Preserved Topic: Team Mascots

I was wondering what everyone here thinks about this proposal to ban all 'ethnic' mascots. Is it really derogatory to call a team the "Indians"? There's a story about it here.

quote:

---

"There are 11 states with Indian names, and endless streets, rivers, towns and counties that have Indian names. Are they going to remove that, too? Where does this ethnic cleansing end?"

---

So basically, if this goes through, they'd have to change state's names? heh.
They just better not touch our Red Wings.

[This message has been edited by Raptor (edited 05-16-2002).]

while some states may have names derived from indian words they tend to not have a state seal depicting a cartoon of a big grinnin injun, know what i'm sayin?

I personally think that's all silliness, but, for the sake of argument lets say they do ban them.

I want to then see all of the following names banned:

Fighting Irish
Steelers
Ichabods
Canucks

Any others?

Boston Celtics...

Montreal Canadiens
San Jose Sharks (hey, loan sharks could take offense to that! ....)
Ny Islanders & Rangers.
Any other mascots that are non-offensive that we can add? If we start getting rid of everything that in one way or another could offend somebody, the world would be a very, very dull place.

[This message has been edited by Raptor (edited 05-16-2002).]

Rptors right. It never ends.

When we got the Avalanche(formerly the Nordiques) in Colorado there were hundreds of people who complained and were offended. They said "Avalanches are very serious disasters that kill hundreds of people every year. You can't name a hockey team after them. We're offended"

-tiki



[This message has been edited by tikigod (edited 05-16-2002).]

Not to mention the Minnesota Vikings... how come the descendants of Vikings haven't raised a fuss?

tikigod: you're joking, right? I feel stupid having to ask this, but you never know in today's world...

Please tell me you're joking. Please.

Well, a topic 'right up my alley' so to speak. There is a distinct line between a mascot, a name, and making fun at the expense of another. Personally, I would have no problem with an indian mascot for any establishment...as long as it is a serious, honest portrail of an indian. However, the symbol of a leering, bugs bunny type of indian is something I hardly consider serious and honest. It is somewhat degrading.

As for the names of states, cities, and whatnot, I don't find that bad. Quite the contrary. The cleveland indians could use a serious indian face (hell, even a smiling indian face, that is also ok). After all, Indians are Americans and a part of America. But to portray Indians as the symbol does, is not correct. I think it has similarites with naming a mascot n****r, or J*w, or whatever, and then displaying such a figure in a similar symbol. I'm sure that is well accepted as being wrong. As for Indians, they are still getting kicked around. Try to understand the situation from their point of view, and not your own. It's not nice when someone stomps all over your pride and worth. I think that's called 'belittle-ing'.

We here in the UK used to have a make of Jam with a Gollywog as part of the logo... see http://www.geocities.com/gipsytwo/golliwogcollectables.html to see what I mean and then read http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4245942,00.html

Think its safer in here...

This is the same nonesense that occurred not long ago with Abercrombie and Fitch with some of their tshirts. Some Asian groups were up in arms about being offended from those but the shirts were really quite clever.

It's a shame really. People who can't laugh at themselves just demonstrate just how insecure they really are about life. I don't think they even realize just how damaging they are to everyone else either. Instead of building more trust and cohesiveness between all the different groups in society, they are actually undermining the entire effort.

I believe the majority of Native Americans (and their descendants like yours truly) agree with how WebShaman has so adeptly put it. (with the possible exception of criticizing Bugs Bunny cartoons of course )

. . : newThing

Check out this article that was posted on Fark last week. I found it amusing and disturbing at the same time.

Political correctness drives me to total distraction. One that very nearly caused me to slash up was here in Canada. A newly appointed "ombudsman" who happened to be a woman insisted on the position being labelled, yes, you guessed it, "Ombudsperson." The whole thing fizzled and there were red faces all around when it was pointed out that the word "Ombudsman' originates in one of the Nordic countries (can't remember which) and that it has nothing to do with gender.
I get around the PC business by using gender nuetral words and terms... like *asshole!" <lol>

Web Shaman - the fact that it's a big leering indian is irrelavant. It's no more derogotory than the diner that uses the cartoon image a big fat white guy.

It's a cartoon image. Where is the offense? It's not a representation of your people as a whole, it's not intended as a realistic depiction in any way.

Should animal rights groups add this to their list? Must the seafood place with the big stupid cartoon image of a lobster being boiled have to change their sign because it pokes fun at cruel acts to an animal?

Come on......get over yourself.

That's not the point DL-44. The fact of the matter is, that indians have been fighting for their rights from day one in America, and they are repeatedly denied and abused. And such a depiction is wrong. Plain wrong. Just having to explain why that is so, is example enough, and proves my point.

Maybe the image of the white boy is also wrong, I don't know, because I've never seen or heard of it. However, the white people of America don't have a history of abusion and a denying of rights that my people have, now do they?

[This message has been edited by WebShaman (edited 05-22-2002).]

Well, thats not completly true, Shaman. My ancestors are Irish, and they were slaves brought here on a boat to some islands of the eastern coast. White people are not all the same, just like Indians are not all the same. Although I do agree that the image could be percieved as negative, perhaps it would be more prideful to laugh at it, and just go...stupid white man. Which is what I say all the time, even though I am white myself.

I see both sides of this issue.
On the one hand, it is completely ridiculous to be upset about a mascot; indian, fat white guy, or fightin' Irish. Completely ridiculous.

On the other hand, it is easy to ask for those things to change. It is far easier to ask, even demand, a team change its mascot than it is to demand one's land back...or for the Trail of Tears never to have happened...or to somehow fix slavery, disenfranchisment and unfair discrimination for hundreds of years.

It is obvious here in the United States we don't have our racial issues worked out. Most of us, especially white folk, like to think so -- but we don't.

Are our racial issues really about team mascots and caracatures (sp?) or are they about a continued feeling of relatively less power on the part of racial minorities? I would argue the later. Granted, things are much better today than they were 100 yrs ago...even 20 yrs ago. But there is still room for improvement. We're not finished.

So, until we do get our racial issues figured out, these same sort of requests will continue to be made. I'm not saying it's right, but it's totally logical, even predictable.

Think of it this way. Talking about team mascots is far more peaceful than the way many nations 'fix' their racial issues. Neither way really gets anything accomplished, but at least no one is dying our way!

mobrul

mobrul: damn you and your logic!

The very fact that many minority groups are arguing about team mascots testifies to just how far we have come in our struggle for justice. Can you imagine how ludicrous it would have been to complain about such inane things 100 years ago? And if there really are serious race issues facing us today, what possible justification can there be for wasting time on team mascots?

I am not saying there are not problems, I am saying that the current problems are dwarfed by their predecessors.

so rather than focusing on today's problems we should reminesce about how things in the days of old were much worse?

we have made progress to a certain extent but there is still a lot of work to be done.

plus the entire human species is a bunch of nimrods so we're doomed anyway.

hooray?

Bugs, you are right.
We have come a long way...no doubt.

But...(you knew that was coming, right?)

One in three black men between the ages of 20 and 29 years old is under correctional supervision or control.

High School Dropout Rates, as of October, 1996
Total 8.2%
White 7.3%
Black 13%
Hispanic 15.7%
--Mexican 34.6%

College Professors, 1997
White 86.5%
American Indian/ AK Native .5%
Asian /PI 5.3%
Black 5.2%
Hispanic 2.6%

The Senate of the 106th Congress contained
2 Asians
0 African Americans
0 Hispanics
98 Whites

Home Ownership Rates, First Quarter, 2000
Total U.S. 67.1%
Whites 73.4%
Blacks 47.4%
Hispanics 45.7%
Other 53.6%

Poverty, 1998:
U.S. Rate: 12.7 % = 34.5 million people
Whites 8.2%
Hispanics: 25.6%
Blacks: 26.1%

Poverty, 2000 Census:
Black 22.1%
Hispanic 21.2%
Asian /PI 10.8%
White (non-Hispanic) 7.5%

Blacks are seven times more likely than whites to be murdered.
American Indians are more likely than any other group to be the victim of a violent crime.

College Enrollment, % of student population
White 74.1%
Total Minority 22.7%
--Black 9.9%
--Hispanic 6.9%
--Asian 5.1%
--American Indian 0.9%
Nonresident Aliens 3.2%

Poverty rate among black households where no husband is present is almost 40%.

Black men alone make up over 42% of all death row prisoners, although they account for only 6% of people
living in the U.S.

Mean / Median incomes (by household), under 65 yrs old, 2000:
Total $62,869 / $48,770
White $68,936 / $53,829
Black $42,355 / $32,915
Hispanic $44,498 / $35,792

I could go on and on and on forever. The numbers are startling and clearly show there are still problems. The difference between these problems and slavery or the Trail of Tears (or 1001+ other instances of forced relocation) or Jim Crowe laws or...
The difference is, what we are looking at are phenomonon with many causes. It is not so easy (or just) to say "it's all whitie's fault" nor is it easy (or just) to say "minorities should just pull themselves up by their bootstraps".

The fact is, these statistics are the result of hundreds of years of oppression...of war...of economic and physical strangulation. They will not be fixed by 50 years of civil rights laws...my grandfather, who is still alive and well, has drunk water out of 'white's only' water fountains.

What we are dealing with today may be the toughest part of the course. It's the part where everybody has to realize our actions effect everyone around us. It's the part where we have to learn life isn't a zero-sum game. It's the part where we have to accept the actions of our ancestors most definetely reflect on us today...and whether you like it or not, sometimes you're a role model and should act like one. It's the part where history is important, but so is the future, and it's the part where we have to learn what it means not to 'cut off your nose to spite your face'. It's the part where we actually have to talk, and learn and listen to one another.

That is why we see silliness like people complaining about team mascots. It is easier to do that than to face the real issues.

mobrul
<edit>Damnit!! How do I do that? I write what I think is an appropriate amount to adequetely address the subject and I always go way overboard. Please forgive my longwindedness...</edit>

[This message has been edited by mobrul (edited 05-22-2002).]

Webshaman - as was pointed out, not all "white" people are the same type of "white" people, and yes...there has been much racial and national discrimination against many various white groups. I am also of Irish ancestry, and I cringe each time stupid comments are made out of ignorance of Irish history, and references to the image of the Irishman as the stupid drunk. Do I take offense? Nope. Why bother?

There was a time when the Irish couldn't get a job in America because of racism, and the Irish were treated like animals.

Certainly the Irish weren't killed and herded (in America anyway...) as the indians were, so I am not trying to draw a direct comparison. The British treatment of the Irish is far different story...

However, where I live, the indians are currently getting extremely rich off the "white" man with their sole right to gambling in my state. ~shrug~ funny somehow...

Either way, it's a silly issue. Caricatures are as common as table salt....they are used everywhere and for myriad purposes. They poke light fun at countless things, and arguing that one particular use is derogatory because of the race of the person depicted is absurd.







[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 05-22-2002).]

Longwindedness? Never, my friend, I always read every word you type because you don't waste words.

I think we can totally agree that the team mascot issue is nothing compared to real problems facing our minority communities.

All those statistics you mentioned are not in dispute. What is in dispute is the cause and more importantly the solution. You may hate this but the overwhelming responsibility for solving these problems has shifted from the oppressor to the formerly oppressed.

This means that once the major barriers have been removed from the laws and society that forcibly held down certain peoples, then those people are the ones that must be *more* motivated than the majority to climb out of the hole.

Is this fair? To even ask the question is a waste of time because once the opportunity has been provided then it must be grasped and fought for regardless of how much work and self effort is required. Why? Because there is simply no way self respect and dignity can be given to another individual... it has to come from within.

As institutional barriers are identified then we must continue to remove them and I'm not suggesting that process has ended. I am suggesting however that most of the biggies are dealt with sufficiently for people to move forward.

Let's take the current situation with America's blacks. Much progess has occurred but the statistics you cite don't lie. What are the main causes of them?

1. One of the biggies is the "war on drugs". There are far too many young black males sitting in jail because of possession offenses. I think this should change and more emphasis should be shifted to rehab for simple possession.

2. Fatherlessness. Here's a statistic you missed: 60% of black children are born out of wedlock (incidentally this was just updated from 70% so we're seeing an improvement). Do you have any idea how much a fatherless household contributes to problems for children? Especially young boys? It's simply devastating and this has to be changed from *within* the community. There is no other way. Reparations won't solve it, welfare won't solve it.

What is needed is for the community to reject the current leadership that draws its power from the powerless by keeping them so. We need leaders that will tell young children that they *can* compete with the majority. We need leaders that respect children enough to expect the very best from them by not "dumbing down" curriculums.

But it's not all bad because there are some very encouraging figures that are sometimes missed. The black middle class is growing and growing in a very strong way.

Political diversity is finally gaining a foothold in the black community which is a major step forward but there's a ways to go yet on that one. I'm sorry this can't be said for the Hispanic community and there are very few signs that will change soon.

California recently removed racial quotas from admissions which was a major victory for minorities. Ward Connerly is currently taking another bold step which would make it illegal for the government in California to catalog citizens by their race.

When the majority of white America is asked whether they want their fellow black citizens to succeed they say "yes". I am more than willing to have my tax dollars spent on programs that truly help the underprivileged. What concerns me is 40 years of programs that while well intentioned have fostered the creation of a permanent under class. This cannot be defended.

Here's the deal, just so I'm not misunderstood by hooray for humans, I want solutions to the problems. I am simply not interested in perpetuating them with failed programs and efforts. I am willing to take unpopular political stances in order to see this happen. I have seen how it is done on the left, since I used to hang out there. I have seen some very promising result just right of center and that is where you will find me looking for real solutions to these real problems.

I am open to suggestions... believe me... because I have my eyes fixed on the goal which is to see *all* peoples realize their full potential by removing any and all boundaries to that end and offering encouragement and support for people willing to go for it.

. . : newThing

[This message has been edited by Bugimus (edited 05-22-2002).]

Good. Bug wants solutions...let's start by honouring the treaties made between the government of the united states and the various indian tribes. That would go a long way to re-compensating the atrocities, backstabbing and reneging on treaties made. It would also finally clear up the 'black' spot on the US soul regarding these 'incidents'. If we really do live in a modern society, then we must be prepared to make reparations to those we have wronged. The Germans did, why can't we? Instead of money, why not land that was already, as per treaty, given to the indian tribes in question.

And yes, I am well aware that 'white' encompasses many different nationalities. And yes, I am aware that there are also 'minority whites'. However, in comparison to what my people have suffered at the hands of the US government, they have had it easier in America.

And when one speaks of poverty in America, one must consider that most indians live well under the poverty line...have very little chance of finding a good job and thus, changing their lives and situations...

Reparations are helpful for the victims of atrocities and possibly their children. That is why holocaust victims were compensated. That is also why Japanese Americans got reparations. Going much farther back than that helps the situation how? I need to understand how it helps. What's the argument in favor? Let me offer an absurd example (I hope you agree this is absurd!) Should Jewish people petition the Egyptian government for reparations for the slavery their ancestors suffered at the hands of the Pharaoh? Where is the line?

I would be certainly open to looking at honoring treaties with Indian nations. I think there should be a lot more given in those instances. Specifics would help though as I am unfamiliar with many of the cases.

Also keep in mind that different solutions may be appropriate for different groups. For instance, our affirmative action laws were originally intended to benefit African Americans and not all non-white groups and look at what a problem it has become. So things can get pretty convoluted in the search for solutions that actually help.

{{edit - bugimus, you slipped yours in while I was typing! }}

WS - I think the most relevant question that has been raised here is, where does it stop?

How many peoples have been slaughtered and evicted from their lands throughout human history? Do the mongolians make reparations to the chineese? do the greeks make reparations to the turks? Do the romans make reparations to most of europe, asia minor, and the north of africa?

As has been said by several people here - you wanna take on the issueS? Great. A cartoon image of an indian is *not* an issue.



[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 05-22-2002).]

Suho(sorry i have been away for a while):

quote:

---

tikigod: you're joking, right? I feel stupid having to ask this, but you never know in today's world...

Please tell me you're joking. Please.

---

Nope, I'm not kidding the controversy lasted about a week. Everybody forgot that Colorado used to have an indoor soccer team by the same name. I personally want my team's name to inspire fear....What were they gonna name them-The Colorado Kittens. There was a similar controversy in Tampa Bay with the Devil Rays. The Christian Right got upset.

-tiki

Hmmm...where does it stop? And where does responsibility end?

Ok, I would say, in the case of my people, with the Government of the United States...since it still governs America, the treaties are lawful entities (the US Government signed them). Unfortunately, the judges that 'threw' them out of court were not indians...

In the case of the Hebrews, I think that the case is mute...the Pharoahs are long-gone. Dust. Any reparations from them would be hard to get...maybe in the next life...

That's how I see it.

You must remember, in my peoples case, they not only took the land (and we won't go into a long treatise on the other stuff here) but by doing so, pretty much sabotaged all attempts at holding our culture. How were my people supposed to hold on to their culture (which was tied closely to the land) when they were sent into a wasteland, that nobody wanted? My people were not a desert folk. All our culture and knowledge wasn't based on surviving in a desert. We were forced to rely on the 'White conquerers' just to survive. Only the fact that later (much later) oil was discovered on our land, that we became somewhat self-standing...but we paid a very high price...my people lost tons of knowledge in the Trail of Tears...many Shamans died underway, without a chance to pass on the knowledge. Many elders, as well. Yes, we survived, but at what price? We were the only indian people to actually have a written language (thank you, Sequoia). It is still alive today. My people tried to appease the US government, we learned the white man's way, even went to Washington DC with educated people to plead our case to Pres. Lincoln. Didn't help at all. We have fought and died along side of you in every war (and as units have recieved very high honors, as individuals always prized for our 'skills'). We have become good citizens, in a land that treats us poorly, when it even thinks on us at all. The words 'red-skin' is still in use.

And we are still waiting for the US Government to uphold the treaties...and to right the wrongs.



[This message has been edited by WebShaman (edited 05-23-2002).]

With all the PC talk, this Mac user felt left out

I don't mean to be rude here but exactly who are your people WS? I was under the impression that you were from Germany (or over in Europe someplace).

With that settled, I think one of the big reasons why this type of bitterness exists is people still hold grudges, and are greedy. Reperations aren't a new idea by any means. Various interest groups have been talking about them for decades now, but who are they really helping? Are they interested in putting this racism aside or gaining a bigger bank account?

Thats just my $.02 at least.


-Jestah
Cell 277

[This message has been edited by Jestah (edited 05-23-2002).]

Jestah - my people are American Indians...Cherokee, to be exact. I am American, living currently in Germany.

We don't want money....we want our treaties, made with the US government, to be upheld...they are legal documents, after all, and binding...

ok.

But......what does that have to do with a caricature of an indian?

keeping in mind all the other exmaples of the use of caricatures in advertising and or team names...

I think I answered that in my first post in this thread *looks over first post* Yup.

Maybe the question should be 'What is the purpose for a caricatur in the first place?'. As long as it isn't being used to defame/de-trod/persecute someone, it's ok in my book...

But this is a bit different...it's a team mascot...so what does the baseball team have to do with Indians? Why are they using one (especially depicted in such a manner) to represent their team? And which tribe is it, anyway? I can't tell. Can you? All Indian tribes are not alike! We may share the same skin color, but that's pretty much where the similarities end...as was said before, there are many different 'white' groups...the same goes for Indians (as well as other groups). The idea 'Indian' is, in and of itself, wrong as well. We certainly don't call ourselves 'Indians'. That's something we got from you. My people always called themselves Cherokees...Indian is an all-inclusive word...

Look: it's not that I am touchy about the issue...I've suffered enough abuse because of my heritage and developed a thick skin...it's just that until attitudes change, nothing will actually get better...and my people seem to be on the bottom of the list...in a land that was once ours...

*looks up at that same post*

uh...nope.

Don't see an answer to that question.

I simply fail to see how the cartoon imagery such as this can be offensive.

As for what the team has to do with indians, I'm sure we can find a lot of team names that don't make much sense (I hardly think the Miami Dolphins are marine biologists....).

~shrug~

Can't tell what tribe it is? Me neither. So let's pretend it's an Iriquois (whose blood runs through my veins) then you won't have to be offended.



[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 05-24-2002).]

Then I will try to clarify it for you *sigh*

IT IS BELITTLING

Plain and simple. It in no way, shape or form shows respect or tolerance for my folk, or for the other tribes...

What exactly is belittling about it though?

I'm just baffled about those who become offended by names of sports teams.

I think people are just ridiculous about certain things. Save the protesting for things that are important.

-Jestah
Cell 277

Cartoon Network yanked all Speedy Gonzalez cartoons because they were afraid of negative things such as this. Then they started getting responses that Speedy is a positive, latino role-model because he is always out-witting that gato -- these comments from latinos.

When I went to college, somebody gave me $5,000 because I'm latino. Big fat non-sequitur. While I did appreciate the financial help, I certainly didn't agree with the reason. This almost turned into an ugly fiasco. Someone else got hurt, so being nice to me makes it okay? Whatever.

I really hate it when my mother says, "You should be proud of your heritage." Why should I be proud of something that I had nothing to do with? Perhaps my ancestors did some cool things or were trod upon. What does that have to do with me right here and now? I'll never understand this.

I really don't care when people use derogatory terms to generalize latinos. I'm too busy making my life better to worry about other people's hang-ups.

Being the humour loving male that I am, I once said, "The next time I get a physical exam, I'm going to demand that a female nurse be present." In the context of the conversation, it was damn funny. Too bad only one other person really understood what I was really saying. Really really.

Article about Speedy and things.

Got this from Rush Limbaugh. I don't know how accurate the numbers are, but it sure is funny.

"Remember those Native American students out in Colorado who nicknamed their team "the Fighting Whities" to show how offended they were by team mascots such as the Redskins and Braves? Well, just as that Peter Harris poll found over 80% of Indians are not offended by mascots honoring their peoples, the vast majority of whites weren't offended by the Fighting Whities. In fact, orders for t-shirts literally flooded the school!"




[This message has been edited by warjournal (edited 05-24-2002).]

Bugimus - When are you running for president? I agree totally.

So, umm. The war on drugs. The war on drugs is not only against black people, it is against everyone in America who does drugs. Solution, stop doing drugs, or at least stop getting caught. Murder, theft, or beating the crap out of someone. These crimes apply to everyone. There is just as high of a percentage of white people who do drugs as black people. Why do such a high percentage of blacks get caught? Why are our jails filled with black people? I just don't understand what is behind this. It doesn't seem like most cops are racial profiling these days, it actually seems quite the opposite, what with all the worry about how bad it is to racial profile. So, its not like there are different laws for blacks then for whites. Anyway, my point is, it is not white peoples fault that there are so many blacks in jail, in poverty, ect. There are go to college for free programs that are available to anyone who wants to go. High School is free also. Now the teachers may be worse at certain schools, but for example: I went to some stupid back woods, red-neck, learn how to read when you are 12 type of school, and I turned out fine, and so did most of the people from there. They all have jobs and live an Ok life. So what seems to be the problem with the black populations of this country, and all around the world? I do not understand this at all? I do not understand how they kill their neighbors, steal from their community, litter and cover the area with sickness and rot. And neither do my friends, some of which (I feel like I am using a trump card here) are black.

Any ideas on why this is, besides blaming another race for it.....

Also.

Webshaman - This all really sucks. All of this B.S. I think what you should ask for from our government though, is for your religion to be taught in schools. For your religion to be accepted as a major religion in America. For people to start teaching in scool what actually happened after Thanksgiving. I don't really think, unfortunatly so, that if the treaties are upheld there would even be enough Native American's to live on the land. And probably, on most of the land you are refering to, huge malls now sit.

I mean, this sucks...
But by tearing down the mall, the ancient trees will not grow back, the great rocks of power will not reform, the spirit may come back to these places in thousands of years, but now it is time to look to new places. Or perhaps all of the good places have been saved in National Parks. I doubt all of them, but some of them at least. Perhaps Native Americans need to try and get rights to live within all National Parks where ever they want, for free. But the problem with this, is that you could not have electricity and whatnot, because this would destroy the naturalness of the parks, so basically, I doubt there are many Indians left who would even live in these locations. Because we all depend on electricity to survive today. So, therefore, by giving these National Parks back to the Indians, they would perhaps become polluted. Not by the elders and people like you, but perhaps by Native Americans who have no respect for the traditions and power of nature.

DL

quote:

---

let's pretend it's an Iriquois (whose blood runs through my veins)

---

if the blood of that tribe is flowing thru your veins you might want
to learn the real name of the tribe:
iroquois


lots of mohawks and iroquois where i'm from

bugs

quote:

---

That is why holocaust victims were compensated.

---

that's the best line of the thread
you should write your own *revisionist history*

6 million jews, poles, gypsies, etc. all slaughtered thru
mass extermination .....how were they compensated?
a new VW beetle for the kids? 2 for 1 at the german McD's
you've got quite a different perspective on history than i do

*sadly shakes head* Ok, I'm droping the issue...I only wanted you to begin to see things through the eyes of someone who has been impacted and affected by the topic...

I only wanted you to understand what my people have gone through and are still going through...apparently, things haven't changed all that much...

It's sad...

Thank you for sharing your views and opinions...and I am grateful that at least I got a chance to explain mine...our struggle goes on...maybe in a couple of hundred years, after you have accomplished what you started, the complete 'erasing' of our culture and people, this will be a mute point...

And all that will be left of us are mascots of some baseball team...a few city names...and whatnot...maybe we will even get a museum, where children can ask 'is that an indian? Who were they?'

Isn't it funny, when you were a child playing cowboys and indians, that the indians were always the 'bad guys'? Well, are we?

ShootingStar, I think that must be your way of pointing out I should have described the recipients of the reparations as "holocaust survivors". Thanks for that.

But in the off chance you had no clue about what I was referring to:
http://www.businessweek.com/1999/99_08/b3617102.htm
http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/newsrel/soc/jeizenstat.htm
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Holocaust/reparations.html

[This message has been edited by Bugimus (edited 05-25-2002).]

SS - it was late...typo's happen...

WS - you assume a lot by your last statement.

I find it somehwat funny - where I live "white" people have been kicked off their land so that the pequots could have it back to build a casino on.

Is that in keeping with the beliefs of "your" people? Is this what restoring your culture is all about?

DL-44, whoever they may be (And I don't know which tribe you mean...), I can assure you they are not my people...not from my tribe. There you go, acting exactly like the mainstream...'indian' is a common, all-inclusive word...sort of like the word 'asian' to describe someone from, say, Korea...

And as to the Casino thing....I'm going to dig up some information for you, it will shock you, I'm sure...naw...I'm not going to do that...you could do it, if you were interested...there is enough information on the internet.....

Sorry if it sounds a bit harsh...

quote:

---

...so that the pequots could have it back ...

---

doesn't sound like a generalization to me....

Obviously we'll have to agree to disagree here. I'll just never understand the importance placed on such silly issues when there are such *huge* issues to overcome.



[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 05-25-2002).]

Bugs:
I understood fully you meant survivors not victims, and i was not
poking fun at that. I meant that when you have directly been
treated like vermin in a concentration camp yourself or have
had your family members rounded up and gassed - no amount of money
or "gee we're sorry we made your dad into a lampshade" or
"we're sorry we did vivisections on your mom (for the kids
that means removing organs and stuff while your "patient"
is alive and unmedicated) or "we would love to give you your
gold teeth back".

Same for the native Indians, same for the Japanese in both
canadian and u.s. internment camps....you don't just make
reparations and it's over, we're square now.

edit: i checked your links Bugs..the last one says 120,000 survivors
are left to be compensated...do the math.

It's not my call but this thread has gone from Mascots (like those
chickens and bears and stuff) to team names to the screwing of
the indians in america..... not going anywhere is it?


[This message has been edited by ShootingStar (edited 05-25-2002).]

Threads most often deviate like this around this place. It's ok, trust me.

And I never said suggested that reparations totally repaired anything. If you acknowledge you knew about the reparations paid to holocaust survivors, then what the heck was that "your own revionist history" remark about? Let's agree on what did happen and then we can discuss whether it was a good idea or not.

Bugs:
My comments on revisionist history were meant to convey
the idea that you just can't say "the holocaust was a bad
mistake but the germans made reparations...so it's tabla
rasa...the slate is clean- everything is ok now"

also, i'm challenging your ideas, not you as a person. if you
felt i was taking shots at you, i apologize.

I love the way people ignore the truth. They just read over it and go to the next thing. They skip right over the truth, like you did my last post, and read the one you can argue with.

"All things are true to someone, so therefore all things are true." me

"Belief is a matter of taste" Bernard Shaw

"The important thing is this: to be able at any moment to sacrifice what we are for what we could become." Charles Du Bos

"We, as individuals, both live and die based on the misconception that what we believe to be true, is in reality true. And this is true, its just that in hyper-reality, everything is true." Me



[This message has been edited by Gilbert Nolander (edited 05-25-2002).]

No prob, ShootingStar. I never said anything remotely like that. If that is what I thought, I would have said it. Of course, reparations don't completely repair past injustices. But that is not to say they are always wrong or always right.

Gil - for the record, I skipped over your post becuase it made very little sense and seemed to have no definable conclusion other than indians living in national parks not being a good idea...

To add to what DL said, if you're going to post in forums or newsgroups don't expect
to always be the center of attention. if you do, you'll be very disappointed. try toughen up that skin...you have to able to dish it out and take it...... go over other threads and you'll be surprised at the high percentage of posts that are "overlooked" and how quickly threads go onto tangents and different topics.

I am not feeling left out or anything. It's just that this topic seems to have no end in site, because everyone can not accept that everyone is right. To be right, you do not have to prove someone wrong. You have to instead accept that they are also right. I think....

Well, I'm pretty happy with this thread...because we agreed to disagree without flaming one another...and if you do a search of the archives, one can see that that is not always the case...

No hard feelings here...because not everyone has to agree with me...that would be boring, indeed...

WebShaman, I'm not sure everyone has disagreed with you. I was actually hoping you could post a few links on some specific treaties that are not being upheld. I'm really not familiar with the specifics of the cases you're talking about. If nothing else, it would be good to learn more about the present situation.

Yeah Bugs, I know that not everyone was disagreeing with me...I was just hoping....aw, forget it.

Now, about the treaty thing, and other matters...ok, if you want, I'll start digging up what I can find on the net...and I'll keep you informed...I know you've always been prepared at least to hear the other side of the story...I know that. The above comments were not really aimed in your direction...sorry if I gave that impression...

read this first...it is about what a treaty is...
http://www.fw.umn.edu/Indigenous/rights.htm and this http://www.jamestowntribe.org/frequently_asked_questions.htm

Here are many background links - http://www.indians.state.mn.us/t-source.html
http://www.narf.org/pubs/faqs.html
http://www.lib.csufresno.edu/SubjectResources/GovernmentDocuments/NativeAmLaw.html
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jamarcus/laramie.html
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/indians_side010222.html
http://www.health.state.nd.us/ndiac/sovereignty.htm
http://writers-voice.com/Danny_Kinser_the_dishonorable_us_government.htm

And here is a bit about my people (and yours, Bugs...you are also Cherokee)

http://pblmm.k12.ca.us/projects/discrimination/NativeAmerican/Cherokee/contact.html and http://www.nps.gov/fosm/history/5tribes/tot/relations.htm

Here is a bit about the 'Casino' issue...interesting read...
http://www.frontpagemag.com/columnists/yeagley/2002/dy04-18-02.htm

Also interesting...
http://www.progressive.org/mpvdbk00.htm

This indepth coverage of the 'current' problems by CNN is fascinating..
http://www.fair.org/media-beat/941123.html

And this is downright shocking... http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=12425

To this, comes a lot more information...the list is almost as long as there are tribes...so many broken treaties, legal documents, mismanaged funds, lands, and Federal Bureaus...it's unbelievable in it's complexity..

If you manage to get through even just half of the information in these links, I think you will be surprised...




[This message has been edited by WebShaman (edited 05-27-2002).]

Hello: http://www.press-on.net/commentaries.htm


Fifty years past the deadline: Why are Indian tribes still suing over ancient treaties?
August 17, 2001

A Goal Unrealized
This August 13th marks the 50th anniversary of the deadline set by Congress for Indian tribes to sue the United States for grievances arising prior to 1946. Nevertheless, Indian tribes continue to file claims for loss of their treaty rights, loss of land, and other claimed injustices. The special law that allowed Indian tribes to file all claims and then closed the chapter on this part of America?s history is now largely forgotten by the courts and the public.

Just thought you may want to read this...


-^^-
--::--
\___/

[This message has been edited by Gilbert Nolander (edited 05-28-2002).]

I don't need to read it...because it is not relavant

quote:

---

Aren't treaties old and out of date?

No, a contract does not "go out of date" just because it becomes inconvenient to certain interests. Even older than Indian Treaties, the US Constitution remains relevant and binding on its citizens. The Constitution guarantees treaties as "the supreme law of the land." If age could render a contract obsolete, then tribes would be able to demand that lands transferred by their ancestors to the United States be returned to the tribe's descendants.

---

So what you posted is irrelevant propaganda....who wrote it, and where did you find it? Ok, found the source...looking into it... http://www.citizensalliance.org/links/pages/articles/50_years_past_the_deadline.htm and here is the article in full http://www.citizensalliance.org/links/pages/articles%20and% 20CERA%20news/Indian%20Claims%20Commission%20Article.htm

I admit that on the surface, it raises some interesting (and perhaps valid) points....I am still looking into it...Ahhh...finally found what I was looking for http://www.perm.org/

Now, of course it would be something like this...and even though they have raised some interesting points....I now understand the background reasons for it...just another group...yes, it does seem that they are 'interested' in conserving, the question is why and what for...ok, just read the mission statement...and to a point, I agree...however, many of the hunting and fishing rights granted to American Tribes would be endangered by this view...that doesn't seem to bother them, even though many of these rights were granted by law (and upheld in the court cases in the very article that they wrote...very interesting...)

Ok, this personally makes me sick...

quote:

---

It's interesting to note that nowhere are the phrases, "as long as the grass grows" or "as long as the rivers flow" , ever mentioned. In fact PERM has never seen a treaty between the U.S. and an Indian Tribe that used such language

---

Such propaganda is indeed a very serious issue...because of this http://www.sixnations.org/Lessons_from_History/
Here is were the difference is

quote:

---

An actual silver chain was made to symbolize their agreement. The three links of that chain were said to represent peace, friendship, forever, the basic themes of all Iroquois treaties. This is also the first written treaty to use the famous phrases: "as long as the sun shines upon the earth; as long as the waters flow; as long as the grass grows green, peace will last."

---

Ok, after going through this information, this treaty was indeed made with the British, not the US...however, the same meaning (though not these exact words), are mentioned in a treaty between the US and the Six Nations in the Fort Stanwix Treaty of 1784

quote:

---

the receipt whereof they do hereby acknowledge, do hereby renew and confirm the said boundary line in the words before mentioned, to the end that it may be and remain as a division line between the lands of the said Six Nations and the territory of the United States, forever.

---

Notice the similarity? The phrase "as long as the sun shines upon the earth; as long as the waters flow; as long as the grass grows green, peace will last." entails the same as the word "forever". However, forever is actually a much longer amount of time as that in the phrase....

Interesting is, that another Treaty was again drafted, the Treaty of Fort Harmer in 1789, just 5 years later. Again, the principle is upheld.

So the PERM is using semantics....but the word "forever" is actually much more damaging to the claim they make as the phrase is...

Ok, found this to help back up my suspiscions...

quote:

---

The Silver Covenant Chain of Friendship was one of the first treaties made between the Haudenosaunee and Europeans. Beginning with the Dutch in the early 1600's, Covenant Chain treaties were made with the French, English, other tribes, and eventually with the Twelve United Colonies of the Americas. The Covenant Chain became a symbol of the relationship between the Haudenosaunee and other nations. It served to connect us or bond us together in friendship, as brother to brother.

According to the book "The Life of Captain Brant," the Commissioners appointed by the Twelve United Colonies to make a treaty with the Six Nations at the City of Albany on Friday, the 25th day of August, 1775 made this statement:

By this Belt, we, the Twelve United Colonies renew the old Covenant Chain by which our forefathers in their great wisdom thought proper to bind us and you, our brothers, of the Six Nations together when they first landed at this place and if any of the links of this great chain should have received any rust we now brighten it and make it shine like silver. As God has put it into our hearts to love the Six Nations and their allies we now make the chain of Friendship so strong, we hope through the favour and mercy of the good Spirit that it will remain strong and bright while the sun shines and waters run.

---

Now it is really getting interesting...

Here is a fascinating link...you won't believe it... http://tuscaroras.com/pages/history/iroquois_constitution_1.html

More on Cherokee history... http://www.tolatsga.org/Cherokee2.html




[This message has been edited by WebShaman (edited 05-28-2002).]

The idea of nationalities in general are just silly.

To fight for your own 'nationality' for something that doesn't overly concern you, is plain ridiculous.

IMO, reperations should be made to all those effected by the said action. Slave as a child? The owner, reguardless of their background, should pay you some sort of reperation. Great grandchild of a slave? 'Whites' in general owe you something? Get out of here. How has your life been burdened? After a while it stops becoming a matter of compensation and more of a matter of getting paid.

IMO, if someone has stolen your land, your perfectly in your rights to use the court system to retrieve it. If someone has 'stolen' land that you've never seen from people you've never met some two hundred years ago? Your out of your mind if your sacraficing time in your day to actually argue about it. What common link do you have? Some where along the lines a century ago or so your great great great grandparents came from the same country?

It's like being born and growing up in NY. Being completely educated in NY and creating a life for you in NY to turn around and say oh no I'm not a NYer, my great grandmother was from Texas.

What realy gets on my nerves though is when people showcase their nationality as if 1.) I cared, and 2.) they've ever even seen the country. If you've grown up your entire life in the United States. You were educated in the United States. You raised children in the United States. You've never left the United States, except on vacation, or not English.

Just adding my feelings.

-Jestah
Cell 277

Well Jestah, you raise some interesting points...and then pour gasoline on them, apparently waiting for me to light it. No chance. I have very good reasons for my beliefs, my (according to you 'supposed') grievences, and my stout support of my people. You say that one born in America is american...ok, that's your point of view, you are welcome to it. I disagree.

I was born and raised in the US. But I have not lived my whole life there, nor have I raised children there. I have fought a war for the US, which combined with my military service legally relieves my 'debt' to the US Government (being born American , one does have duties to uphold).

Other than that, I don't really consider myself American. At least, not in the sense that you have given. I consider myself a Global person, with strong ties to my Cherokee heritage. At this point in our history, being 'just' a Global person is really not recognized. Maybe that will change, who knows?

To the other points that you have raised, I've already provided more than enough information on...

WS, I'm not trying to directly target you in any way. I respect you far to much to do so. I respect your beliefs but fail to see the reasons for them. If it is someone you know in particular who's rights are being deprived in the United States then I could understand being annoyed. If it was a family members I could understand being upset. But coming from someone who doesn't live in the States, I just don't see the reasoning in it. Originally my family came from both Germany and England. I don't become enraged if one or the other is having problems. I certainly don't seek some sort of compensation for it. I've been fortunate enough to be able to summer in both countries and while I enjoy going there, I'm simply neither German or English.

-Jestah
Cell 277

Ok, considering that, why indeed do I feel so strongly on this issue? Well, considering the history of my people here http://www.tolatsga.org/Cherokee2.html and the fact that my people are one of the 'five' (so named...not from my people, certainly) civilized tribes and adapted to the 'new' ways so well, only to get knocked back down, built up again, got knocked back down...

We once had a functioning nation (twice, actually), with a written language (still exists) and a constitution (still exists). Every time my people got to a point that it was well underway, we got 'put back in our place' so to speak...we definetly showed, that it was, and is, possible for the 'indians' of the US to impliment the 'new' ways and at the same time, hold on to the old ways, to produce something new...but that was also unacceptable, apparently...

And so it goes on...we only wish to do just that...self-rule, as was promised, time and again...on our lands (and then taken..). Now, don't get me wrong. My people are certainly no angels, and have certainly made mistakes. But we paid very dearly for our mistakes. We tried...very hard, actually, to become a part of the 'new ways'. It was not allowed. Intolerance. And it continues, to this day. And that is what it is all about...today and tomorrow. We have not forgotten the past...and would be very stupid to do so. The past shows that we cannot trust what is promised, be it in word or in law (on paper)...we need to be wary of that. Today shows that many of the same 'stereotypes' still exist...and haven't changed all that much...and we need to be wary of that, as well. And tomorrow?

If my people can learn from the past, overcome the challenges of today, then maybe we have a chance for tomorrow. But we need your participation, your allowance, your acceptance. Only then can we move ahead...sad, but true...


Fixed the link - Jestah

[This message has been edited by Jestah (edited 05-28-2002).]

WS - I would understand your position if you were an active member of a Cherokee reservation that was continuously losing land, but this isn't the case. Civilizations being 'conqured' by those stronger and more advanced is just the way of the world. While perhaps its not right, its human nature. While we can't just right off all the wrongs in the world as acts of human nature, I fail to see what your fighting for. Is it breaking away from the US government? You've already done that. You reside across an ocean. Is it looking for respect or equality? I believe you have that. Since IMO, you aren't personally suffering, I don't see why you are even seeking some sort of reperation in any form.

-Jestah
Cell 277

Hmmm...well Jestah, I'm considering your point...and no, I'm not really an activist (at least, not in that sense).

However (and you knew that was coming, didn't you...) because of my 'race' I have been persecuted...and encountered prejudice. This has stuck with me, even to today. I would either like
a) to see that change
or
b) to see my people finally become that which was promised...which would mean that there would be a place where that wouldn't be the case...a land for us...where we are free to decide for ourselves...

However, as I have really enough things to do with my life, I don't have alot of time (and energy) to actually become an activist....though I do attempt to 'do my part' when and where I can...