Stupid People Shouldn't Play Hockey Historian

There's something about Jymn Parrett -- known around these parts as Jim Parrot for his tendency to mindlessly repeat any line of bullshit a far-left demagogue instructs him to -- and hockey that seems to send his under-sized, under-powered mental locomotive off the tracks.

As was shown during the Vancouver Canucks 2011 Stanley Cup run -- which ended in disappointment for all Canadians, on far too many levels -- a bizarre obsession lies in Jim Parrot's psyche to politicize the game in all sorts of ways that don't reflect the reality of it.

For example, in the mind of this deranged individual, the horrifying story about Philadelphia Flyers forward Wayne Simmonds having a banana thrown at him in London, ON has become an opportunity to blame Prime Minister Stephen Harper for some alleged resurgence of racism in Canada.

Those who have paid close attention to race issues in Canada for what they are, as opposed to what they wish it would be know better. All proper-thinking Canadians wish racism was a thing of the past in Canada. But we know it is not.

Racism has never really gone away in Canada, as much as we wish it would. It seems worthy of note that the race indcident that most readily comes to mind during the 2011 federal election, in which Harper won a majority government, involved not a Conservative candidate, but a Bloc Quebecois candidate who declared that Quebeckers would note vote for Romeo Saganash because he's Cree.

Let's not for get that the Bloc Quebecois was essential to the power-grabbing coalition of socialists and separatists that people like Jim Parrot so readily favoured in 2008.

Parrot's logic is hardly befitting the word. It proceeds something like this: Stephen Harper is the Prime Minister of Canada. A racist incident occurred in London, Ontario. Ergo, Harper must be to blame.

Parrot pretends to be deeply concerned about this incident -- and perhaps truly is, even if he isn't at all legitimately concerned with the issues intrinsic to it. But can't even keep his hockey history straight.

He treats Boston Bruins forward Willie O'Ree as the pioneer for black players in hockey. This assessment is actually incorrect.

O'Ree played a total of 45 games in the NHL for the Boston Bruins -- not bad for the first black player to ever do so. But those fully familair with hockey history know of another man... a man by the name of Herb Carnegie.

Carnegie began his professional career in 1938, while O'Ree was but three years old.

In 1948 Carnegie was invited for a tryout with the New York Rangers. Although he was widely regarded as one of the best players in the camp, fit to crack the Rangers starting lineup, he was instead offered a contract to play with the Rangers' minor league affiliate. The contract was worth less than he was earning playing for the Quebec Aces.

Among his teammates with the Aces was none other than Jean Bealiveau, who would later remark that Carnegie was one of the best players he had ever played with. Considering Bealiveau played with legends such as Maurice "The Rocket" Richard, this is high praise indeed.

Msny believe that if Carnegie had accepted the contract offered to him by the Rangers that he would have played in the NHL long before Willie O'Ree. Unlike O'Ree, whose NHL output totalled 14 points, he also would have excelled.

But Carnegie should always be admired for one thing: he knew that his self-respect and dignity were worth more than the possibility of one day, maybe, playing in the NHL after prostrating himself in order to have done it.

Hearing Carnegie talk about it today, he is still clearly stung by the pain of having been denied the opportunity to play in the NHL, but he publicly expresses few regrets. The Rangers management of the day should have a few: it's not unreasonable to speculate that they could have won a Stanley Cup with Carnegie. Instead, the franchise would wait until 1994, when they beat -- who else? -- the Vancouver Canucks.

Carnegie's decision to keep his dignity is a triumph in itself.

That Jim Parrot would look to the mediocre Willie O'Ree over the spectacular Herb Carnegie as the luminary for black hockey players demonstrates that he's as out-of-touch with hockey history as he is out-of-touch with the issues at the heart of the Simmonds incident.

Simmonds is far from the only black hockey player in the modern era to experience racism. In one incident that comes to mind, Anson Carter -- whose career peak was a world championship-winning goal -- had a banana thrown at him during the 2004-05 NHL lockout... while he was playing as part of a team of touring NHL stars in Russia.

Simmonds, like Carter, like Carnegie, has opted to take the high road in this incident. Simmonds has opted to simply rise above the clearly-premeditated expression of hatred directed at him, and move on.

He's brought no personal agenda to the table; political, ideological, or otherwise.

If only Jim Parrot had opted to do the same thing -- instead of transforming the incident into a political smear -- he would be fit to comment on the matter. Sadly, he didn't, and unsurprisingly, he isn't.

No, Vancouver, You Can't Blame This One on the Black Bloc

Anarchist terrorists couldn't have planned this any better themselves

No sooner had it become clear that the Vancouver Canucks had lost the Stanley Cup to the Boston Bruins, it became equally clear that some Canucks fans weren't going to let it go quietly.

Frankly, all too many.

But as violence swept through Vancouver, some people -- such as TSN's Bob McKenzie and CTV's Rob Brown -- blamed the violence on the famed Black Bloc.

A pack of black-clad anarchist thugs who take any international conference as ane excuse to show up and terrorize the local population, the Black Bloc very likely had absolutely no hand whatsoever in the violence following the Canucks game.

First, there's the obvious: a professional hockey championship reeks of too much consumerism for such individuals to be there for their intrinsic pleasure. Then there's the looting. The Black Bloc smashed store windows in Toronto, but few people can recall them actually stealing anything. At least in that meagre sense, they're comparatively honest.

And, quite frankly, hockey fans are far too likely to respond to a Black Bloc rioter by simply beating the shit out of them than a peaceful protester is.

So one can assure themselves that cowards like Alex Hundert would shy away from hockey fans and gravitate toward peaceful left-wing protesters: the latter he can take advantage of. The former he cannot.

Even so, the Vancouver 2011 riot couldn't have gone down any better for the Black Bloc if they had planned and orchestrated it themselves.

Now, the Black Bloc and their water-carriers on the left -- such as No One is Illegal's Harsha Walia -- have a violent incident to point to and declare that the Black Bloc's political violence isn't nearly as repugnant as many would consider it. They'll declare that ordinary citizens, fueled by alcohol and their own frustrated sense of entitlement, can be just as violent as they are.

And who is anyone to say that they aren't right about that?

It doesn't make what the Black Bloc does OK. Nothing accomplishes that particular rhetorical feat.

But Vancouver cannot blame this riot on the Black Bloc. The task of assigning blame will be much more difficult for them than that. They have to look into the eyes of their fellow Canucks fans and wonder if this was a honourable and peaceful fan -- as this author believes the majority of them were -- or if it was another one of these thugs ruining the experience for everyone else.

It should even lead to some soul-searching for the city of Vancouver, just as the 2006 riots led to soul-searching among Edmontonians.

The Black Bloc wasn't to blame for the Edmonton riots. We were. In some way, we all were. The same sad reality applies to Vancouver as well.

Hopefully, next year -- when the Canucks contend for the Stanley Cup again, and hopefully win -- Vancouver will be able to do it better. Then there will be no blame to worry about, and they'll all be able to share the credit.

I Really Hoped I Was Wrong...

...But maybe I was right. At least it seems that way.

It all begins with this post, after which I noted that Jim Parrot's expressed desire to claim a Stanley Cup victory as glory for himself (well, for Vancouver, BC, and Canada, but mostly for himself) as opposed to glory for the players.

I tried to get the message through to him: that it was the players who had to win the victory, the players who deserved the glory for it, and that he had no right to attach his values to them without their consent.

But Jim has a thick skull. He refused to listen, and went on a two-week long binge of bandwagon jumping and demagogic grandstanding.

I sat back and paid attention. And a disturbing pattern emerged.

It seemed to me that each time Jim wrote a post questioning the patriotism of any Canadian fans not backing the Canucks, or wrote a post about how badly victimized the Canucks and their fans allegedly have been, it seemed like the Canucks would lose the next game.

At one point Jim even pointed the finger squarely at Prime Minister Stephen Harper, blaming him for the Canucks game 4 loss (this despite the fact that Canadian teams have a 2-1 record in the Stanley Cup finals when Harper attends a game). Jim directed Harper to "stay away from our Canucks".

Jim, it seems, had also claimed what was believed to be the Canucks' impending glories for the political left. In this he merely did what all too many political extremists do: that is, make everything about politics. About their politics.

I'm not really a superstitious person. At times I enjoy to feign superstition, because sports-related rituals can be a lot of fun.

I don't believe in anything like hockey gods. But the Canucks' loss has me thinking about changing my mind.

On each side of the ice in this series, there has been a magnificent goaltender who deserves to win the Stanley Cup. In Roberto Luongo, there was a bedrock of a goaltender who was won nearly everything there is to win. In Tim Thomas, there was a goalkeeper who, despite his advanced age, refuses -- simply refuses -- to fade.

But somewhere in between these two players, perhaps the hockey gods saw something else. Perhaps they spied Jim Parrot, this vindictive little worm of a man, trying to claim the glory of a Stanley Cup win for himself; for his own narcissistic ends.

Perhaps the hockey gods looked upon Jim Parrot, heard his petulant whining, his bizarre demagogic grandstanding, and saw someone whose narcissism just cannot be justified. Perhaps it was enough to tip their favour toward Tim Thomas.

Or, much more likely, the hockey gods just don't exist. Injuries to Michael Samuelsson, Dan Hamhuis, Mason Raymond, and Alex Edler (who played game 7 with an undisclosed injury) caught up to them. Perhaps it was the Canucks' lack of championship-calibre play (allowing too many goals in the opening or closing minute of a period, giving up too many blowout victories to their opponents and generally proving themselves to be a fragile team with questionable heart). Poor officiating in the closing games of this series was definitely a factor as well.

One way or the other, maybe the Vancouver Canucks just lost, and Jim Parrot has to live with it, victim mentality and all.

To most Canucks fans, the average Canadian hockey fan should tip their hat. They showed up to support their team in nearly-undreamed of droves, and did so without a surplus of violent incidents or a riot. To most Canucks fan, the message should be: don't give up.

It sucks that your team lost, but all is not lost. Next year is another year. Hopefully, the Canucks can apply the hard lessons learned this year to the postseason next year, and rise from the ashes of this defeat with a triumphant victory.

For Jim Parrot, however, the message is entirely different: before the next time you try to claim someone else's accomplishment as your own, before you try to attach your politics to them without even asking for their agreement, before you try to use a hockey playoff as a wedge between Canadians of the left and the of right, think twice.

At least show them that much respect.


Well, fuck - Everything seemed to be going so well. Thanks, assholes, for ruining a good memory for a lot of people; including your fellow Canucks fans.

Memo to Jim Parrot: the Vancouver Canucks Are Not Your Tools

Considering the nature of drivel that regularly passes for commentary on Let Freedom Rain, that particular corner of hate-based gibberish is ordinarily best left (largely) ignored.

Unfortunately, this isn't one of those times.

Rarely has a blogger ever offered as disturbing a look into the workings of their mind as Jim Parrot until a recent bizarre screed on that particular cesspool.

In short, the blogpost seems to suggest that Albertans -- particularly Calgarians -- are unpatriotic if they don't support the Vancouver Canucks in their playoff run. More bizarrely, Jim Parrot seems to have unilaterally annointed the Canucks as the team of the left. (One can rest assured he never bothered to actually ask Canucks fans, management, or players -- especially the players, as will be shown shortly -- what they think of this.)

Then there's the colossally stupid. Cornette face stupid. PressCORE.ca stupid.

Jim Parrot even links to a story suggesting that Stephen Harper has invoked some kind of Prime Ministerial power to automatically present the Stanley Cup to the Calgary Flames.

The clear problem for Jim Parrot is that the website carrying the tale, Canada Second, is very clearly a parody website (although the site's operator very cleverly declines to actually say so).

There's no indication from Parret that he understands that the story is satire. Considering some of the bizarre comments made on his website about Harper, it becomes very easy to suspect he believes it.

It wouldn't be the first ridiculously stupid thing he's ever said.

But as one gets into the discussion stemming from the post -- in which Parret again provides little sign he understands the story is satire -- he provides a very disturbing look into the inner workings of his political mind, and of the precise role he seems to think people are to play within collectivist machinations.

Hockey players, he seems to think, are mere tools:

"I don't understand how the number of Canadians on a team matters. They are merely foot soldiers on a team representing a city, a province and in this year's Stanley Cup finals, a country (should the Canucks prevail over the Sharks). I find it kind of amusing that Vancouver has Swedes and Americans fighting for it. If Vancouver wins it all, the players are only the tools to victory, the victory itself belongs to Vancouver, BC and Canada. "

The players actually out working their asses to the bone to win the Stanley Cup -- and this is very much precisely what it takes -- are, to Jim Parrot, mere tools to someone else's ends. The victories they win -- the fruits of their labour -- are not their own.

It would likely shock Parret to learn that the Stanley Cup cannot be won by cities. It cannot be won by provinces. It cannot even be won by countries. If it could, Canada would have had one of its teams win the Cup at some point between today and 1993. The country has certainly wanted it badly enough.

The Stanley Cup is won by a team -- a team made up of individuals working together toward a shared and mutually-adopted purpose.

People are not tools. They are not chattel. They either work together out of choice, or they do not. Anyone who has ever watched hockey -- as opposed to subverting it for the purpose of wedge politics -- understands that it's the individual efforts of hockey players, focused into working as a team, that wins a championship. That goes for any other team sport.

Ultimately, in every way that really matters, the victories belong to the players who win them.

Jim Parrot's concept of hockey players as only tools is a frightening look into the worldview of far-left collectivism. But that only comes after one gets past the mind-numbing stupidity.

Own the Gold

The United States can have all the silver and bronze that it wants. When it comes to gold, Canada owned the podium.

Congratulations to Canada's hockey teams, as well as all of its victorious athletes, and any who were privileged enough to proudly represent their country in the first place

Frozen Diplomacy

In 1974, while Canada was embroiled in the second of a pair of intense Summit Series against the Soviet Union, the University of British Columbia Thunderbirds travelled to China on a national tour of their own, in the style of the many Soviet teams that would tour Canada during the 1970s and '80s.

Playing against a variety of club teams across communist China, the Thunderbirds would encounter a very different atmosphere than that confronted by Canada's teams playing in the Soviet Union. While Canadian players touring the Soviet Union were subjected to late night phone calls and stolen steak, Canadian players touring China were treated to friendship ceremonies and tours of hydroelectric dams.

In the years since the height of the Canada-Soviet rivalry in the 1980s, Soviet hockey became known for the intensity of their training regimens. Originally designed by Anatoli Tarasov and later obsessively perfected by Viktor Tikhonov, Soviet hockey players would be isolated from the outside world, and forced to live around their training schedules.

During the 1970s, the Chinese followed a training regimen even more intense than the Soviet schedule, in some cases being allowed a mere five days' break every two years.

But while the Soviet Union had fewer than 100 artificial ice rinks by the 1990s, China started even further behind, and the state of their hockey in the 1970s -- despite their emulation of Soviet methods -- clearly shows it.

Today, Chinese hockey has come a long way. In 2008, the same year that China hosted the World Women's Hockey Championships, the Chinese National Women's team managed to post a win over the traditionally-dominant University of Alberta Pandas. (In 2003, the tournament was scheduled to be held in Beijing, but was cancelled due to SARS.)

Thunderbirds in China is a stark reminder of the diplomatic power of sport, and a reminder that despite the euphoria of the Canadian wins over the Soviet Union in the 72 Summit Series, and in the 76, 84 and 87 Canada Cups, the greatest benefits of Canada's athetlic competitions with its adversaries have always been diplomatic benefits. (The famed 1987 punch-up in Piestany being a clear exemption.)

This Day in Canadian History

September 17, 1974 - Puck drops for Summit Series II

When Canada defeated the Soviet Union in the 1972 Summit Series, some notable Canadian players were missing from the lineup.

Team Canada 1972 was iced without Gordie Howe and Bobby Hull. Both were playing in the fledgling World Hockey Association. WHA players had been refused the opportunity to participate in the series.

Following the success of the '72 Series, WHA founder "Wild" Bill Hunter went to work on organizing a WHA version of the series. According to his autobiography, the '72 Series was originally his idea, but he was unable to organize the event until 1974.

In the meantime Alan Eagleson took the idea -- stole it, by Hunter's account -- and organized the '72 Series. Hunter would view Eagleson's refusal -- to the extent of denying Bobby Hull the opportunity to participate despite having been named to the team by Harry Sinden -- as a slap in the face not only to himself, but to his league.

By 1974, '72 series veterans Frank Mahovolich, Paul Henderson, and Pat Stapleton had also joined WHA teams -- Henderson and Mahovolich played with the Toronto Toros, and Stapleton represented Chicago Cougars.

The '72 edition of Team Canada was also the only version to unite Gordie Howe with his sons, Marty and Mark.

The series began inauspiciously for Canada, as they split their home games with the Soviets. They won a single game, lost one, and tied two.

The Soviets had proven to be less gracious guests than they were in 1972, as they raised a litany of complaints about their treatment at the hands of the Canadians -- including insisting their bus had "square wheels".

Upon returning to the Soviet Union the Soviets further ratcheted the psychological tactics against their Canadian opponents. Late-night phone calls were answered only to hear the sound of silence on the other end.

A game in Moscow nearly led to an international incident, as Bobby Hull signed autographs for Russian children. When a Soviet guard struck one of the children with the stock of his rifle, Hull lifted the guard off the ground by the neck. Only the soothing of Bill Hunter was able to stop Hull from harming the guard.

The Canadians also fell victim to extremely partisan officiating by the Soviet officials, as the Soviet Union won three of the games in Russia, winning the series decisively 4-1-3.

As far as a propaganda tool went, the Russians must have been disappointed with their win over a team scraped together from a few NHL stars, a group of seasoned WHA pros, and a collection of players who otherwise would be plying their trade in minor leagues.

In 1972, the Soviets had lost to a team that was not even Canada's best. In 1974, they defeated a team that was even further short of Canada's best.

The series, however, had greater implications than merely its potential to be used as propaganda. After their defeat at the hands of the Soviet Union, the WHA decided to embrace the European brand of hockey.

European players who would play in the WHA included Peter Stastny, Anders Hedberg and Ulf Nilsson. A European-styled player by the name of Wayne Gretzky would suit up for the Indianapolis Pacers and Edmonton Oilers of the WHA.

When the Oilers, Winnipeg Jets, and Quebec Nordiques of the WHA were absorbed into the NHL they revolutionized the stubborn, linear NHL style of play.

In the pages of hockey history, the 1974 Series may not stand as the touchstone the '72 triumph has become, but it was certainly more influential over the development of Canada's game, even if it would be fortunate play second fiddle in the hearts of Canadians.

The ADQ Needs Super Mario to Return

ADQ leadership campaign self-destructive

Canadians, being hockey fans, almost certainly remember the story of the Pittsburgh Penguins in the 1990s.

They kicked off the decade by winning two straight Stanley Cups. The Penguins' fortunes steadily declined until 1997, when Lemieux retired to battle lymphoma. The Penguins struggled after Lemieux's departure, winning only a single playoff series.

Lemieux returned to the Penguins in 2000, and the Penguins continued to struggle. These years of struggle set the stage, however, for a spectacular rebuilding program that eventually resulted in the team winning another Stanley Cup under Lemieux's annointed and groomed successor, Sidney Crosby.

Super Mario Lemieux recognized when his team needed him, and returned to the fray.

Super Mario Dumont may need to do the same.

Dumont resigned his position as leader of the party he founded in 2008, after being reduced from Leader of the Opposition to only seven seats in the National Assembly.

Since then, the ADQ has been in search of a new leader. The results haven't been inspiring.

So far, the main issues discussed in the ADQ leadership campaign have been the disqualification of a candidate, and the allegedly-inflated resume of another one of the candidates.

Where most party's leadership campaigns are characterized by the rush to sign up new members to support a particular candidate's leadership ambitions, the ADQ leadership campaign has been characterized by an exodus out of the party.

"I would say that the meter counting members leaving the party is turning faster than the one counting new members," said Caire, one of the leadership candidates.

Caire has been accused of using a fraudulent resume in which he is listed as holding a Bachelor of Communications degree from Laval University. For his own part, Caire insists that the degree is still "a work in progress", and that his resume was merely subject to a typo.

Caire himself accused Christian Levesque of being unable to chew gum while walking.

ADQ founding member Marie Gregoire has been markedly disappointed in the tone of the campaign.

"You would hope that the debate would be on ideas," she complained.

"The ADQ has always been a party of ideas," Gregoire continued. "They have been putting things on the table that nobody had the courage to talk about."

Enougn is enough. Taillon, Caire and Levesque have embarassed their party enough. Mario Dumont must by now recognize that he's the only one left who can lead to the ADQ.

Even if the party continues to struggle, at least it can continue to rebuild under his leadership. Perhaps one day it will return to the benches of the Official Opposition, or perhaps even the government of Quebec.

All Super Mario needs to do is return.

July 2009 Book Club Selection: Home Game, Ken Dryden & Roy MacGregor

In a month in which Canadians across the country and the world are celebrating our wonderful country, it's only appropriate to select a book that delves deeply into the Canadian cultural imagination.

Home Game was written as something of a sequel to The Game, in which Dryden followed his final season as a professional hockey player.

Home Game, written with Roy MacGregor, follows the central theme of The Game -- a life in hockey -- and applies it to the country as a whole, and chronicles the extent to which this magnificent sport may be the greatest unifying factor in Canada.

Regardless of wherever in Canada one comes from, one thing that nearly all of us agree on is our love of the sport of hockey.

Certainly, hockey isn't all there is to Canada. But Dryden and MacGregor make the case that it's a big part of it. The millions of us who tune in to Hockey Night in Canada on a wintry Saturday evening can attest to this.

A Foolish Assumption

There's nothing rational about discrimination

Writing in an op/ed column in the Globe and Mail, Tom Flanagan attempts to make the case that the Canadian Human Rights Commission is, essentially, obsolete and should be abolished.

In many ways, as Flanagan notes, Canada's Human Rights Commissions are largely responsible for their own current predicament -- that of a lack of public credibility:

"For the first time in a long time, human-rights commissions are on the defensive. The Harper government is taking away pay equity from the Canadian commission and University of Windsor law professor Richard Moon's report has recommended repeal of the commission's right to interfere with free speech.

Both federal and provincial commissions are suffering blowback from their unsuccessful attempts to muzzle media gadflies Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant. Mr. Levant, in particular, has declared a jihad against the commissions, drawing attention to the one-sided nature of the legislation under which they operate. For example, commissions pay expenses for complainants but not respondents; successful respondents cannot sue complainants to recover costs; commissions allow complaints for the same alleged offence to be lodged in multiple jurisdictions, amounting to double jeopardy."

There's certainly a case to made for this. The extremely self-destructive behaviour of many of the CHRC's investigators, including the one who was unscrupulous enough to hack the wireless internet connection of a private citizen, has made the CHRC extremely suspect in the eyes of many Canadian citizens.

The toll taken on the commissions by Levant alone has left the CHRC struggling to maintain its public sense of credibility.

But continuing Flanagan's analysis of the predicament confronting the CHRC hits an incredibly fatal flaw, when he attempts to analyze the phenomenon of discrimination -- with the CHRC is meant to combat -- in the same manner as would an economist:

"In a competitive market, discrimination is costly to the discriminator. An employer who refuses to hire workers because of race, religion or ethnicity restricts his own choices and imposes a disadvantage on his firm. Meanwhile, his competitors gain by being able to hire from a larger pool. The same logic applies to restaurateurs turning away potential customers, or landlords refusing to lease to people of particular categories. (I'll never forget the experience of owning rental property in the recession of the 1980s; I would have rented to Martians if they had showed up with a damage deposit.)

The argument applies no matter how rampant prejudice and discrimination may be. Those who discriminate impose burdens on themselves and confer advantages on their competitors. Competitive markets don't immediately abolish discriminatory practices, but they tend to erode them, not by trying to enlighten bigoted people, but by making discrimination unprofitable."

Flanagan overlooks two basic truths: one of economics, and one of discrimination.

Economics proceeds from the assumption that most people make rational choices. In any particular situation, they will make the decision that benefits them most fully -- or at least believes will benefit them the most.

Discrimination, meanwhile, is not rational. And although Flanagan's argument that discrimination is self-defeating and thus unsustainable in a competitive environment is an elegant argument, it overlooks the fact that discrimination has often taken place in some extremely competitive environments.

In Canada, few things have ever been as competitive as the sport of hockey. Yet the disadvantage of discriminating against the most talented or hard-working players on the basis of race or ethnicity has often proven to be a less-than-convincing incentive to not discriminate.

Canadian hockey offers numerous examples of this.

Perhaps the most little-known is the discrimination against the Winnipeg Falcons, the Canadian team that won the first Olympic Hockey Championship in 1920. The Falcons had won the Allan Cup as the champions of a league in Winnipeg staffed entirely by players of Icelandic descent. Players of Icelandic descent in Winnipeg had to start this league because other leagues wouldn't allow them to play because of their Icelandic heritage.

Their triumph at the Olympics -- which also won them a World Championship, as the World Championship was awarded to the winner of the Olympic tournament -- eventually won them a warm, if uncomfortable, welcome back in Winnipeg.

Players like Herb Carnegie -- who played excellently in training camps for the New York Rangers but were never allowed an opportunity to play for the club -- were discriminated against for the colour of their skin. Carnegie won MVP honours in the Quebec Provincial League in 1946, '47 and '48. The New York Rangers had won a Stanley Cup in 1940, but could have well won another with a player like Carnegie, whose skills were often considered comparable to those of Canadiens legend Jean Beliveau.

If discrimination could be defeated by the self-interested rationality of those who need top-caliber talents to excel in highly competitive environments, as Flanagan insists, one would have to imagine that such historical episodes never would have happened.

The truth is that there is nothing rational about discrimination. It's predicated on emotional responses to evident differences between people, and in cases of racism doesn't even necessarily rely on differently-coloured skin.

Discrimination proves to be one of those instances where the free market isn't enough to ensure justice for those involved.

Flanagan is eager to argue that cases wherein discrimination turns out to be profitable are so because of government interference in the free market:

"Government can use its coercive powers, however, to protect discriminatory practices in the private sector from being undermined by competition.

There is a long and dishonourable history of propping up discrimination in the private sector - refusing to enforce laws against violence (lynching), passing discriminatory legislation (Jim Crow laws in the American South) and authorizing business cartels (sports leagues) and labour cartels (trade unions). Satchel Paige would have been pitching against Babe Ruth if professional baseball had been a competitive industry.

Government, using its monopoly of coercion, imposes the costs of discrimination on its hapless targets. Think of the episodes in our history that make Canadians feel ashamed and for which our governments have been busy apologizing: disregard of aboriginal property rights; sending Indian children to residential schools; closing the doors to Jewish refugees; keeping out Chinese and Sikh immigrants; relocating the Japanese during the Second World War; interning Ukrainians during the First World War and Italians during the Second World War; eugenic sterilization of the mentally and physically handicapped.

Every one of these was an exercise of governmental power. Political majorities undoubtedly approved at the time, but public opinion did not relocate the Japanese or send Indian children to residential schools. Governmental authority did, backed up by the coercive monopoly of the state. Authorizing a government agency to stamp out discrimination in the private sector is truly setting the fox to guard the henhouse."

Yet the Winnipeg Falcons were the victim of discrimination within an amateur league, unprotected by government legislation, and that Carnegie actually excelled within a Quebec league that was.

As Flanagan notes, discrimination in the private sector may well be self-liquidating over time, as those who very much do disadvantage themselves by discriminating against those with valuable talents inevitably lose out.

But that does absolutely nothing for those being discriminated against today. That is where Human Rights Commissions come in handy, and that is a valuable role that they fill.

While few Canadians will pretend that Human Rights Commissions are perfect, fewer still would pretend that those imperfections couldn't be rectified with a program of reform, not abolition.




Other bloggers writing about this topic:

George Young - "World According to Flanagan (And Harper)"

Cracked Crystal Ball - "Tom Flanagan: It's All About Social Darwinism"

Canadian Feistiness is Nothing New

We just might be finding a new venue for it

A new poll conducted by the Association of Canadian Studies suggests that Canadians may be shifting their attitudes in regard to international issues.

According to the poll, a majority of Canadians are willing to risk conflict with other countries in the pursuit of Canada's goals on the international stage. By contrast, in 2003 a bare minority -- 49% as compared to 67% -- had agreed that Canada should pursue its goals even at risk of international friction.

The study notes that Canadians have "grown feistier when it comes to defending their interests on the international front."

While this may be true, the feistiness itself is actually nothing new.

Canadians have always been particularly feisty about the things they care about. While Canadians have historically tended to care little about the things that go on in the international community -- although the wars Canada have fought provide momentary exceptions to this general rule -- Canadians have always cared about hockey.

Incidents such as the famed Punch-Out in Piestany -- a bench-clearing brawl between Team Canada and the Soviet Union at the 1987 World Junior Hockey Championships -- demonstrate just how seriously Canadians have always taken hockey. When Team Canada decided they didn't like the way the Soviets were playing in a poorly-refereed game -- a surplus of stickwork by the Russian team continually ratcheted up tensions in the contest -- a line brawl on the ice quickly escalated into an all-out donnybrook between both teams.

The brawl wound up with both teams being disqualified from that year's tournament. But that same feistiness had previously emerged on numerous occasions, rarely more famously than in the 1972 Summit Series.

Canadian diplomatic officials in Moscow helped negotiate the Summit Series as part of their "hockey diplomacy" program. This unofficial diplomatic policy had, until that point, mostly entailed teams of Canadian diplomats -- sometimes with their rosters rounded out by American and European diplomats -- playing against their Russian counterparts. This team would eventually become known (although not well known) as the Moscow Maple Leafs.

These officials' plans to use the Summit Series as a goodwill-building exercise between Canada and the Soviet Union didn't go as well as they had hoped. On-ice tensions often spilled off the ice, including one incident in which Alan Eagleson was nearly arrested by a Soviet guard who didn't know who he was.

Phil Esposito would pose a particular problem for Canadian diplomats. Esposito, perhaps more than any other player, took the politically ideological undertones of the series to heart. His fierce on-ice play was matched by his confrontational attitude toward Soviet officials -- at one point even blowing Soviet Premier Aleksei Kosygin a kiss.

The behaviour of Canadian hockey fans particularly vexed diplomats. The Canadian cheering section made it difficult for Soviet officials to make use of the series for propaganda purposes. Soviet officials even attempted to spread Canadian fans out across the arena, believing isolating them from one another would temper their enthusiasm and boisterousness.

Instead, the invidual Canadians only cheered louder. In game seven, when Soviet officiating seemed to threaten the series, Canadian fans filled the arena with a chant of "let's go home".

One Canadian fan even managed to be arrested by Soviet guards and wound up having his foot tattooed with the markings usually used to identify Soviet prisoners. Quick work by Canadian diplomats secured his release, and he wound up expelled from the country will little more than his new tattoo.

This "hockey diplomacy" program was certainly less than a rousing success with Soviet officials. But in many other Soviet-bloc countries the matter was very different.

Canadian teams were immensely popular at tournaments played in other countries behind the Iron Curtain. Canada was viewed as the one country that could defeat the Soviet team, and as such enjoyed tremendous goodwill in countries where Soviet oppression had been especially harsh -- countries like Czechoslovakia and Hungary.

When Team Canada locked horns with the Soviets in Piestany, the Czech fans whistled raucously in support of the Canadian squad.

Canadian feistiness toward hockey has certainly has its dark side in the past as well. It's hard to forget what Bobby Clarke was willing to do to Valeri Kharlamov in order to win the '72 Summit Series.

Canadian disinterest in foreign affairs certainly has yet to completely dissipate -- Romeo Dallaire noted this much during the 2008 election, but there have been signs that more and more Canadians are becoming interested in foreign affairs, as more and more Canadians support intervention in the Sudan, or demand intervention in Sri Lanka.

Once Canadians become interested in foreign policy it's likely only natural that they would become feisty about it. Doing anything less than whole-heartedly simply isn't in the Canadian character.

And That Makes 5

Congratulations to our men's junior hockey team for a fifth well-earned championship!

You've done our country proud 30,000,000 times over.

Is This Unfair?

Stephane Dion stages the worst photo op in the history of photo ops.

Maurice Richard has to be spinning in his grave.

Five Reasons to Be Proud This Canada Day

Canada's top five cultural icons, according to myself

Today, Canadians across the country are celebrating 141 years of Canada.

To help determine what Canadians think of as our identity, the Dominion Institute and Citizenship and Immigration Canada have been conducting a survey of Canada's cultural icons.

As of the time of this writing, the top five consisted of the Maple Leaf, Vimy Ridge, Hockey, Queen Elizabeth and the Canadian Flag.

Like any other Canadian, we here at The Nexus, we all have our own ideas on Canadian identity. The following are my own personal top five Canadian icons, and explanations as to why:

1. Terry Fox - No one in Canada's history has ever embodied the spirit of our country quite the same way Terry Fox does.

When diagnosed with osteogenic sarcoma -- bone cancer -- at the age of 18, many people would resign themselves to a long, hard illness with little chance of recovery. But not Terry Fox.

Even after the cancer took his leg, Terry took to the Highways of Canada, running across the country to raise money for cancer research. As every Canadian knows, he didn't make it past Thunder Bay, when his cancer reappeared.

He would pass away on June 28, 1981, but would leave behind him a legacy that eventually blossomed into the Terry Fox run, taking his legendary Marathon of Hope worldwide.

Terry Fox represents everything good about Canada: dedication, generosity, self-sacrifice and, through his memory, global leadership.

2. Ottawa - Canadians have long accepted the reality of Canada as a country made up of at least two solitudes, in the phrase coined by author Hugh MacLennan.

Those Canadians with a firmer grasp on Canadian history would likely amend that to three solitudes -- the first two being English and French Canada, and the third being our aboriginal community -- but even then, Ottawa remains a symbol of the disjointed unity that may permanently elude and challenge us.

Built upon the foundations laid generations before the arrival of Europeans to North America, Ottawa straddles Ontario and Quebec where the Odawa First Nations had maintained a village named Kanata (a village that, like Ottawa has grown over time to become part of the Ottawa Metropolitan Area).

Besides remaining the seat of Canadian government, Ottawa is where the three most dominant strains of Canadian culture -- British, French and Aboriginal -- intercede most dramatically.

So long as there is a Canada, Ottawa will remain the strongest reminder of our three-pronged historical heritage.

3. Lester Pearson's Nobel Peace Prize - In 1957 Lester Bowles Pearson -- or "Mike" as he was dubbed by his Air Force instructors, a nickname that stuck with him throughout the remainder of his life -- won the Nobel Peace Prize.

In doing so, he put Canada on the map in terms of global leadership that his varying successors would try to emulate, but never quite equal.

Pearson was awarded the Prize for his work in establishing the United Nations Emergency Force that helped ensure a (at least temporarily) peaceful resolution to the Suez Crisis of 1956.

He would eventually parlay the award into the Leadership of the Liberal Party and the Prime Ministership of Canada.

Pearson's award remains a vital symbol of Canadian leadership on the global stage, and a reminder that Canada needs to remain committed to leadership as such.

4. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police - Many Canadians would likely name "freedom" as one of the most important reasons to be proud to be Canadian.

But the simple fact of the matter is that freedom only exists where order and justice are maintained.

Originally established in 1873 as the North West Mounted Police, the Mounties have safeguarded law and order in Canada for nearly as long as there has been a Canada.

The Mounties are known the world over as one of the top law enforcement agencies in the entire world, and they remain ambassadors for law and order the world over. Not only do they serve in Canada, ensuring our own safety and security, but they have also volunteered in wartime and peacekeeping operations overseas.

While many a controversy has been stirred over several progressive modernizations of the force, the very freedom that so many Canadians pride themselves on could never exist if not for the men and women who have pledged their lives to upholding it day in and day out.

5. Hockey - While it may seem like a cliche, there is simply no denying it: Canadians live and breathe by hockey.

Hockey Night in Canada remains one of Canada's top-rated television programs, and when it comes to international competitions like the World Junior Championships, Olympics and World Cup, Canadians practically demand victory from their teams.

Like the other items on this list, hockey represents virtually everything it means to be Canadian: energy, dedication, toughness, and a solid work ethic.

Certainly, not all Canadians will agree with everything on this list. But that's the magic of being Canadian: that we've drilled diversity so deeply into our national identity that what it means to be Canadian can mean different things to different people.

This is only partially what Canada means to me.

On that note, I bid you a temporary adieu and a happy Canada Day.

Congratulations to the Golden Bears

University of Alberta claims University Cup championship #13

Congratulations are clearly in order for all the players and staff of the University of Alberta Golden Bears, as the storied hockey club emerged as national champions for the 13th time in their history, and third championship in four years.

Congratulations, gentlemen.

Canada Four-peats at World Junior Hockey Championships

Let the drive for five begin

It took a little bit of extra work, but Canada defeated Sweden 3-2 in Overtime to claim its fourth consecutive World Junior Hockey Championship.

Congratulations, gentlemen. The country is truly proud of you -- again.

One Day to Zero Hour: Free Agency Kicks off Tomorrow

Tomorrow is judgement day for Kevin Lowe and the Oilers

Just some thoughts on hockey before tomorrow's big free-agent explosion.

With a promise to add upwards of eight to twelve new players for next season, Kevin Lowe has his work cut out for him, and his work load will only increase come Canada Day.

The Oilers have glaring needs following last year's 25th-place finish, and Lowe will have to work hard to meet them.

First off, the Oilers have seven unrestricted free agents who have the option of testing the markets: Petr Sykora, Petr Nedved, Daniel Tarnqvist, Jan Hejda, Jussi Markannen, Brad Winchester and Tobey Petersen; none of whom really warrant an urgent return ticket to Edmonton.

While Petr Sykora started the season off hot and set pace for a 40-goal season, he fizzled throughout the mid and late season, instead posting a paltry 20-goal season. While a 20 goal season is still a fairly successful season, Sykora's $3.5 million could be better spent on a player who produces throughout the entire season. Re-signing Sykora may be in the cards, but he should definitely be considered a low-priority signing.

With Shawn Horcoff, Jarret Stoll, Raffi Torres, Ales Hemsky and Joffrey Lupul returning, and Robbie Schremp and Robert Nilsson apparently ready to crack the lineup, the Oilers have few needs in terms of scoring forwards. They also have a collection of decent defensive forwards in Marty Reasoner, Ethan Moreau, and Fernando Pisani, along with a number of young prospects -- Jean-Francois Jacques, Marc-Antoine Pouliot, Kyle Brodziak, as well as Andrew Cogliano -- who could also make the team.

The Oilers could really use a good high-impact forward. A number of them are available. The lion's share of attention should be directed toward Daniel Briere, Chris Drury, Ryan Smyth, Teemu Selanne, Robert Lang, Peter Forsberg, Paul Kariya and Bill Guerin. This should take some of the pressure off Mike Peca, Nils Ekman, Mike York, Jason Blake, Scott Nichol, Radek Bonk, Jozef Sumpel, Martin Gelinas, Kyle Calder, Eric Lindros, Ladislav Nagy, Anson Carter and Vyacheslav Kozlov. Lowe could pursue any of these players -- but forget about Mike Comrie.

But what Edmonton really needs are defensemen. Fortunately, there are a number unrestricted defensemen who could really help this team out. Montreal's Sheldon Souray will be fiercely sought after. Roman Hamrlik likely won't be resigned in Calgary. Dallas' Darryl Sydor (an Edmonton native) could potentially fly under the radar, passed over in favour of Mathieu Schneider, Danny Markov, Andrei Markov, Brad Stuart, Brian Rafalski or Scott Hannan. Greg DeVries, Bryan Berard, Jiri Fischer and Tom Preissing are also available.

If Lowe goes to the well early and often enough, and negotiates aggressively enough, he should be able to secure two defensemen for his club -- that is, if he doesn't commit too much potentially unproductive time trying to secure a trade for Wade Redden. A fantastic as Redden would be as an Oiler, a trade of this magnitude would open more holes in the Oilers lineup, which Lowe may not be able to fill.

One should also keep in mind that Edmonton is one of the two choice destinations for Dick Tarnstrom as well. That should make some of Lowe's decisions much easier.

Goaltending should be a relatively simple decision: Dwayne Roloson is clearly number one, and Jeff-Drouin Deslauriers is due for a gig as a back-up goaltender. If Deslauriers takes to the NHL, he could be ready to slide right into Roloson's spot by the time Roli's four-year hitch is over.

This should be an exciting off-season for Oilers fans. Expectations are high, but Lowe just might have another summer of 2005-esque coup in his hat.

It's doublful is Oiler GM tenure could survive another sumer of 2006-esque fizzle.

Pair of Senators Fans Embarrass Country

Apparently a couple of tough guys in Ottawa could use a run-in with Georges Laraque

In Canada, hockey is a big deal. Any Canadian knows this. In fact, anyone, anywhere in the world, who can find Canada on a map probably knows this.

Canadians are passionate about hockey. But the recent behaviour of a pair of Ottawa Senators fans is beyond the pale.

According to news reports, two Senators' fans attacked a female Buffalo Sabres fan after she told them they could "put [their] brooms away." According to her husband, Sean, Renee Luck was pushed to the ground, then punched in the face repeatedly after the incident.

"One of the gentlemen -- actually, I can't call him a gentleman -- pushed our friend down, then pushed my wife down," Luck explains. "She got up and said, 'are you kidding me?' That's when the other guy hit her probably four or five times in the face."

"What kind of person does that?" he asked.

Obviously, the kind of person who takes a hockey game way too seriously. Also, a person who probably isn't all that bright. While a 3-0 lead in a playoff series always puts the sweep possibility in play, a team like the Buffalo Sabres simply isn't going to be washed out of the playoffs in four games. Especially not in the conference final.

While revolting, the incident really underscores the situation in the Eastern Conference final. No matter who wins this series, the fans of the team that loses are going to be extremely, extremely angry. Ottawa has been to the Conference finals before, in years they were expected to win the Stanley Cup, and lost. The Buffalo Sabres were so terrible for so long that their fans expect nothing less from the Presidents' Trophy winners -- especially given that, with Daniel Briere and Chris Drury set to become unrestricted free agents come July 1, it is very unlikely that the Sabres will be able to ice this line-up again come October.

All this aside, the behaviour of the fans in question -- who have been taken into custody, although charges haven't necessarily been laid yet -- is absolutely inexcusable.

Unfortunately, inexcusable behaviour seems to have become synonymous with playoff success in Canada. Last year, Oilers fans tore up Whyte Avenue in Edmonton following Oilers victories. In 2004, Flames fans in Calgary did the same to the Red Mile (although their fans won't admit to it).

Personally, I never thought I would say this: but perhaps Canadians could stand to take hockey a little less seriously.

A league in which millionaires get paid to play a children's game simply isn't worth fighting over.

Hockey Fans Should Be Hit With 5, 10 and a Game

Many people unhappy with violence and chaos

News flash.

A lot of people are excited about the Edmonton Oilers advancing to the Stanley Cup final. I'm one of them.

With a 2-1 victory over the Anaheim Mighty Ducks on Saturday, the Oilers will play for the Stanley Cup for the first time in 16 years. The last time they did so, in 1990, they defeated the Boston Bruins to claim hockey's highest prize. This is something that hockey fans in Edmonton have been waiting for all too long, and it is the first great triumph of the new NHL.

Unfortunately, there is something happening that is far less than a triumph -- that is the atrocious behavior of hockey fans celebrating on Whyte Avenue.

Dubbled "the Blue Mile" by national media (the Blue and Whyte Ave by fans), Edmonton's landmark Whyte Avenue has been ground zero for the raucus celebrations following each Oilers win. However, what began quite nicely during the Edmonton/Detroit series has quickly become a nightmare for many denizens of the area -- including, but not limited to, local residents and business owners.

During what can only truly be described as a riot following the key Oilers win on Saturday, up to 20,000 fans lit bonfires in the street, jumped from buildings into trees, and kicked in the doors and windows of hapless Whyte Avenue businesses.

Shamefully, the vandalism of Whyte Avenue businesses has been a common occurance during the post-game celebrations this postseason. Estimates place the clean up cost at $1,500 to $2,000 after each celebration. This is for the street alone -- it doesn't include repairs to local businesses.

The Edmonton Police Service is now responding in kind. Police Chief Mike Boyd has promised a "get-tough" strategy for dealing with these hooligans -- likely one that can't help but involve riot police.He has even noted that police do have the option of declaring martial law and calling in the army to help pacify any crowd that develops.

It's a very sad day for the city of Edmonton, and for Edmonton Oilers fandom, when the option of setting the army loose upon a post-game celebration would even be entertained by the authorities. And the authorities are not to blame for this.
It's the fans.

Certainly, not all the fans. Hopefully, it's only a minority of bandwagon-jumpers who think they've found a good excuse to tear up local streets in search of a macho thrill. Nonetheless, there is simply no where else to point the finger of blame in this matter, and sadly, the blame fits.

For their part, the Oilers themselves don't approve. " It's sad to see some of the incidents that happened," forward Georges Laraque announced. " I hope it won't come to the point that it will ruin everyone's celebration. [Hooligans] don't respect our ethics or our morals and our pride in the city."

Ryan Smyth only wants to see some sanity. " Obviously we would like everybody to be safe and have fun, but be responsible too."

The Oilers aren't alone in their concern. The Edmonton Sun letters page has been filled with angry statements about the violence. " I had better not be stopped from celebrating an Oilers [Stanley Cup win] because of you drunken vandals," wrote Dustin Bell. "Just because you're too young or too stupid to understand that drinking doesn't mean you have to bust up Whyte Avenue doesn't mean you have the right to take away my chance to celebrate with friends and strangers and cheer on the Oilers. It is as smart has having your friends burn down your house because it is your birthday."

Then again, such behavior is nothing new for Edmonton hockey fans. Following the 1990 Stanley Cup victory, the riot that occurred in Edmonton made headlines across the country.

Nor is it anything new for Albertan hockey fans in general: during 2004's legendary Red Mile celebrations in Calgary, public urination and defecation posed serious problems for law enforcement. During this year's celebrations, numerous fans were arrested for hurling objects at police officers.

But just as Oilers fans have set the bar higher inside the arena, they have done the same in the street. Following the Oilers May 12th elimination of the San Jose Sharks, two fans were stabbed in a Whyte Avenue bar. Partiers in the street blocked an ambulance from accessing the scene, forcing police to remove the victims by cruiser.

What is happening on Whyte Avenue is entirely unacceptable. Just as a line was crossed with the infamous 2001 Canada Day riot, so has it been crossed with this. Sadly, it may take an overhand right from Georges Laraque -- or maybe even Dave Semenko himself -- to smarten some of these idiots up.