What a pathetic display of leftwing buffonish-ness. I’m upset I actually googled your name to see what you’re up to Joe, since I live in KC. Looks like you’re up to no good
Great article, Joe. I wrote an op-ed column in the Cleveland Plain-Dealer in March urging the Indians to rename the team the Satchels, after Satchel Paige, who played for two Cleveland teams in the Negro League and the American League. Others think the team should honor the Indians' first Black player, Larry Doby, by calling the team the Dobies. Others like the Spiders or the Buckeyes (the city's most prominent Negro League team but also the nickname of Ohio State University's sports teams). But I think the Satchels is the most fitting, as I explained in this article https://www.cleveland.com/opinion/2021/03/rename-the-cleveland-indians-the-satchels-after-satchel-paige-peter-dreier.html and in a larger version published in The American Prospect https://prospect.org/culture/new-name-for-cleveland-indians-baseball-the-satchels/
Wood Floor Contractor NJ by ABC Wood Flooring NJ. ABC Flooring is a licensed and fully insured wood floor sanding company in NJ, specializing in a variety of wood floor services in NJ. Affordable wood floor Installing & wood floor sanding service in NJ
"I never thought about the Cleveland Indians name in a larger context, never thought about how the name offends, how it taunts and ridicules an entire people"
Yes, just like how the Texas Rangers name taunts and offends anyone who was ever part of the Texas Rangers, and the Utah Jazz belittles anyone who likes jazz, and the Portland Trail Blazers' name is intended to ridicule the original trail blazers, and the Yankees are insulting to anyone born in the northern US. Clearly.
Obviously the only reason you'd name a team the Texas Rangers is to taunt and belittle the Texas Rangers, right?
There's quite a big difference. The American government has never systematically persecuted Texas Rangers, jazz music fans, or Oregon settlers. There's a big difference here, and you know that.
...he says, following an article with example after example after example of the racist language and imagery with which the Cleveland team, their fans, sportswriters, and so on, have caricatured and ridiculed Native Americans, dating back from the introduction of the name a century ago to this decade.
You're talking in hypotheticals when reality is staring you in the face.
Right. This is why the Cleveland Indians should try hard to see if Native Americans would like the name changed, and then change it if they are. (I don't have an answer as to what percentage of them would need to want to keep the name to keep it.)
Please bear in mind that i am a middle aged white guy with no experience in race relations and would be happy to be corrected by anyone who is an expert on these topics. Change the names. Based on what I see, right now Native Americans comprise 1.6% of the population - and that includes Alaska Natives. If there were more of them, they would have been changed already. I would suggest that teams having Native American themed mascots should - after changing their name - try to partner with a local nation and maybe sponsor some events aimed at educating others about their history and culture. Maybe include a small museum in their stadiums. College teams who use a specific name (Seminoles) can ask permission to use it, incorporate Native American themed classes into their curriculum and require athletes to take a certain number of credits in these classes. Just trying to turn it into something positive.
Florida State got permission a long time ago -- "The use of names and images associated with Seminole history is officially sanctioned by the Seminole Tribe of Florida", from Wikipedia.
I agree that we should immediately change the name of the Cleveland baseball team. Then we can go after the pro-religion crowd who cheer the Padres, Saints and Angels. And why do we have sports teams named after rapists and looters like the Pirates and Buccaneers? I can go on and on, but you get the idea. I say death to political correctness!
1. I've seen several comments referring to "surveys" claiming X% of people do not want the name changed. Unless you KNOW how the survey was conducted then it it's worthless. You can get any survey to deliver any result you like if that's your goal. Check the classic comedy Yes Prime Minister for just 1 fun method (skip the first 30 seconds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA). Maybe the surveys the commenters quote are quality, maybe they are crap... , but without that knowledge they they score 0 points in arguments, sorry. If you have a survey that was conducted well and describes it's methodology then link to it please.
2. I don't think this is a popularity contest anyway. It oughtn't be anyway.
3. a couple of decades back Australian soccer did a review of themselves to see how they could expand the game. One of the (many) findings is that they teams had to change their names to drop the old ethnic affiliations they had - e.g. Sydney Croatia, Pan-Hellenic Sydney Olympians etc. The ethnic names made it difficult for "outsiders" to become supporters or even interested in the team. It was bad for the game. Those old names had a history, made sense from some perspective. But there came a time when they no longer made sense and they were simply bad for the game. And names were changed, and yes some people were very upset, but games continued to be played and life as we know it did not come to an end.
It doesn't really matter what anyone thinks. It's going to happen. It's been a matter of time for a long time. It might be worth noting that several reservation newspapers contain "Indian" in their name such as News from Indian Country. Also that some when asked have felt Cleveland Indians was an honor.
But it doesn't matter - just don't make it too pc so I can continue to root for them as I have for 60 years. Wow, I'm really getting old!
1. As with another notable word, just because members of the group being referenced decide to use it as a way of taking power back doesn't mean those outside of the group should be using it if it is an issue to do so.
2. If the name is the reason you are rooting for the team, that's likely part of the problem.
#2 - rooting for the team because of the nickname? I don't know which is stranger - doing that or thinking of doing it - that's likely part of your problem. you don't know me at all.
Chicago native, lived most of my life near KC. I have no use, nor have I ever had any use for the Cleveland Indians. They are a non-entity. I've never liked the team, their uniforms have always been crap, particularly the annoying "c" logos they have tried in place of Chief Wahoo. Utterly unappealing. They should change their name to the Cleveland Putzes (use Eddie Murphy's old Jewish man voice from "Coming to America") with cap/jersey designs and team colors to follow accordingly. And they should move to the NL. (P.S.: Joe, you're the best.)
We must dismantle everything about the old (successful) America now due to the demands of the angry mob. As a 1940's English writer once said:
“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”- George Orwell- 1984
Leaving aside any number of other issues with your appropriation of Orwell, are you certain the history books you've been reading, the statues in town squares and names of buildings you're familiar with were not themselves the work of - if not a "Party" - seeking to stop history?
It was a choice to name the bridge over the Alabama River at Selma after Edmund Pettus, and that choice reflected the desires and worldviews of a particular group of people at a particular time. Must the citizens of Selma forever live in their endless present?
I guess your insertion of the word "(successful)" is meant to rationalize all these things. Again, leaving aside all numbers of assumptions that would be necessary to believe that, I would ask: "successful" for whom?
The Venn diagram between the people I have seen using that quote to describe the current environment, and the people who chant "No collusion" in the same tones as "We have always been at war with Eastasia" may not be an exact circle, but it is close enough that you really should think hard before using it if you aren't in that second group.
Kinda funny how it's becoming more and more apparent to any fair minded person that "collusion" was an invention of the Clinton campaign after all. You don't even need a Venn diagram to see it.
I was thinking of the comparison to 1984 recently. I'll bet Orwell never dreamed big brother would be a segment of the population rather than the government.
What are you going to do with the New York YANKEES, it’s offensive to Northerners or Southerners? You’re going to change that too? Or the Braves, Padres? Aren’t you going too far?
On the one hand, I feel like the world will move a millimeter or so in the direction of justice if the baseball teams in Cleveland and Atlanta and the football team in Kansas City change their names. That feeling will be even stronger when Washington's NFL team finally abandons the disgusting racial slur it has marketed for far too long.
On the other hand, it's easy to write about someone else's team. So what about mine: the San Diego Padres? If you grew up in California, you know that the Padres name celebrates the Franciscan priests, led by Fr. Junipero Serra (now a Catholic saint) who wandered up the coast building missions and converting the native peoples. These conversions were not voluntary, and the original Padres worked hard to extinguish the languages and traditions of the people whose land they had taken. Apparently, one of the statues that came down during the mass uprisings of the past several weeks was the likeness of Fr. Serra in Father Serra Park in Los Angeles.
So far, I am unaware of any calls for renaming the Padres. But I have to admit that the name would be hard for me to give up. I haven't lived in San Diego in over 15 years, and following the Padres is one of the few things (aside from family) that still connects me to my hometown. It wouldn't be the same if I suddenly had to root for the San Diego Seashells, or Grunions, or whatever. I'm not sure I could ever come to think of them as "my" team.
But, really, that just drives home Joe's point at the end of the essay. It's *not* just a sports nickname and it *does* mean something. If that weren't true, nobody would care about any of this in the first place. The very fact that we can get so emotionally invested in the power of symbols and names ought to help us understand the offense taken by those who see those symbols and names as degrading reminders of the indignities (and much worse) that their ancestors faced, often within living memory. And when the choice comes down to that--warm childhood feelings vs. stark reminders of bigotry and brutality, it seems to me there's really no choice at all.
"the offense taken by those who see those symbols and names as degrading reminders of the indignities (and much worse) that their ancestors faced" -- The problem is that there's no evidence that any more than a scant minority of Native Americans take offense to the Indians team name. (As always, given evidence to the contrary, then I'll change my mind.) It strongly looks like the offense is taken by a small amount of white "progressives". That just isn't good enough to support a name change, when it appears that both Native Americans and Indians fans mostly are fine with keeping it.
Invitro--That's a fair question and it deserves a response. Obviously, it is possible for claims against one team name or another to reach the point of absurdity, such as the person on this comment board who suggested (probably disingenuously) that the name "Yankees" might be offensive to southerners. I am, of course, sympathetic to the idea that we ought to listen to the people at whom the slurs are allegedly directed. By the same token, I'm not sure I see this as a plebiscite. That is to say, exactly how many Native Americans have to take offense before it becomes appropriate to make the change? One third? One quarter? Half? I'll be the first to admit that I don't have an answer, either, though I guess my threshold would be fairly low. After all, it seems to me that the burden ought to be on the person (and I don't mean you) who wants to preserve a team name that is construed by some number of individuals as ethnically offensive.
How many Native Americans need to take offense is a good question. I don't know.
Is there a single leader of all Native American tribes? If so, I might just ask that person to make the decision. I would at least ask the leaders of all tribes in the Cleveland area, or in all of Ohio and western Pennsylvania.
And if the name does get changed, I know how to find a new one: allow Native Americans to choose it. If they're the ones who have been hurt by the name, they're the ones who should get to choose its replacement.
Well said. And as I did love the Padres for a few years growing up in the 80s, I feel I am entitled to half a vote, which I would cast in favor of "San Diego Grunions."
What a pathetic display of leftwing buffonish-ness. I’m upset I actually googled your name to see what you’re up to Joe, since I live in KC. Looks like you’re up to no good
Great article, Joe. I wrote an op-ed column in the Cleveland Plain-Dealer in March urging the Indians to rename the team the Satchels, after Satchel Paige, who played for two Cleveland teams in the Negro League and the American League. Others think the team should honor the Indians' first Black player, Larry Doby, by calling the team the Dobies. Others like the Spiders or the Buckeyes (the city's most prominent Negro League team but also the nickname of Ohio State University's sports teams). But I think the Satchels is the most fitting, as I explained in this article https://www.cleveland.com/opinion/2021/03/rename-the-cleveland-indians-the-satchels-after-satchel-paige-peter-dreier.html and in a larger version published in The American Prospect https://prospect.org/culture/new-name-for-cleveland-indians-baseball-the-satchels/
Wood Floor Contractor NJ by ABC Wood Flooring NJ. ABC Flooring is a licensed and fully insured wood floor sanding company in NJ, specializing in a variety of wood floor services in NJ. Affordable wood floor Installing & wood floor sanding service in NJ
flooring nj https://abcflooringnj.com/
Indiana?
"I never thought about the Cleveland Indians name in a larger context, never thought about how the name offends, how it taunts and ridicules an entire people"
Yes, just like how the Texas Rangers name taunts and offends anyone who was ever part of the Texas Rangers, and the Utah Jazz belittles anyone who likes jazz, and the Portland Trail Blazers' name is intended to ridicule the original trail blazers, and the Yankees are insulting to anyone born in the northern US. Clearly.
Obviously the only reason you'd name a team the Texas Rangers is to taunt and belittle the Texas Rangers, right?
There's quite a big difference. The American government has never systematically persecuted Texas Rangers, jazz music fans, or Oregon settlers. There's a big difference here, and you know that.
That has literally nothing to do with whether the name is intended to taunt and ridicule. Please learn to read.
...he says, following an article with example after example after example of the racist language and imagery with which the Cleveland team, their fans, sportswriters, and so on, have caricatured and ridiculed Native Americans, dating back from the introduction of the name a century ago to this decade.
You're talking in hypotheticals when reality is staring you in the face.
Right. This is why the Cleveland Indians should try hard to see if Native Americans would like the name changed, and then change it if they are. (I don't have an answer as to what percentage of them would need to want to keep the name to keep it.)
Please bear in mind that i am a middle aged white guy with no experience in race relations and would be happy to be corrected by anyone who is an expert on these topics. Change the names. Based on what I see, right now Native Americans comprise 1.6% of the population - and that includes Alaska Natives. If there were more of them, they would have been changed already. I would suggest that teams having Native American themed mascots should - after changing their name - try to partner with a local nation and maybe sponsor some events aimed at educating others about their history and culture. Maybe include a small museum in their stadiums. College teams who use a specific name (Seminoles) can ask permission to use it, incorporate Native American themed classes into their curriculum and require athletes to take a certain number of credits in these classes. Just trying to turn it into something positive.
Florida State got permission a long time ago -- "The use of names and images associated with Seminole history is officially sanctioned by the Seminole Tribe of Florida", from Wikipedia.
NPR's Scott Simon had the best idea for a new name: Cleveland Rocks!
I agree that we should immediately change the name of the Cleveland baseball team. Then we can go after the pro-religion crowd who cheer the Padres, Saints and Angels. And why do we have sports teams named after rapists and looters like the Pirates and Buccaneers? I can go on and on, but you get the idea. I say death to political correctness!
Tell it Joe. The sooner the better. Most of us have been blind but now we are starting to see.
I'm not an American. A few points:
1. I've seen several comments referring to "surveys" claiming X% of people do not want the name changed. Unless you KNOW how the survey was conducted then it it's worthless. You can get any survey to deliver any result you like if that's your goal. Check the classic comedy Yes Prime Minister for just 1 fun method (skip the first 30 seconds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA). Maybe the surveys the commenters quote are quality, maybe they are crap... , but without that knowledge they they score 0 points in arguments, sorry. If you have a survey that was conducted well and describes it's methodology then link to it please.
2. I don't think this is a popularity contest anyway. It oughtn't be anyway.
3. a couple of decades back Australian soccer did a review of themselves to see how they could expand the game. One of the (many) findings is that they teams had to change their names to drop the old ethnic affiliations they had - e.g. Sydney Croatia, Pan-Hellenic Sydney Olympians etc. The ethnic names made it difficult for "outsiders" to become supporters or even interested in the team. It was bad for the game. Those old names had a history, made sense from some perspective. But there came a time when they no longer made sense and they were simply bad for the game. And names were changed, and yes some people were very upset, but games continued to be played and life as we know it did not come to an end.
It doesn't really matter what anyone thinks. It's going to happen. It's been a matter of time for a long time. It might be worth noting that several reservation newspapers contain "Indian" in their name such as News from Indian Country. Also that some when asked have felt Cleveland Indians was an honor.
But it doesn't matter - just don't make it too pc so I can continue to root for them as I have for 60 years. Wow, I'm really getting old!
1. As with another notable word, just because members of the group being referenced decide to use it as a way of taking power back doesn't mean those outside of the group should be using it if it is an issue to do so.
2. If the name is the reason you are rooting for the team, that's likely part of the problem.
#1 - it depend on who is making it an issue
#2 - rooting for the team because of the nickname? I don't know which is stranger - doing that or thinking of doing it - that's likely part of your problem. you don't know me at all.
Chicago native, lived most of my life near KC. I have no use, nor have I ever had any use for the Cleveland Indians. They are a non-entity. I've never liked the team, their uniforms have always been crap, particularly the annoying "c" logos they have tried in place of Chief Wahoo. Utterly unappealing. They should change their name to the Cleveland Putzes (use Eddie Murphy's old Jewish man voice from "Coming to America") with cap/jersey designs and team colors to follow accordingly. And they should move to the NL. (P.S.: Joe, you're the best.)
Maybe they should wear shorts.
P.S., Sorry we've been dominating your teams. It seems like it caused some bitterness. ;)
We must dismantle everything about the old (successful) America now due to the demands of the angry mob. As a 1940's English writer once said:
“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”- George Orwell- 1984
Leaving aside any number of other issues with your appropriation of Orwell, are you certain the history books you've been reading, the statues in town squares and names of buildings you're familiar with were not themselves the work of - if not a "Party" - seeking to stop history?
It was a choice to name the bridge over the Alabama River at Selma after Edmund Pettus, and that choice reflected the desires and worldviews of a particular group of people at a particular time. Must the citizens of Selma forever live in their endless present?
I guess your insertion of the word "(successful)" is meant to rationalize all these things. Again, leaving aside all numbers of assumptions that would be necessary to believe that, I would ask: "successful" for whom?
Way to miss the point, Big Brother.
The Venn diagram between the people I have seen using that quote to describe the current environment, and the people who chant "No collusion" in the same tones as "We have always been at war with Eastasia" may not be an exact circle, but it is close enough that you really should think hard before using it if you aren't in that second group.
Kinda funny how it's becoming more and more apparent to any fair minded person that "collusion" was an invention of the Clinton campaign after all. You don't even need a Venn diagram to see it.
(not a Trump fan)
I was thinking of the comparison to 1984 recently. I'll bet Orwell never dreamed big brother would be a segment of the population rather than the government.
What are you going to do with the New York YANKEES, it’s offensive to Northerners or Southerners? You’re going to change that too? Or the Braves, Padres? Aren’t you going too far?
No Oscar.
Eloquently said, as always. And for my money, I think the Cleveland Buckeyes is an awesome name!
On the one hand, I feel like the world will move a millimeter or so in the direction of justice if the baseball teams in Cleveland and Atlanta and the football team in Kansas City change their names. That feeling will be even stronger when Washington's NFL team finally abandons the disgusting racial slur it has marketed for far too long.
On the other hand, it's easy to write about someone else's team. So what about mine: the San Diego Padres? If you grew up in California, you know that the Padres name celebrates the Franciscan priests, led by Fr. Junipero Serra (now a Catholic saint) who wandered up the coast building missions and converting the native peoples. These conversions were not voluntary, and the original Padres worked hard to extinguish the languages and traditions of the people whose land they had taken. Apparently, one of the statues that came down during the mass uprisings of the past several weeks was the likeness of Fr. Serra in Father Serra Park in Los Angeles.
So far, I am unaware of any calls for renaming the Padres. But I have to admit that the name would be hard for me to give up. I haven't lived in San Diego in over 15 years, and following the Padres is one of the few things (aside from family) that still connects me to my hometown. It wouldn't be the same if I suddenly had to root for the San Diego Seashells, or Grunions, or whatever. I'm not sure I could ever come to think of them as "my" team.
But, really, that just drives home Joe's point at the end of the essay. It's *not* just a sports nickname and it *does* mean something. If that weren't true, nobody would care about any of this in the first place. The very fact that we can get so emotionally invested in the power of symbols and names ought to help us understand the offense taken by those who see those symbols and names as degrading reminders of the indignities (and much worse) that their ancestors faced, often within living memory. And when the choice comes down to that--warm childhood feelings vs. stark reminders of bigotry and brutality, it seems to me there's really no choice at all.
"the offense taken by those who see those symbols and names as degrading reminders of the indignities (and much worse) that their ancestors faced" -- The problem is that there's no evidence that any more than a scant minority of Native Americans take offense to the Indians team name. (As always, given evidence to the contrary, then I'll change my mind.) It strongly looks like the offense is taken by a small amount of white "progressives". That just isn't good enough to support a name change, when it appears that both Native Americans and Indians fans mostly are fine with keeping it.
Invitro--That's a fair question and it deserves a response. Obviously, it is possible for claims against one team name or another to reach the point of absurdity, such as the person on this comment board who suggested (probably disingenuously) that the name "Yankees" might be offensive to southerners. I am, of course, sympathetic to the idea that we ought to listen to the people at whom the slurs are allegedly directed. By the same token, I'm not sure I see this as a plebiscite. That is to say, exactly how many Native Americans have to take offense before it becomes appropriate to make the change? One third? One quarter? Half? I'll be the first to admit that I don't have an answer, either, though I guess my threshold would be fairly low. After all, it seems to me that the burden ought to be on the person (and I don't mean you) who wants to preserve a team name that is construed by some number of individuals as ethnically offensive.
How many Native Americans need to take offense is a good question. I don't know.
Is there a single leader of all Native American tribes? If so, I might just ask that person to make the decision. I would at least ask the leaders of all tribes in the Cleveland area, or in all of Ohio and western Pennsylvania.
And if the name does get changed, I know how to find a new one: allow Native Americans to choose it. If they're the ones who have been hurt by the name, they're the ones who should get to choose its replacement.
Is there a single leader of all European "tribes"? Or all Asian "tribes"? Or all African "tribes"?
Well said. And as I did love the Padres for a few years growing up in the 80s, I feel I am entitled to half a vote, which I would cast in favor of "San Diego Grunions."