effects their speech may have on others? Absolutely.

Absolutely, but seeking asylum is not a crime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mbar
Sorry dude but your last sentence is patently absurd. Kids kill themselves over being bullied on social media. Words most definitely CAN hurt people. Educate yourself:

suicide bullying social media - Google Search

believe me i know about that first hand. as tyler the creator said (paraphrasing because i know how this board works), put the phone down, turn the computer off

sometimes being so deep into an addiction(social media) has side effects the same as every other addiction and sometimes that requires effort on the addict's end to lessen the side effects

i do feel i'm straying very far off topic here so i'm probably not gonna continue this line though tbh
 
Absolutely, but seeking asylum is not a crime.

Some asylum claims are legitimate, and some are not. It is always illegal to enter the United States at a location that is not a controlled port of entry.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: steepdrop
Cherry's comments had nothing to do with race...his comments were new immigrants, to embrace the culture that rembembers soliders who fought for liberty.
Did he say 'go back'? NO
Did he say 'if you don't wear go back?' NO

If you watched him he always said 'you people', not intended to be insulting.
I bet you poppy sales increased 5 fold after his comments, so the tactic worked, he has always been about honor the solidiers.

He worked fe power, but they fired him for same thing the kept him for years or decades rather...speaking his mind.
 
Cherry's comments had nothing to do with race...his comments were new immigrants, to embrace the culture that rembembers soliders who fought for liberty.
Did he say 'go back'? NO
Did he say 'if you don't wear go back?' NO

If you watched him he always said 'you people', not intended to be insulting.
I bet you poppy sales increased 5 fold after his comments, so the tactic worked, he has always been about honor the solidiers.

He worked fe power, but they fired him for same thing the kept him for years or decades rather...speaking his mind.
I tend to agree that Cherry's frustration was about new immigrants not embracing a Canadian tradition, but I think he was also lashing out against long-time or native born Canadians residing in large cities failing to carry on the tradition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Master Yoda
Leipsec popped a goal for the Caps, he looks really good with them. I'm honestly still a pretty big fan of his, I hope find success.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad