Bernie Sanders: Redskins Name Not Necessary

[Chesterton]

I invite any reader to complete this sentence: "The negative consequences of changing the name from Redskins are................".

giving in to selfish, fascistic demands, abandoning freedom, abandoning beloved tradition, big unnecessary monetary expense and letting the thought bullies win again.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

So it all comes down to the right or lack of same to say anything--so long as someone, somewhere, on the political Left takes offense at it, logically or otherwise.

Wait.. what? "Political left?"

Do you even know who is actually offended by the name "Redskin" and why? If you have any understanding of the term and who it applies to, I have no idea why you'd invoke the "political left".

The political leanings of anyone offended by this name are really inconsequential to the reason why they are offended by the name.

 

[KarateCowboy]

Hey if he can pay for all the free stuff with existing tax revenues, fine.

Nothing like selling your vote for the reward of other people's money. You know, if an nominee bribed you with his own money .... at least he could say he was honest enough to use his own money. There are villains who will try to buy votes and villains who will sell their votes. Dig a layer deeper in the sludge and you find democratic socialists, who also buy and sell votes, but are not decent enough to do it with their own money.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

I swear, do people not understand how taxes work?

They understand it fine. They are forced to lie and play dumb to defend their political position.

I like to give them the benefit that they're not that completely ignorant to how reality works.

 

[SummerMadness]

It's a beloved tradition to use a racial slur? That's rich.

"I call another group a term they do not like, but don't call me racist, I'm trying to uphold a tradition, they're in the wrong!"

 

[expos4ever]

Even if it does have a history, you shouldn't ban something merely because it's been used wrongly in the past. You judge things on their merits. And if you are easily inclined to unhealthy thinking when skin color is mentioned, you speak for yourself, and in that case I suggest you should not think in terms of skin color. I am not so inclined, so my speech does not need artificial restrictions.

I suggest that is manifestly the case that all of us - including you and me - are susceptible to the divisive effects of seeing the world in terms of differences in skin colour. It is, sadly, in our DNA, I suspect. But, this inclination to racism should be valiantly fought. One way to do that is to get rid of names like "Redskins" for sports teams.

It does not trivialize, on the contrary it honors even if only by acknowledgement. It is not disrespectful - we do not name sports teams in order to show disrespect, it's the opposite. You've never heard of a team named after a bad group of people have you - The New York Traitors, The Ottawa Cowards?

I disagree, given the nature of athletic endeavor. If we named a football team "the New York Disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ", would you object? I confess the analogy is a little over-stretched in this example, I am provided, but I cannot think of something less dramatic. The point is NFL football (or baseball) is not the pinnacle of achievement of our culture. To connect these sports to the name of a serious tradition (North American native culture, or any other cultural heritage of any merit at all) is at least a little bit dispespectful.

 

[KarateCowboy]

It's a beloved tradition to use a racial slur? That's rich.

"I call another group a term they do not like, but don't call me racist, I'm trying to uphold a tradition, they're in the wrong!"

If I in my culture refer to them as redskins, who are you to tell me what is and is not a slur in my culture?

 

[GoldenBoy89]

It's a beloved tradition to use a racial slur? That's rich.

I think he meant the beloved tradition of a sports franchise.

I mean... I don't see much tradition in an organization that was created and exists to sell products like sports drinks, shoes, beer and potato chips but I guess to some people, that is just too important to let go or change.

 

[expos4ever]

giving in to selfish, fascistic demands, abandoning freedom, abandoning beloved tradition, big unnecessary monetary expense and letting the thought bullies win again.

Imagine that the name of the team were "the Washington Large-Breasted, Low IQ, Blonde Women".

If I led a campaign to have that name changed, would you say that I am:

1. Selfish
2. Fascistic
3. Promoting the abandonment of freedom
4. Abandoning tradition
5. Incurring expense (to change the name)
6. Being a "bully" by simply campaigning for the name change.

I look forward to your answers.

 

[Tallguy88]

I disagree with any aspect of NDN culture or any imagery of NDN people being exploited and used for American sports entertainment or for other kind of American entertainment. And I know I am not the only NDN who feels this way. American Indians are human beings. We are people. We are not mascots for American sports entertainment or profit. Our people and our culture have been exploited, romanticized, misrepresented, and misappropriated in this country long enough. We have been abused, mistreated, exploited, oppressed, and discriminated against for far too long in this country and we are sick and tired of it. And we are fighting back.

The Seminole Tribe of Florida seems to disagree that all representations are bad or disrespectful.

 

[One Voice Among Many1]

The Seminole Tribe of Florida seems to disagree that all representations are bad or disrespectful.

I know that. I disagree with them and I am sure they would disagree with me.

 

[SummerMadness]

If I in my culture refer to them as redskins, who are you to tell me what is and is not a slur in my culture?

Then don't whine when you're rightfully labeled a racist and a bigot. And we are the same culture, it's a racial slur.

 

[KarateCowboy]

Then don't whine when you're rightfully labeled a racist and a bigot.

Maybe in youuuuuur culture, yes. But it would be bigoted to try and push those standards on me, since I come from a different cultural heritage.

Besides, in my culture, calling someone a racist over something like that is just a way of admitting you have no substantial argument.

 

[SummerMadness]

Maybe in youuuuuur culture, yes. But it would be bigoted to try and push those standards on me, since I come from a different cultural heritage.

Were you not born in the United States of America? You have American cultural heritage.

 

[KarateCowboy]

Were you not born in the United States of America? You have American cultural heritage.

Well, in my culture we frown upon these things. Being a crybully loser-whiner is not respectable.

 

[SummerMadness]

Well, in my culture we frown upon these things. Being a crybully loser-whiner is not respectable.

What culture would that be?

 

[Calvinist Dark Lord]

Bernie Sanders: Redskins Name Not Necessary



http://washington.cbslocal.com/2016/03/19/bernie-sanders-redskins-name-not-necessary/

Last i checked, the Washington Redskins were a privately owned entity, and as such Berned Out Sanders needs to mind his own business with respect to that.

Patronise the team or don't patronise the team. It is a private matter and not subject to government interference.

The Steelers name isn't necessary for the Pittsburgh football team either. However it is also privately owned.

IIRC, the only publicly owned NFL franchise is the Green Bay Packers.

 

[TLK Valentine]

If I in my culture refer to them as redskins, who are you to tell me what is and is not a slur in my culture?

Maybe the world's just a little bigger than "your culture"?

 

[KarateCowboy]

What culture would that be?

Traditional, heartland American culture. It's the culture of people who identify as "ethnic American".

 

[SummerMadness]

Last i checked, the Washington Redskins were a privately owned entity, and as such Berned Out Sanders needs to mind his own business with respect to that.

Patronise the team or don't patronise the team. It is a private matter and not subject to government interference.

The Steelers name isn't necessary for the Pittsburgh football team either. However it is also privately owned.

IIRC, the only publicly owned NFL franchise is the Green Bay Packers.

The Steelers aren't a racial slur against an ethnic group. It seems you can tell which way someone's support blows if they're up in arms about the possibility of a company changing the racist name of a product or mascot. These are the same people that are angry that Muslims allegedly cheered in Jersey City, NJ on 9/11 (a false claim); notice they're not running around saying, "It's their first amendment right to cheer the deaths of people!"