That’s my real number in the message I sent, Cliff. Will you be calling?

As I am not criticizing any person, company, etc. I thought I was following the rules. As I understand it, one is allowed to have an opinion different from yourself. I'm not even criticizing Packs, I just disagree. As I understand the rules, you can't remain private as you are accusing me of "cowardly crap", etc., but I am allowed to have an opinion contrary to yours.

If I am breaking the rules I apologize and will delete, but then other folks are not allowed to do it either, who do not seem to be so aggressively 'called out'.

I don't see why you feel a need to dox me or argue on the phone? I tend to think of these matters as being about ideas, not about ad hominems and personal attacks (which is why I'm not making them). Perhaps I have a minority view here too.

The reason I prefer to stay private, though none of your business really, is, largely, that we are all posting about valuable collectibles here, it can be read by anyone, and it is very easy to ID members home addresses with their full names.

EDIT: There, they've been removed just for you. That you want to start an altercation over the phone with Cliff, a gentleman I don't know besides our very public chats on some Topps variations and his discovery of 66 Topps high number miscuts as a group sheet-recreation project (thank you for sharing, sir!), about what a "coward" and "garbage" I am because I have an opinion different from yours, is another excellent reason that I don't want you to have my personally identifying information to track me down. This is ridiculous.

It’s up to Leon. Normally people too cowardly to put their name behind their words aren’t allowed to post on anything that’s the least bit controversial, but maybe things have changed. No one wants to know your address or whatever else you’re afraid of. But if you’re too afraid to put your name out there because of your amazing collection that is better than all of the other people on this board who post their names, then maybe you should STFU?

I'm pretty sure insults like this are also against the rules. I expect this to be enforced with the other posters who agree with you but have committed the same sin. Your hostility, insults, anger and inability to speak in a civil manner over somebody not having your opinion is not "grown up".

I think the names need to be changed. Some of the previous posts talked about not seeing racism. Others made the point that any transgressions happened long ago. It dawns on me that that’s probably true. Many states drove all their tribes out a long time ago. Only Indian names remain as a reminder of the sad history. In such circumstances, it would be easy to feel a disconnect, and be impatient with those who want to stir things up by changing team names.

Here where I live, a little north of Seattle, in Washington State, there are numerous reservations. I see Native Americans every day. The tribes hold written agreements and treaties that our federal government has failed to honor. The grievances are not tales from long ago. They are current, and they are raw. Reducing people to a cultural stereotype, and using that stereotype as a team mascot, is demeaning.

Don’t think so? Well how would it be if the name were changed to the Washington Honkies?

As for the Indians and the Braves, yes - they’re next. I suggest the Cleveland Engines. The name hardly changes, yet offends no one.

And the Atlanta Breves also hardly changes anything, but avoids insult. If you visit Starbucks, you probably know that a Breve is a drink with half-and-half. And all you musicians know that a breve is a note that lasts eight beats.

Oh yeah, I am going to call a stark raving mad lunatic self loathing indoctrinated L word and have you scream incoherently at me with obscenities. Ain’t gonna happen.

I hadn't really been interested in this thread until I read it last night. I thien locked it and then reopened it. I don't want this place to be sterile. I prefer not to get involved in anything :). The rule at the top is still the rule. But in this world everything isn't black and white. Still if you are calling someone names then your name is going to be out here. But just disagreeing..meh....

What we need, imo, is half of all social program money go to mandatory parenting classes for whomever gets any govt. handouts they didn't work for.

For the record I don't think any names of anything should be changed. And I don't think any monuments should have come down. Just one, well thought out, point of view.

,

Dont Delete
 

I hope you do not delete your posts in the future. Much like the statues of war leaders their symbolic meaning changes with time. I dont believe in sanitizing history the comments you make will stand as a testament of where we are in this moment as a nation painting a more vivid message for our country men that follow.
Kindly,
Aaron Heineman

I cannot believe we as a society have let the vile disgusting name continued to be used in the NFL. This is 2020 and no one should be subject to such public humiliation with a major sports franchise name that offends, degrades and panders to the lowest common denominator in our society. The name should be changed to the Virginia Redskins.

Unfortunately, the guy on the 'tolerant' side escalated things from a conversation and is now harassing other people because I disagree with their political view. This just isn't worth it.

Native Americans
 

I think just about all the posters on this thread are missing the point. As White Americans, our opinions don't really matter on this issue. As well , the opinions don't really matter of Black Americans, or any other group besides Native Americans. Their opinion on this is what matters.
These names are applied to Native Americans. If they find it offensive, that should be enough for the rest of us. It's a matter of giving a fellow human being respect. If Native Americans want these names removed, that should be enough.
Respect your fellow human beings. Such a concept.

Not only are the grievances from "not tales from long ago", they are current. The Supreme Court just rules *last week* that half of the state of Oklahoma is now considered reservation because the federal government failed to honor their treaties.

Last. Week.

For the record, I have no problem with the removal of Confederate statues. Never understood why you would put up statues to honor traitors that lost while fighting AGAINST the United States. We don't put up statues for Mussolini or King George III...

Totally agree.

The Confederate statues were put up as a show of white supremacy and to intimidate people of color. Most were put up in the first couple of decades of the 20th Century.

They were a show of intimidation. Not honor. Their message is clear as day. If anyone disagrees with me please do some research before touting your “beliefs.”

-D Lu$ti$

Packs never met a post he didnt edit

This is a very interesting read. Much of the details I did not know.

The Atlantic. July, 2020
Title: Americans Need to Know the Hard Truth About Union Monuments in the West During the Civil War: Union soldiers in the West weren’t fighting to end slavery, but to annihilate and remove Native Americans.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...y-west/613918/

The rule of thumb is, within reason, to let the demographic group say what offends them. If Americans Indians say a name or mascot depicting them offends or doesn't offend them then the name or mascot offends or doesn't offend them.

It is not for others on the left or the right to decide what does or should offend them. Whites on the left and right can be equally condescending, patronizing and "unlistening" to minorities.

But that involves actually finding out (asking) what minority groups find offensive or not-offensive, and not assuming for them.

A standard argument is "Scandanavians in Minnesota don't find the Vikings name and mascott offensive." Okay, they don't find that offensive. That's great, more power to them. That sentiment, however, applies to the white Minnesotans and Vikings, not across-the-board to any and all mascots and any and all peoples. And, of course, it was more than likely that Scandinavians in Minnesota who picked and/or approved the team name.

Just for the record, Packs and I just disagreed and it was completely civil. Packs only edited his posts after I deleted mine because I deleted them, which I did because ElCabron flipped out and started harassing Cliff and trying to get my contact info to berate me. Packs did nothing wrong.

Please dont give yourself much importance. He edits every post in every thread. Nobody cares why you did anything.

Don't entirely disagree but how many have to find it offensive for it to be removed? 50%? 100%? Or maybe one single person?

Some Native Americans find it offensive, some don't.

+1

Lived in Spokane, WA. The local MiLB team, the Indians, work very closely with the local tribe. Jerseys sometimes include the team name written in their dialect, or salmon - an important symbol for local natives. They are a really good example of how to handle culturally sensitive topics with respect, and showing dignity to a group that has often been marginalized. https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...6a7d899ab4.jpg

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

I am a season ticketholder for the Spokane Indians. Have been a regular at games for 22 years since moving to Spokane. The team is truly the poster child for how to handle this stuff. Roughly a decade ago, the topic of possibly changing the team name came up and they reached out to the local tribe. That tribe, whose official name is the Spokane Tribe of Indians, told them not to change the name. From there a conversation ensued on how to best honor the tribe. The result, as described above, has been the incorporation of Salish writing into the team logos and wordmarks. There is a display in the concourse of tribe-related information and material. When Spokane hosted the All-Star game a few years ago, they had a tribal drumming demonstration as part of the festivities. Everything they've done has been respectful and in consultation with the tribe.

I respect history. If history is sanitized we loose important messages and are likely to repeat our mistakes. The original message of these monuments is clear; however today and in the future the real message, a sad chapter of our history, will hopefully not be repeated.
Respectfully,
Aaron Heineman

A beacon
 

I am glad there is a model that the pro teams could adopt.

Aaron

If the plaques on them were along the lines of (paraphrase), "Robert E Lee, traitorous leader of the Confederacy...blah blah blah", I could be persuaded to agree with you. But that's not what they were. They were statues to honor those leaders, tributes to them. Makes no sense.

Ditto for naming *military bases* after them. WTF. Do we have a Fort Rommel somewhere I'm not aware of?

Let's not forget to give a shout out to George Brett and his brother, owners of the team.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Just talking to a good buddy here in Cleveland, we can't figure out why the Indians can't do this!!!!!!! We have trophy cases and rooms with plaques everywhere, why not dedicate a section to showing WHY we're the Indians, show some respect for the natives that preceded us? Work as a frickin' partnership.

as americans we have a complicated history.
the story below outlines a march of triumph over a bridge.
i cite the story to help better illustrate that we have the power over objects and what they mean today.

https://www.npr.org/2020/06/17/87968...s-wide-support

Good source. I saw this in this last week somewhere else. Lots of dilemmas. But I don't think sports teams' names need to be one of them. Refer back to Spokane Indian posts above.

I would refer you to this post I wrote on 7/13 prior to the excellent example of the Spokane Indians.

Remove statues
 

I have never got the idea of people saying - if we remove statues, we're erasing history. History stays the same, just a statue has been moved.
I have always loved to read about history. There are many great books that have been written about history.
If you're getting your history by looking at a statue, and that's it , I would say you don't know much about history.

Ah, somehow I missed that one. I concur.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Particularly the Confederate monuments. We're not talking about monuments in a cemetery or on a battlefield. These were erected in public places, like courthouses, decades after the war AND during the rise of Jim Crow. They were a tool of intimidation.

I think "a statue has been moved" is quite a polite way to refer to the destruction of public (and private) property by a mob of people. Should they be moved or removed? Perhaps. But I'm hoping your not condoning that the ends justifies the means in how some of these have been 'moved'.

As to the original OT question. I'm not sure I buy the Braves name change. This gets back to the question of who takes offensive and how many need to be offended to be classified as 'offensive'. Sometime in the 1987-1994 time frame (as I remember where I was living at the time), this was brought up with regard to the Braves (among others). There were a number of Native Americans that were fine with the team name of the Braves as it was a symbol of strength, courage, and nobility. The Redskins and Indians would be a different matter.

It is not true to say that no one alive was victim to the two century attempt to destroy Native land and identity. Well into the 1960’s and 1970’s young native children were taken from their families to be sent to Indian schools or to be placed with white families. This was done to strip these children of their heritage.

It was not until 1978 the the Indian Child Welfare Act was passed to address this issue

This in Not ancient history

Don't condone vandalism.
 

Of course, I don't agree with mobs destroying statues.
I live in New Orleans. The city removed the 4 most prominent Confederate statues in this city. It was a move that I would say the great majority of the residents of the city approved of.
I'm not in favor of destroying art. The statue of P.T. Beauregard in particular was a very beautiful statue of him riding on a very beautiful horse. I think these statues belong in museums, in a proper setting, with the proper context.
The city has placed them in storage, no one knows what will happen to them eventually.