The Official ES All Things Redskins Name Change Thread (Reboot Edition---Read New OP)

[RedskinsFan44]

You might deal with 1 by going to the res, something that the "garbage poll" I cited did.

It sampled 2 pow wows, it did not go house to house in a number of reservations.

 

Add:  You have still not addressed the issues of omitted results, question wording, etc.  Plus check the sample sizes.

 

Add: I challenge you to name the location of the pow wows.

[s0crates]

Dismiss is a strong word.

Isn't that what many of us are doing to anybody who wants to change the name?

[skins island connection]

If I named my child Sitting Bull, would the NA have a legal right to sue me?

Its just strange that we're one of the few teams which represent the American Indians via our name and mascot, yet criticized for doing it.

I always heard to be proud of who you are, regardless of skin color, its your personal conduct that displays your character.

[RedskinsFan44]

Are you suggesting I've used the word incorrectly? What do you think that word means?

Here,I did your work for you:

http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/231062001.html#LFm0thUAVY7RAros.97

[s0crates]

I need to take a break from the echo chamber for the sake of my sanity. I feel like I'm trying to explain the merits of the heliocentric model to the 16th century church.

I'll be back to take up this debate later.

[skins island connection]

Larry,

sorry for some reason my quote feature isn't working. figures. lol.

 

Anyway,

You CAN be wrong about a feeling if it is coerced.  That's where the problem lies.

 The claim of the word 'redskin' in the dictionary is termed bad; well, let Danny open his wallet to Webster's and have them update/change it to a positive representation.

 

 Besides, for S&G lets just say that the name had to be changed. Who's to say that whatever the name ends up being doesn't insult another group?  The Redskins legal dept. could be in court forever !  We've all seen how others are pointing out other team names and how/who it could be deemed insulting, so where does it stop?  Where is the end point? we do not know, because this could be the very beginning of a very long downward spiral.

Society majority cannot continuously buckle to the cries and demands of a handful; we've seen how this has worked in our own government, imagine how damaging 'activists groups' can be.

[throwback37]

 

I don't think anyone has ever made that argument. I do think there was some weird intent to honor Native Americans with the team name. There has been a strange - and at weirdly respectful - appropriation of Native American culture in this country for close to 140 years. It's probably the only example in human history of one group so "honoring" a group that was systemically annihilated by the first group.

 

That doesn't make it not odd.

But the same "group" that "systemically annihilated" the first group ISN'T honoring them.  The U.S. Government "systemically annihilated" the Native Americans.. the ownership groups of The Redskins, the Chiefs, the Indians, Braves and Blackhawks are not the U.S. government and they are not guilty of "systemically annihilating" Native Americans.  They are private individuals. I know several non-Native American people who study, respect and honor the Native Americans in their own ways.. whether it be through works of art, music, jewlery, tattoos etc.  It isn't a stretch to believe that someone with those feelings would want to honor the Native American culture via naming their sports franchise after them.  

[SoulSkin]

Americans still need to learn that Native Americans are NOT indians.  How many times are we going to call them Cherokee Indians?  The only Indians on this planet are from India for heavens sake!

 

They also refer to themselves as American Indians. Look at that list s0crates posted of tribes that issued statements of opposition. There's a lot of 'Indian' in there. National Congress of American Indians, American Indian Foundation, Indian Country, etc. I'm not joking when I ask if there a reason I shouldn't say American Indian? I am a little awash in wordsmithery at this point.

[ram29jackson]

that Chiefs fan site is a little crass compared to this one LOL

Indians is an accepted slang to save time while typing  so get over it LOL

 

Cleveland Indians

[Bang]

Isn't that what many of us are doing to anybody who wants to change the name?

 

When the kettle complains about th blackness of the pot, what is it?

Fact: This is not a settled issue among the people who it is supposed to offend. Not even close to a settled issue, and in fact, the majorities seem to favor the non-name change group.

If the name change crowd want honest debate, and to not be 'dismissed', they should follow their own advice when it comes to listening to their own people.

they do not. In fact, they go out of their way to silence, marginalize and straight ignore them.

The name change crowd has absolutely no interest in anything resembling honest debate, they do not want to hear anything but their own self-decided truth.

 

they in fact DO this because they KNOW they do not have anything CLOSE to the support they want you to believe they have among the people who are supposed to be offended.

 

Which is why they have relied on non-native self centered media whores like UnWise Mike to carry the fight. Why they are happy to let Peter King and bob Costas and Mike florio exploit their people some more for their own self-aggrandizement..   Which is why they've been happy to allow ignorance to guide their supporters, suppress actual debate, and ignore actual facts.

 

So if you don't want ot be dismissed, get your people to stop being so dismissive of those who they actually claim to speak for.

Have true debate. Listen to those they say they speak for.

 

The gall it takes to live in such a bubble.. i don't understand it.

 

~Bang

[Larry]

Since we're in the business of poking holes in polling methodologies now, we might point out a few problems with the Annenburg poll.

1. It was conducted by telephone, but around 50% of people on reservations lack telephones.

2. The poll is over 10 years old, opinions may have changed.

3. The only criteria for categorizing somebody as Native American was that they self-identify as such.

4. The question was leading, ending with ". . . or does it not bother you?"

Am I now free to regard this as a "garbage poll" and be completely dismissive of it because of its flaws? Or should we just cite the polls that can be used to support our own positions?

So run a better one.

Hire a real, reputable polling company, like Gallup or some such.

Pick the criteria of native-ness that you like. (And be prepared to announce what criteria you used, and defend it. You want to demand that only registered members of recognized tribes count? I'm good with that. Although gaining access to tribal records might be tough and/or expensive. Want to limit it to only people living on reservations? I think you're being too exclusive, but I could see why maybe their vote might count more. Want to limit it to only people who have signed your anti-Redskin petition? See ya.).

Pick the question phrasing you want. (And, again, be prepared to tell people what it is, and defend it. Me, I think the Annenberg question is pretty much perfect. It asked people about the name if the football team, not about the word used in some context other than the one we want to know about. And it asked people about their own feelings, not about what they imagined the feelings of some imaginary other person were.)

Wonder why the name changers have been doing this schtick for 40 years, now, and they have never once ASKED the people they claim to represent, if they're offended? I've got a theory.

1). They know what the answer will be.

2). It says that the Natives disagree with them.

3). And they don't care.

[Bang]

But the same "group" that "systemically annihilated" the first group ISN'T honoring them.  The U.S. Government "systemically annihilated" the Native Americans.. the ownership groups of The Redskins, the Chiefs, the Indians, Braves and Blackhawks are not the U.S. government and they are not guilty of "systemically annihilating" Native Americans.  They are private individuals. I know several non-Native American people who study, respect and honor the Native Americans in their own ways.. whether it be through works of art, music, jewlery, tattoos etc.  It isn't a stretch to believe that someone with those feelings would want to honor the Native American culture via naming their sports franchise after them.  

 

And again up come the Buffalo Bills,,  a name honoring a man who earned his everlasting fame by enabling the systematic annihilation of the ttribes.

In fact, Buffalo Bill and his methods WERE the SYSTEM that was the basis of the 'systematic annihilation".

Kill the herds. Deprive the Native of food and shelter, make him move more and more just to eat. Take his land.

Systematic.

 

 

Oh but hey.. the Redskins name is so offensive that people on this board who are so concerned over how it makes the Natives feel could not care less about the Buffalo Bills, a team named directly after the man who did so much to destroy them that they gave him a Medal of Honor for shooting tens of thousands of animals .. just so the natives who had subsisted on them for centuries no longer could.  And given that the Bills seem to skate through each of these debates, I believe this ignorance is complete throughout the Kardashian Kulture that shakes their facebook fists so mightily at the Redskins.

 

 

How can anyone take that seriously? it is mind bogglingly ignorant, or unbelievably hypocritical,, i can't decide which.

Probably a nice fat American mix of both.

 

~Bang

[Ax]

Haven't been through the whole thread, but judging by the last few pages, I'd say Bang definitely has the best grasp of this drama-rama.

 

This is a PC driven money grab attempt. Nothing else.

[grego]

 

 

This is a PC driven money grab attempt. Nothing else.

 

 

as sure as the sun will rise, there is a pot of gold at the end of this debate. 

 

thats not to say there arent some wacky (many of them racist, imho) true believers, who cling to a made up story despite all evidence to the contrary (because a 'white guy' did the research, btw). 

 

but there is money involved. there always is. 

[SWFLSkins]

Isn't that what many of us are doing to anybody who wants to change the name?

 

No, no most of us are not, just because we disagree and present historical facts doesn't equate dismissal of one's feeling. When ignorance is met by ignorance no knowledge is gained. I see you took you're ball and went home, hmm. 

[Gizmo 3squire]

Bang is spot on

[SoulSkin]

Piece from the local news in Richmond last night. Not anything new, but I like that Mark Holmberg has the guts to get on TV and say it. He'll catch a little flak I'm sure, but not too much. Dude is a giant large-person.Training camp field looks pretty good!

 

http://wtvr.com/2014/06/27/protesting-washington-redskins-name/

 

 

[Dub70s]

Just some fun on Steinberg and his WP ranting....he has done so much work for the Change the Name Party that he's spending more time defending his ranting:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/wp/2014/06/24/why-is-there-a-redskins-pride-caucus/

 dfoster2:

Said it before,but this "controversy" just screams for a Hitler Parody Video. UnWise Mike ranting away in his bunker surrounded by Steinberg, Jenkins, the Post Editorial Board, Halbritter, Costas, Blackhorse, Harjo. "YOU MEAN THEY STILL HAVE THE NAME?!"

Dan_Steinberg:

The author of the story you are approvingly commenting under?

dfoster2:

Dan, even a blind squirrel can find an acorn once in a while. You consistently trot out negative posts on The Name That Shall Not Be Named, then pop up in the comments saying "I don't have a dog in this fight, It's what people are talking about, I don't make news I report it" blah blah blah. We get it that people are talking about it in these pages because you guys keep pushing it, and if you (Dan) didn't write about it constantly one of your colleagues would be happy to pick up the slack and continue fanning the flames and drawing reader clicks. We get that. 

  

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/wp/2014/06/26/school-board-of-majority-native-american-district-votes-to-keep-redskins/

dfoster2:

Much of the Post's reporting on this "issue" (more than just Dan's) seems to be pulled directly from the pages of Indian Country Today. Wise probably forwarding stories throughout the newsroom

Dan_Steinberg:
No, I've never gotten calls or texts from anyone associated with the movement to change the team name about news stories they think I should cover.

Dan_Steinberg:

I'm sensitive to that issue, because I don't want either side to think the opposition is feeding me stories and influencing my story selection

[pjfootballer]

I think this anecdote misses a few things:

1. Most Native Americans live far west of DC.

Actually, not true. I've lived all up and down the east coast and there are thousands of NAs near DC. The Catawba Indian Tribe (their name, not mine) are here in York county where I live.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

This thread is now just people telling other people that people don't believe what they claim to believe.

 

This is a PC driven money grab attempt. Nothing else.

 

I know that everyone on this board is an expert on everything and probably has this figured out, but - for the life of me - I don't see how anyone can make any money off this controversy - short of being so annoying that Dan Snyder just writes a check to someone for them to go away.

 

Explain to me what the "money grab" part of this is without making some general "Oh...you know how the courts work" argument out of a bad 1960s drugstore novel.

But the same "group" that "systemically annihilated" the first group ISN'T honoring them.  The U.S. Government "systemically annihilated" the Native Americans.. the ownership groups of The Redskins, the Chiefs, the Indians, Braves and Blackhawks are not the U.S. government and they are not guilty of "systemically annihilating" Native Americans.  They are private individuals. I know several non-Native American people who study, respect and honor the Native Americans in their own ways.. whether it be through works of art, music, jewlery, tattoos etc.  It isn't a stretch to believe that someone with those feelings would want to honor the Native American culture via naming their sports franchise after them.  

 

Personally, I've always compared virulent racist George Preston Marshall to those hippies making bracelets in Santa Fe.

[Larry]

This thread is now just people telling other people that people don't believe what they claim to believe.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

[Larry]

This is a PC driven money grab attempt. Nothing else.

Just in my personal experience, every single time I've seen someone announce that thousands of people are all thinking exactly the same thing, and that he possesses knowledge of what every single one of them is thinking, he's been an arrogant gasbag.

Now, me, I can't claim to possess absolute certainty as to other people's motives. but I actually find it hard to believe that people like Harjo have been beating their heads against this wall, for 40 years, and has never once asked for any money whatsoever, only for the team to quit using the name, because they really have a secret plan to get money out of it.

It's certainly possible. But me, I tend to assume that they actually feel that they're on the side of rightousness. (I think they're wrong. Deluded, in fact. But I think it's a sincere delusion.)

(And Hallbritter? Yep, I think he's after money and power. That's simply the impression I get, from looking at everything else he's done.)

But, more importantly, I think it's absolutely inconceivable (I probably shouldn't use that word, following my previous post) that the hundreds of people surveyed by the Annenberg poll, lied about being offended in a telephone public opinion poll, ten years ago, because they thought they'd get money, if they did.

I think it's a pretty safe bet that pretty much every single one of them, who said they were offended, said it because yes, they really were offended.

(Just like I assume that the ones who said they weren't offended, were being honest, too.)

[grego]

This thread is now just people telling other people that people don't believe what they claim to believe.

 

I know that everyone on this board is an expert on everything and probably has this figured out, but - for the life of me - I don't see how anyone can make any money off this controversy - short of being so annoying that Dan Snyder just writes a check to someone for them to go away.

 

Explain to me what the "money grab" part of this is without making some general "Oh...you know how the courts work" argument out of a bad 1960s drugstore novel.

 

Personally, I've always compared virulent racist George Preston Marshall to those hippies making bracelets in Santa Fe.

 

 

no, i dont believe socrates would cite a horribly flawed poll as evidence and in the next breath rip the annenberg poll.

 

 

short story about money- look who is all of a sudden involved- senators. what is it now? half the senate? native american groups (no matter how small -morningstar institute? I'd like to know more about that group) put their name on a list of offended people. 

 

to think that senators are now involved but nothing else is being done for these groups is something i cant believe.

 

thats not to say that there shouldnt be attention brought to native american problems- absolutely there should be. i just disagree with the way its been done. 

 

and ray halbritter is involved. so theres that. 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

no, i dont believe socrates would cite a horribly flawed poll as evidence and in the next breath rip the annenberg poll.

 

 

short story about money- look who is all of a sudden involved- senators. what is it now? half the senate? native american groups (no matter how small -morningstar institute? I'd like to know more about that group) put their name on a list of offended people. 

 

to think that senators are now involved but nothing else is being done for these groups is something i cant believe.

 

thats not to say that there shouldnt be attention brought to native american problems- absolutely there should be. i just disagree with the way its been done. 

 

and ray halbritter is involved. so theres that. 

 

So.......this is all about campaign contributions from casino owners? Isn't everything in American politics currently done for campaign contributions from casino owners?

[steve09ru]

I'm seeing this argument on social media, apparently it's gaining some steam for the name changers:

 

In the mid 20th century the term “chief” was frequently used as a way to talk down to American Indians much like the term “boy” was used for African Americans.

 

Let's toss Cowboys into the mix then