Daily Archives: November 18, 2019

Local Blogs

By Sherry Listgarten

E-mail Sherry Listgarten

View all posts from Sherry Listgarten

I was thinking about this when I wrote last weeks post on Zero Waste Party Packs. I was pretty sure the virtue signaling accusation would be trotted out, so I aimed to cover it this week. Though I deflected it by focusing more on kids parties (can you virtue signal to kids?), the tenth or so comment was pretty much on target.

The thing is, I get it. Who likes to be preached at? Who likes to be judged? One of the reasons I titled this blog A New Shade of Green is because it is so important for us to develop inclusive and positive attitudes to being environmentally-friendly, and to collectively welcome changes that reduce emissions and help us to adapt to the changing climate. We shouldnt need to worry about evading or embracing claims of moral superiority.

So I thought Id hold up this phrase virtue signaling to the light so we can examine it. What does it mean, who uses it and why, and what is its impact?

The Brit who popularized the phrase, a writer named James Bartholomew, says that it describes the way in which many people say or write things to indicate that they are virtuous. One of the crucial aspects of virtue signalling is that it does not require actually doing anything virtuous. (1) Two psychologists writing in the New York Times say it is feigned righteousness intended to make the speaker appear superior by condemning others. (2) Wikipedia succinctly defines it as the conspicuous expression of moral values. (3)

It might be used, for example, to describe a smug Los Altos Hills resident (who parks) her Escalade at the Trader Joe's parking lot and pulls out the tote bags ... in smug reassurance that she's fighting the good war against the evil scourge of plastic. (This and all following quotations in this post are taken from comments in the online forums of this paper, unless otherwise noted.) There is an element of hypocrisy implied, as well as a degree of pretentiousness and possibly even judgment. It is a pejorative and dismissive term.

I want to go through a number of examples showing how this term has been used in the comments of this online paper, so we can think about how it is used and why.

Applied to Palo Altos City Council, for various climate-related actions:- Virtue signaling seems to be about all this council is capable of.- The problem with Palo Alto politics is the political establishment virtue signaling civility to misdirect the public from their corruption, hidden agendas, and passive aggression.- Go Palo Alto! You're leading the Bay Area in virtue signaling!- The problem is that they are blaming other people and legislating, always virtue signaling and spewing drivel about greenhouse gases and whatnot. This method can't possibly help the environment. No matter how many laws they come up with, it won't stop climate change.

Applied to the Cool Block initiative:That being said, as an exercise in yodeling our moral superiority without actually doing anything beneficial, while wasting taxpayer money and creating much-needed opportunities for graft, it sounds like a winner. And when it comes to pointless virtue-signalling, the comrades of Palo Alto yield to no one.

Applied to Caltrain riders:For the younger set, wanting to virtue-signal green, Caltrain is just a fashion accessory.

Applied to cyclists:You sound like a very affluent Palo Altan that likes to virtue signal by bicycling and condemning the avarice of your somewhat less affluent neighbors who need a car and still have to work for a living.

Applied to Tesla drivers:I agree that Climate Change as a priority is both a distraction and a feel good item for those impressed by virtue signaling. Why not buy everybody a Tesla and support a home town business? Virtue signaling is the top priority for most Palo Altans. The town is becoming overrun by Teslas.

Applied to recyclers:I wonder what it is that drives Palo Altans to engage in such constant and extreme virtue signaling. "Zero waste" is a myth. As long as we live abundant lives we will always generate more waste.

Applied to Palo Altans in general:There seems to be a denial of reality here, where people with an extremely high income and high quality of life engage in forms of virtue signaling to distract from their own abundance.

The term is used to disparage more than environmental actions. A cursory look found it applied to people saving Buena Vista, renaming schools, complaining about police behavior, and advocating for the homeless, gun control, or minimum wage. It was even used against Stanford, with the claim that the GUP campaign essentially amounts to virtue signaling aimed at convincing the outside world how good the university is.

So, what do we make of all this? Is it true that unless you are driving a gas-powered car to get around town, you must be virtue signaling? Is it virtue signaling to buy a veggie burger, use a party pack, or do any pro-environmental action that others can see? We can all agree that people sometimes or even often think about how their actions look to others. But does that mean they are being hypocritical? Judging others? Feeling superior?

IMO there is an element of nastiness and judgment in the accusation of virtue signaling. When Alice accuses Bob of virtue signaling, she is expressing not only mistrust but scorn, interpreting his motivations as manipulative and disingenuous. But is it Alice or Bob who is being more judgmental? (4) Of course you cant reverse climate change by washing your laundry in cold water, or get to zero waste just by using reusable dishware at a picnic. But is it wrong or hypocritical to do so? Moving towards a sustainable planet will take both big and small actions, and small does not preclude big. (5)

What makes this shaming particularly problematic is that social norms have a big influence on people. When people see and hear their neighbors, friends, or co-workers taking action for the environment, they are more likely to take similar actions. But accusations of eco-posturing can negate this. As someone commented in a post here: All the virtuous people doing the right thing simply creates a backlash against "political correctness" and allows the clueless to continue their profligate ways. Fear of appearing judgmental can be a powerful disincentive. As another commenter noted: I typically don't mention it (the efficiency work Ive done on my house) because the global impact is minimal and I don't want to engage in virtue signaling. Argh. You should not feel embarrassed to share that you drive an EV, enjoy eating veggie burgers, turn down your thermostat in the winter, or bike to work!

Geoffrey Miller, an environmental psychology professor at the University of Mexico, has written a book on virtue signaling. (6) He distinguishes two kinds, one being cheap talk (as weve been discussing) and the other being a genuine reflection of underlying values. He writes: What distinguishes good virtue signaling from bad virtue signaling isnt just the reliability of the signal. Its the actual real-world effects on sentient beings, societies and civilizations. When the instincts to virtue signal are combined with curiosity about science, open-mindedness about values and viewpoints, rationality about priorities and policies, and strategic savvy about ways and means, then wonderful things can happen. These more enlightened forms of virtue signaling have sparked the Protestant Reformation, American Revolution, abolitionist movement, anti-vivisection movement, womens suffrage movement, free speech movement, and Effective Altruism movement.

That is a lot to digest, but the point is that many big cultural revolutions are precipitated by early visible (viral?) trends in social norms. And that is what we need to reduce our emissions and blunt the impact of climate change.

Fortunately there are other ways to drive trends in social norms beyond individuals speaking up and sharing. Gregg Sparkman, a post-doc in psychology at Stanford, ran an interesting experiment last year at on-campus eatery The Axe & Palm. (7) He placed a note on the menu, and a card in the restaurant, indicating simply that more customers have been choosing the meatless dishes. Even though The Axe & Palm is a burger-and-shakes place, where people go to eat meat, the signs worked. During the 17-day test period, 1.7% of diners (about 180 people) switched to a vegetarian option, a statistically significant result. I love this idea, which Sparkman refers to as fostering social change through dynamic norms. It bypasses issues with perceived preaching or posturing while having a similar impact. Have you seen it deployed anywhere? (Hint: Did you read the previous blog post?) What about at your workplace? At stores you frequent? Id love to hear.

As to the verbal gunslingers parrying the accusation of virtue signaling, I want to end with this quotation from former Secretary of Defense James Mattis in the current issue of The Atlantic (8): Cynicism is cowardice. Cynicism fosters a distrust of reality. It is nothing less than a form of surrender. It provokes a suspicion that hidden malign forces are at play. It instills a sense of victimhood. It may be psychically gratifying in the moment, but it solves nothing. Consider that people may be aiming, in however small a way, to improve our future. Their actions may not be perfect, but what they are doing is a start. Use your energy instead to take it on yourself and lead by example.

Notes and References1. This 2015 article in the Spectator by James Bartholomew talks about why he adopted the phrase virtue signaling in April 2015. (He claims to have coined it, but it was in use earlier.)

2. This 2019 NY Times article describes some work by two psychologists to better understand when and why people might virtue signal.

3. Do you really need a link to Wikipedia?

4. David Shariatmadari wrote a nice opinion piece on this for The Guardian in 2016, observing that What started off as a clever way to win arguments has become a lazy put down. Its too often used to cast aspersions on opponents as an alternative to rebutting their arguments. In fact, its becoming indistinguishable from the thing it was designed to call out: smug posturing from a position of self-appointed authority.

5. Some people will say that small can in fact preclude big, because people will use the small to excuse the big. For example, someone might rationalize purchasing a new BMW M5 because they switched their home lights to LEDs. Ill have to do a separate post on emissions rationalization.

6. The book, published just a few months ago, is here. You can find an excerpt on Quillette.

7. There is a very interesting article about Sparkmans work by Sophie Yeo in Pacific Standard (August 2018). It is worth a read.

8. James Mattis writes in the December 2019 issue of The Atlantic about his concern that we are not putting in the work needed to maintain our democracy. But his point about cynicism (and some of his other points) applies equally well to the work needed to maintain our planet.

Current Climate Data (September/October 2019)Global impacts, US impacts, CO2 metric, Climate dashboard (updated annually)

Comment GuidelinesI hope that your contributions will be an important part of this blog. To keep the discussion productive, please adhere to these guidelines, or your comment may be moderated:- Avoid disrespectful, disparaging, snide, angry, or ad hominem comments.- Stay fact-based and refer to reputable sources.- Stay on topic.- In general, maintain this as a welcoming space for all readers.

What is community worth to you?Support local journalism.

Comments

Read this article:

Palo Altans and their Virtue Signaling | A New Shade of Green | Sherry Listgarten - Palo Alto Online

In July 2001, I was 26 and living in New York, basking in the glow of the citys punk scene from the 70s, dancing to post-punk pastiche of the 80s, and dressing like a mod from the 60s. I didnt know the name for my generation I was born in 1975, technically placing me on the tail-end of the 1965 to 1980 Generation X spectrum and neither 9/11 nor The Walkmen had yet come around to tell me that historical epochs were important. The Yeah Yeah Yeahs had just released their first self-titled EP; its closing song was called Our Time, and we already knew the words. When the band ended its shows with the chorus of its our time to be hated (this was obviously before Maps), everybody sang along and felt it in our bones. It was as much a plea as a statement of fact. Old people didnt hate us they didnt even really care about us.

Does the above paragraph make you want to defenestrate yourself? Good. Welcome to the wooly and wild world of generational exceptionalism. This is where the diss-by-omission that is OK Boomer comes in. For those readers unwilling to follow the vagaries of memetic language, OK Boomer is a phrase first used on Reddit in 2015 but was recently popularized on Tik Tok and Twitter as a hashtaggable response to condescending old people. Its a sarcastic rejoinder to older folks use of terms like snowflake and SJW to describe young people, or, for actual Boomers who fear that this jokey insult will somehow reveal they dont deserve the op-ed columns theyve mysteriously held onto for the past two decades, it is an ageist, odious call to violence that will inevitably lead to Wild in the Streets-style internment camps.

The concept of OK Boomer, however, is historical canon; the first OK Boomer moment perhaps occurred in the Old Testament when Abraham decided to tie Isaac up and sacrifice him to God. Ever since then, everyone, regardless of their side in the conflict, has loved generational distinctions, which are much like astrology in that they even flatter in the negative. And if you have ignored whatever semblance of your sanity that has not been devoured by online brain worms and are still reading this, even better youre ready for another essay on OK Boomer. Like the Old Testament and climate change, were living in the discourse flood times. And, taking a cue from that other early-aughts prophet, Andrew W.K., were all here to get wet.

Speaking of brain worms, if one is (like me) inclined to hate-read New York Times op-ed pieces like its ones job, one will come away with the impression that Gen Xers are jaded and apathetic, Millennials (born from 1981 to 1996) are babies, and that all Zoomers (those born after 1997) are full of ageist spite. I begrudge the writers of these pieces nothing. But, though I firmly believe that all generational talk is pure marketing hokum, I want to discuss my generation, X, for no other reason than being ignored hurts my feelings. Or my sense of history. Whichever scans better.

Theres a reason my generation was, and is, a touch jaded. We held mass protests against two wars in Iraq that were promptly ignored by both the government and the media. My youth was the era of in no particular order Rage Against the Machine, veganism, the Beastie Boys, Free Tibet, the World Trade Organization protests, Mean People Suck T-shirts, yelling at people for dancing too hard, and political correctness as both a genuine notion and right-wing boogeyman. And thats just the popular stuff. Dont even get me started on 90s hardcore and its tendency to preface a two-minute song about the singers ex-best friends betrayal with a 10-minute speech about how wearing suede sneakers is literally mass murder. We werent just caring and earnest in our ambition to save the world, we were downright insufferable. We contained multitudes, and we told the world so with our t-shirts.

Sure, most people back then didnt give a shit beyond their Clinton-era personal comforts. But most isnt how we remember culture. Most Boomers werent at Woodstock, and most Zoomers arent attending climate-change protests (and god knows theres no shortage of smirking teenagers in MAGA hats), but news of those who do attend still goes viral. Trying to talk about a country the size of America with lazy delineations of everybody or nobody feeling or acting a particular way has become the foolhardy norm.

While I busy myself crying about everybody mischaracterizing old people of my particular vintage as having been fashionably nihilistic, I cant help but feel that young people view my generation as not worth the time of their contempt, and that gets my Dickies in a bunch. Just how hypocritical and selfish, 70s-fetishizing and Lewinsky-demonizing, tribal-tattooed and murderous-Iraq-war-supporting, Friends-watching and Afghanistan-ignoring does a generation have to be to get any anti-credit around here? We embraced vague existential/economic dissatisfaction as brand. (We didnt have OK Boomer, but we did have OK Computer.) We commodified punk, came up with nu-metal and electronica, took Paul Veerhovens Starship Troopers at face value, and somehow managed to invent irony and pronounce its death.

And still, the babies, who cant even keep a straight face when we talk about the golden age of hip-hop, refuse to rate the members of Gen X deserving our own ephemeral put-down. Gen X is terrible, if anyone is. The endless discourse positioning generations as these communal personalities, set in stone and unchangeable, is infuriating. But still, I want my slice of hate-pie. (In the last 15 minutes or so, someone seems to have invented a Gen X-specific putdown, OK Karen. Whether this is a BuzzFeed hoax or some anti-No Wave Karen O slander is immaterial. It is, like hope punk or voters who went to Trump because of the intolerant Left, purely a media fantasy. Ignore it like youd ignore a flat-earther at the bar.)

As someone whose cohort was also written off as lazy, ruined by technology, and having particularly inane song lyrics, I want to see Millennials and Zoomers swaddled from criticism, while at the same time, Im left feeling deeply resentful of their wholesale theft of our lazy, ruined by technology, bad lyrics schtick. Do you people honestly believe we wouldnt have stared at our smartphones back then if wed had them? All the Lollapaloozas after the first were boring as hell. Given a choice between Pearl Jam and an iPhone, I wouldnt have looked up once.

Id find young people subscribing to the tired religiosity of us good/them bad a bummer only if I held them to a higher standard than all the old weirdos who lurked in my social spaces as a teen. I do not. I am both gifted and cursed with a visceral memory of what being 15 was like by this, I mean I still deeply relate to Minor Threat lyrics and I distinctly remember that neither I nor anyone I knew was smart or good. To be young is to be in the drift of possibility, but its only guarantees are strong opinions, raging hormones, and whatever chaos ensues when you combine the two.

Now that Im old and infirm (Im 44), I fear and respect teenagers, as their capacity for cruelty knows no bounds. But I also realize that its only a few short years before Zoomers witty knives are broken or at least dulled. Thats what happens: young peoples brutal honesty turns into culturally mandated politesse (or civility) and becomes feigned empathy for those feeling the brunt of the systemic cruelty were all complicit in. So until then, if they want to squabble with their elders just like the Greatest Generation, Boomers, Gen X, Millennials, and everyone else did and will do in the future, I say go with God. All I almost-sincerely ask, of op-ed writers and online posters alike, is a certain specificity of memory, and the language to match. And I will hold my breath. As noted, futility is kind of our thing.

Read more here:

As a member of Generation X, I want my own OK Boomer - The Outline

The barman glanced up at the sky over Ocaas elegant main square before dragging a couple of tables outside. Like much else in Spain, the recent weather could charitably be described as changeable.

On Sunday, the ruling Spanish Socialist Workers party (PSOE) won the countrys fourth general election in as many years, the far-right Vox stormed into third place, and the Citizens party once touted as the future of the Spanish centre ground collapsed into an ignominious heap.

Fewer than 48 hours later, the PSOE and the anti-austerity Podemos announced the preliminary coalition deal that had proved so elusive after the Socialists won the last election in April but failed to secure a majority.

Juan Francisco Cruz, a Vox supporter to his core, described the deal as just a horrible situation as he stopped for a mid-morning drink and a cigarette in the towns damp plaza mayor.

His dismay was lessened by Voxs national showing and by its performance in Ocaa, a town of about 11,000 people an hour south of Madrid, where the party overtook the PSOE to finish first.

The far-right grouping, led by Santiago Abascal, won 34.5% of the vote in the town, the PSOE 28.3%, the conservative Peoples party (PP) 21.6%, Unidas Podemos 7.2%, and Citizens 6.5%.

Three years ago, Vox had attracted 0.62% of the vote in Ocaa. Cruz, 58, had a simple explanation for the surge.

Theyre just right on everything, he said. Id always voted PP before but theyre very weak now and theres been a lot of corruption. Its also about immigration: there are too many illegal immigrants and they get help that Spaniards dont. Its just out of control and somebody needs to get a grip.

Another local Vox voter, 75-year-old Juan Montoya, offered his own, understated take on the main issue driving Voxs rise in towns such as Ocaa.

Catalonia is a big mess, he said. I voted Vox because I want order and I want peace.

Corruption scandals and the political deadlock prompted by the death of traditional two-party politics in Spain have bred disillusionment among millions of Spanish voters.

By seizing on that, weaponising the issue of Catalan independence and calling into question the countrys current system of regional self-government, Vox has succeeded in moving very far, very fast.

Abascal who not so long ago was ridiculed for a video in which he appeared on horseback to announce a reconquest has managed to cut through with a simple proposition: do voters want to be able to retire comfortably, or do they want to carry on footing the bill for the government of Spains 17 autonomous regions?

Or, as he pithily put it: Pensions or regional governments?

Cristina Arranz, a local businesswoman, said people were simply sick of the status quo.

They want someone who can offer them something credible, she said. Its easy to promise things but its difficult to deliver them. People are desperate, and when youre desperate you go to the extremes, whether of left or right.

Arranz, 56, said people were using Vox as a protest vote, just as people had begun to back Podemos in the aftermath of the economic crisis.

She said Citizens whose leader, Albert Rivera, resigned on Monday had found itself on the wrong side of history by refusing to join the Socialists successful attempt to unseat the corruption-mired PP last year, and by trying to compete with Vox by moving further to the right.

Both the PP and Citizens have also helped to legitimise Vox by enlisting its support to take power in Andaluca and Madrid in the past year.

Arranzs friend, Lola Carrero, said people were leaving the PP for Vox now that Abascal had slightly recalibrated his rhetoric.

Its basically the same people voting for the same ideas, she said. Vox have softened their message and its worked. Well see if they go back to it soon.

Pablo Simn, a political scientist at Carlos III University in Madrid, said Voxs results in satellite towns around the Spanish capital and in places such as Ocaa suggested it was widening its socioeconomic base.

Vox is a party whose origins lie in the middle and upper middle-class vote people who used to vote for the PP and Citizens, he said.

But in these elections, it seems theyve done a bit better in relative terms among the rural and working classes. Were starting to see that working-class people who voted PP in the past are now turning towards Vox. As it grows, the party is developing a slightly more heterogenous electorate than it had before the April election.

Simn said Vox looked set to continue its growth, fuelled by media that sustain the partys momentum whether the coverage is positive or negative.

Having capitalised on voter discontent and the question of Spanish unity, he added, the party may now ape other successful European far-right parties by adopting chauvinist strategies over the welfare state.

Vox still hasnt really started doing that, but Im sure they know that its a strategy that would help them grow, said Simn.

If there is a PSOE-Podemos government backed by Catalan pro-independence parties, that will only help Vox keep hammering away when it comes to territorial questions and general political discontent. Add to that a discourse over immigrants taking up resources and youve got three elements that could help Vox grow still more at the next election.

There is much that is familiar and contemporary in Voxs appetite for border walls, in its paradoxical, if not hypocritical, antipathy towards elites, and in its demonisation of immigrants.

And then there is the nostalgia that verges on the atavistic. Juan Montoya hankers after the peace and co-existence of the past and cannot fathom the Socialists decision to exhume Franco from the Valley of the Fallen last month.

What has it achieved? he wondered. Its just revived tensions between people. They should just have left him in his tomb.

Juan Francisco Cruz, meanwhile, mourns the political correctness of the present.

Its a lie to say that Vox are racist. Theyre just the only party that has the balls to come out and tell the truth about things.

Read more from the original source:

'They tell the truth: Spanish town where 34.5% voted for far-right Vox - The Guardian

Ron MacLean (left) sits beside Don Cherry as Rogers TV unveils their team for the station's NHL coverage in Toronto on Monday, March 10, 2014. MacLean addressed Don Cherry's dismissal during the first intermission of Saturday's "Hockey Night in Canada" broadcast. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Chris Young

Chris Young/The Canadian Press

Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter.

From the Comments is designed to highlight interesting and thoughtful contributions from our readers. Some comments have been edited for clarity. Everyone can read the comments but only subscribers will be able to contribute. Thank you to everyone furthering debate across our site.

Readers respond: On Saturday, Don Cherry was erased from Hockey Night in Canada in more ways than one

Story continues below advertisement

Some changes make you feel good. Some make you feel sad. You are aging. You will experience changes and feel the same when your time comes.

Don Cherry was saddened by the fading support for the poppy program, and consequently, for the sacrifices others made to our benefit. Nothing wrong with that.

I am saddened by the lack of effort to understand Cherrys concern. Primacy was given to vilifying him, in an ugly display of current societys gang-up attitude toward slights perceived or real.

We beat people up; we move on to the next beating; and somehow this feels satisfying to the angry hordes. Ron MacLean has embraced this change. Enjoy your next beating, Ron. I hope you feel better for it. George Bay

The man made bigoted statements on the air for decades. Finally one of them was too much for his employer, and they fired him. The true ugliness is in the bigotry and the chord it struck in his supporters. Alceste

I have said many dumb things in my time, lashed out in anger, had words misconstrued and sometimes had to apologize, clarify, retract, explain. I am thankful that in pretty much every case, the person I was speaking to recognized that they were also flawed, and perhaps either of us imputing the most nefarious intent to every word spoken is not entirely fair and no way to conduct human relations.

Sportsnet has the right to fire Don Cherry if they deem him damaging to their image. But I find the vindictiveness of todays social media mob the desire to destroy peoples lives and careers with no second chances if every word does not pass muster to be disheartening. Freshycat

Story continues below advertisement

Story continues below advertisement

The problem with demonizing Don Cherry is that he is not the problem. What readers think of his firing from Hockey Night in Canada

Don Cherry, Colin Kaepernick and why stick to sports doesnt work

Don Cherrys downfall: He became more interested in his own opinions than hockey

Hockey has long defined Canada, but its time to reassess our relationship

Don Cherry poses for a photo in Toronto on March 10, 2014. When sociology professor Kristi Allain saw that "Hockey Night in Canada" commentator Don Cherry was fired for on-air, anti-immigrant remarks Monday, she was hopeful that it spoke to a change in Canadian social values and social life, and an intolerance of racism. But then she logged onto Twitter and saw the reactions. While some have been jubilant he was axed over his rant accusing immigrants of not wearing poppies, others have called for a Sportsnet boycott and are using the hashtag "Don Cherry Is Right." THE CANADIAN PRESS/Chris Young

Chris Young/The Canadian Press

Still upset about it. Im all over being multicultural but this is the end of Canadian culture as we know it. 10 years from now, itll be Soccer Night in Canada. Again, Im all for multiculturalism, but Canada is losing its identity and fast. Pretty sad. Will96

Canada is growing up, and we have room for more than one sport. Oooooops

Hypocrisy at its highest. This Buds for political correctness, not for you, Canada.

From Coachs Corner to HRs Corner.

Sportsnet reran the segment in the late game. Should they not fire themselves? BJBeat

Having met Don Cherry a few times, Ive seen firsthand what a gentleman he truly is, taking over a room with genuine warmth. In person, he is simply a pro at making people feel good. Having witnessed that, what becomes apparent by contrast is how his role on HNIC had become just that: a role he came to play on camera, and one that his fans (myself included) expected of him. The way he spoke, his defiance, his mispronunciations, his put downs on Ron MacLean.

Story continues below advertisement

But it had all become pretty redundant. Even Johnny Carson and David Letterman knew when to eventually take the exit door. Ill miss Don Cherry, and wish him well. There will, no doubt, never be another quite like him. Lorne M-G

On Hockey Night in Canada's Nov. 9 Coach's Corner segment Don Cherry with Ron MacLean.

CBC/CBC

There isnt a question that Don Cherry was wrong, even he begrudgingly admits that he could have chosen better words. However in the new world, as Ron MacLean puts it, there are no second chances, no lighter sentences or rehabilitation, you are out.

When California first introduced their infamous three strikes and you are out rule on crime, most Western democracies found that to be cruel and unnecessary. In the world of political correctness, it has become the norm that one strike and you are out, and most people seem quite fine with that.

In an age of reconciliation, understanding and acceptance of different views and, of course, compassion, there is also a blank spot where the wrong few words can get you banished, as in Cherrys case.

Cherry, at 85, will be fine. He doesnt need the money and will find something else to do, although it is unlikely it will be in media. However, we should consider that regardless of the fact that Cherrys comments were wrong, is this the type of justice we want? JeffSpooner

Don Cherry was a character with a lot of interesting stuff to say. He has had a great career and was an integral part of our Saturday nights.

Story continues below advertisement

I wonder why he didnt jump right in the next day and say that he was angry at everybody who didnt wear a poppy, and that he didnt intend to single out immigrants. He knows that a blanket condemnation of any group isnt right.

It is too bad that it ended this way. one-eighty

Whats missing from the present situation is that Don Cherry made clear he wanted no rehab. Instead of acknowledging his error, stepping back from and softening his comments, he spent the week digging his heels in and doubling down. He did all but permanently tattoo his rant across his own forehead.

I think recovery from his big slip-up could have been easy, but he refused to participate. And so, there is no lighter sentence, no rehab, no parole. JPP221

Don Cherry had many second chances. If you want to share the blame, maybe its the people (his producers) who let him stray by a few degrees every year from his original Coachs Corner mandate. Like a ship thats only off course by a little, after a lot of time, its way off and ends up on shoals.

Cherry is a grown man and was a highly paid professional. He made his own mess. Not the Alliance

Story continues below advertisement

CBC HANDOUT -- MOLSON HOCKEY NIGHT IN CANADA -- Ron MacLean and Don Cherry

Archie Bunker would not exist today. What a pity! We need to get rid of our enormous chip on our shoulder and learn again to laugh at ourselves. Not everything is done and said with malice, sometimes its just plain humour. If we dont, then anything, by anyone, can be considered offensive by the next person. Silva2

I love Archie Bunker. The writers were decades ahead of their time. Im not sure they couldnt pull it off again, even today. Archie wasnt given a bully pulpit the best scenes were with Jeffersons son, who would make Archie look simple and wrong by playing along.

In 99 per cent of the cases, Ron MacLean did a good job of pushing back on Don Cherry when he was being Archie. MacLean was right: If he caught him on this most recent faux-pas, Cherrys run as Archie probably continues. PeterK2262

Cant help but think this would be a good time for Ron MacLean to exit. patti o furniture

Oh but there are second chances for a select few. Our Prime Minister comes to mind. billy112

Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter. Sign up today.

See the article here:

Don Cherry had many second chances. What readers thought of Hockey Night in Canada without Coachs Corner - The Globe and Mail