Beware - this troll is about to lob a doozy into the crowd.... In history, aggressors that win do not apologize nor do they pay reparations Only aggressors who lose apologize and pay reparations. Whether anyone likes it or not, the European settlers that came to the Americas won the battles with the Natives, and took their land. They own the land, and are the dominant population on this continent. For 100+ years, the US government basically treated the Natives as prisoners of war, relocating them from tribal lands to barren, desert-like reservations in the West. Land that deprives them of the means of subsistence and viable economic development - lack of arable land, denying integration into towns and cities, etc. I'm not saying it was a good policy, but when you're the loser in a battle, you get whatever treatment the winner forces on you - including being called names the winner deems appropriate... In 1987, SCOTUS determined that the Federal and State governments could not infringe on the sovereignty of a tribe to offer gaming on reservations, especially in states which currently allowed gambling. In 1988, Congress enacted IGRA, allowing tribes to offer gambling under a Federal framework, and fulfilling the wish of the Reagan administration that the tribes become economically self-sufficient. Let's not sugar-coat it - SCOTUS and Congress actions were not means of helping the tribes become economically self-sufficient. Instead, let's call the gambling revenues for what they really are - REPARATIONS... REPARATIONS for winning REPARATIONS for taking their land as the spoils of victory REPARATIONS for the disparaging names used as enemy combatants (and prisoners of war) REPARATIONS for relocating the tribes to enemy internments (aka reservations) The US government basically got to wipe its hands free of its historical actions, while the "people" paid the reparations in the form of mindless, yet costly "entertainment". A solution to the Redskins issue: 1. If they want to eliminate all "stereotypical" nicknames/logs/mascots from American sports, then they need to do the following: a. Pay all costs incurred by the affected parties to change their nicknames/logos/mascots, legal fees, marketing costs (including rebranding expenditures), etc. b. Repay the American people all the gaming revenue the tribes have received since 1988. As an example, Indian gaming revenue between 2003 and 2012 was approx. $244.7 B. -or- 2. They do nothing and keep the status quo. Which means they get to keep running casinos and raking in $28B a year in revenue. Pride (in being a historical loser) or money? You can one or the other. But not both. Seems like a fair deal to me....
Good points. Harsh but accurate. I've never been 100% comfortable with the name myself, but I am far more opposed to the self-appointed arbiters of political correctness being allowed to dictate what we can say and think. I am looking for a compromise, and I think I have found it. I support a name change for the Redskins but only if it is something inherently offensive to the PC crowd. I have nothing against Indians, even if most of them dont have a problem with the name, but let's move on. I think better names are out there. The obvious one would be the Washington Weasels. Nothing better symbolizes our Nation's capital and the political class, but it's not really all that offensive. The Washington WMDs is a little awkward, but you could have a logo with a nuke and chemical weapons. The Washington Welfare Queens probably lacks the macho spirit a team needs. How about the Washington Assault Rifles? Logo would be a raised AK-47 with 30 round banana mag. You could also go with the Hand Grenades, Howitzers, Bombers, Machine Guns, etc all calculated to make progressives long for the return of the relatively innocuous Redskins moniker. Many fans miss the old name of the Wizards, the Bullets. They may still control the rights however, making its use problematic. The winner however has to be the Washington War. It's alliterative, its aggressive and it symbolizes what made this town what it is. Plus, Eric Burdon and the Animals had a great song by that name which could replace Hail To the Redskins.
Try to make them alliterative and as offensive as possible. It can't be too timely either. Violating both those rules, the Washington Zimmermans would be perfect. Logo could be a problem though.
If that were the goal... the Washington Pound Sterlings. However, after thinking about this and K street and campaign bribery, I really like the Washington Courtesans
We have already caved to the PC crowd with rebranding the Bullets to Wizards....Can't mention guns in DC Now the Redskins.... Isn't there something of importance for congress to do?
Best case this is PC run amok. Worst case it's a prelude to hate speech laws like those in Canada and the UK.
Washington Circle Jerks. For the PC complainers claim it reflects the layout of the city and the jerks that can't find their way around. If they percieve a deeper meaning it must be something inside their own twisted little pinheads.
As the clear winners in that struggle for N. America, I think we're in a position of strength and wealth sufficient to grant a name change to those losers. It costs us nothing, though maybe it offends someone's sense of ideological purity. Hopefully their pride is strong enough to stand it.