Exactly. It is insidious and needs to be confronted. If someone generalized a negative attribute to all people of a particular minority race, we would all agree that is reprehensible, and the very definition of racism. Yet people can look at your skin color, and nothing else, and ascribe all sorts of negativity on you because you happen to be white.

It's the same exact concept, and it is a rotten thing on principle. The way to end racism in this country is to treat everyone with equal respect, until they, as individual people, through their own actions, prove otherwise. But you don't end racism my turning that evil cannon around and firing it at white people, thinking it is somehow evening the score.

Ok. But it's still aesthetically ugly and cheap looking.

It's ridiculous. The one Black kid in our neighborhood was a close and ultimately lifelong friend of my brother, and was a fixture in our house. Nobody could have cared less about his skin color. I say that not in self-congratulation but as illustration.

I live in an extremely liberal town. Our Mayor is always ranting and raving about institutional racism. Ironically, her predecessor, who would have easily been reelected had he run, was Black.

It is far worse than you think. Not only will cancel culture mow down traditions, it will also lead to dancing among our children.

Starting your first post to me with, "I am sure that you know that your post is disingenuous BS" does not win arguments either.

sing it Johnny....
 

“Dancing”? Is that what the cancel culture is calling rioting,looting,and burning now?

You would be thinking of CNN's "mostly peaceful protest"

Yes. They should never have been named after traitors in the first place.

You must be thinking of the “normal tourist visit” in January 6th that “cancel culture” doesn’t talk about.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That’s the one! A summer of “dancing” in the streets!

As a grade schooler I became an Indian's fan by reading Bob Feller's books. Bob Fellers Strikeout Story and Pitching To Win. If their name had been Guardians I would not have been interested.

Total Pud effort in finding a new moniker.

From the perspective of Great Britain, the Founding Fathers were traitors.

May as well be. Honestly, I never even thought this was a controversy until people from both sides started arguing about it.

I’d actually be surprised if any every day person could even name three of the bases in question. People in the military (then and now) would know the names but likely no idea who the people even are.

Looking into it a bit, once these guys became Generals they weren’t even very good at the job. Never mind who they fought for, they just weren’t good and there are far better and more successful Generals out there that they could be named for.

If they do end up changing names, I suggest Audie Murphy (not a General) for one. If they change the name of Ft Bragg, I suggest MG Scoltes, the first CDR of JSOC, as Ft Bragg is the home of special operations forces.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can we make those changes without an inquisition into THOSE people's lives? What if they made a racist remark somewhere along the way? Or was an abusive husband or father, that behavior is as bad as racism no?

I’m assuming by “those” you’re talking about the people who the bases are named after?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No I mean the ones you would change the names to. No point removing a name if the new one did something inappropriate too.

Guess what, we aren't terribly likely to find anyone free of sin. So maybe we shouldn't name anything after anyone. Be like New York, PS 129. Fort 33. Oak City. Tear down EVERY statue except horses.

The Cleveland Guardians? Yes, It's Official
 

So which is it? People that said something or someone that did something?

They (currently names Generals) rebelled against their country. Why should they have an entire base named after them?

Do you even know anything about the two people I mentioned and how it might make sense? Do you even know anything about the people who the bases are currently named after?

I’ll wait while you Google who they are and respond.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes I know who they are, and spare me the patronizing crap, but you are missing my point. Do you really think the distinction between word and deed will hold up if we make that the standard? Didn't Princeton get rid of the Woodrow Wilson School because of things he said?

Just to clarify: when someone says that white people are racist, it doesn't mean that all white people actively hate minorities or burn crosses or murder people in a black church or fly a Confederate flag. I think that there are two points to be made: one is that white people have prejudices, which they may not even recognize, because everyone does, whatever race they identify as. The difference is that white people have privilege and power that other races don't have, and because white people have privilege and power, their prejudices turn into racism and oppression in a way that's not possible for races that don't have privilege and power.

A classic article about white privilege: https://nationalseedproject.org/Key-...sible-knapsack


The second point that I think is important is that not all racism comes from individual racist acts. There's also structural racism. There are a lot of articles about that - here's one specifically aimed at Christians by a conservative Christian, but useful even if you're not a Christian yourself:

https://frenchpress.thedispatch.com/...t-wokeness-its

Given that structural racism exists, and that white people benefit from it, we (I'm white) have three options. One is to be happy with our privilege and tell ourselves we deserve it. One is to recognize that it's a bad thing, but not do anything to change it. That lets us feel good about ourselves, because we aren't actively doing anything wrong, but it perpetuates the status quo and the existing structural racism, even if we don't personally feel hostility to minorities. And the last one is to actively work against it.

Incidentally, the National Council of American Indians had this to say about the name change:

https://www.ncai.org/news/articles/2...name-guardians

“With today’s announcement, the Cleveland baseball team has taken another important step forward in healing the harms its former mascot long caused Native people, in particular Native youth,” said NCAI President Fawn Sharp. “We call on the other professional sports teams and thousands of schools across the country that still cling to their antiquated Native ‘themed’ mascots to immediately follow suit. NCAI also looks forward to continuing its work with the Cleveland Guardians to help grow the national movement of respect for Tribal Nations, cultures, and communities, a movement that values, teaches, and validates who Native people are today, what makes us unique, the many important contributions we make to this country, and our rightful place in the diverse mosaic that is America.”

I'd be curious to hear from those of you going to the National what percentage of the dealers and what percentage of the attendees there are white and what percentage are women (excluding those who are just there to keep their boyfriend/husband/son happy)....

Ted Clayton

To make clear, I did edit in the middle of when you apparently responded. I don’t know how to add an edit reason in Tapatalk. I’m a technological moron and don’t know how to do it. I’m used to desktop.

You’re stuck in things people said and what people did.

The people the bases are named after rebelled against the U.S. That’s what they DID. Why should that be celebrated? Do you celebrate the people who stormed the Capitol on January 6th?

The people I mentioned actually have significance to the U.S. military history which, again, I highly doubt you know unless you Google right now. And that’s not patronizing, not many people at all know who they are. It’s stating a fact.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree they are significant individuals. But you shouldn't assume someone else doesn't know something just because the average person might not. That is patronizing or at least presumptive. Do you know anything about me, or my interests or education or what I read and study for example? Audie Murphy btw is pretty well known, although I will grant you Scholtes, whose name YOU misspelled by the way lol, is not.

The Cleveland Guardians? Yes, It's Official
 

And you’re right, I shouldn’t assume.

I’m going on my personal experience and mentioning these people among others in conversations with many civilian and military personnel.

You still haven’t answered any of my questions though. Specifically, and now I can’t see my comment so it’s not word for word, why should they have a base named after them? What did they do to accomplish such an honor since they rebelled against the country? Additionally, should those on the 6th of January be celebrated as well?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That was a joke, champ, and I figured most people had enough neurons bouncing around inside their melon to catch the implication. Obviously, I was wrong. So, even though it doesn't really belong in this section, I'll try to explain. There are two premises here, but I will only address the one that is actually relevant (IMO) to the name change from Indians to Guardians. Also, these are my general observations. It isn't meant to be one size fits all. I am sure many of you do not fit neatly into the narrative:

1. Cancel culture is just the latest biennial moral panic conjured up by political operatives who needed something new to gin up outrage now that the previous panics have lost their impact.
2. The name change in Cleveland has nothing to do with "cancel culture." It is an artifact of the usual inter-generational changes that cause the olds to get their backs up and the youngs to roll their eyes at grumpy old Papaw.C

I was born in 1965 and I am part of the first Gen X cohort. I spent the first part of my professional career working with Baby Boomers and the second part with Millennials and (now) Gen Z. It's my observation that the younger generations are more comfortable with differences along ethnic, cultural, faith, and sexual orientation lines. With this comfort level comes a desire to use language that acknowledges the difference without resorting to potentially offensive tropes. It is nothing more than matter of being considerate of other people. And, I think we can all agree that being considerate is a good thing.

This isn't to say that Boomers (and my generation) are inherently racist. But we were able to move through our formative years without being confronted with the increasingly multi-cultural nature of America. Having one minority family in your neighborhood or, in my case, your graduating class doesn't mean that you are the living embodiment of MLK Jr "I have a dream" speech. It does mean that you grew up in an environment where you didn't need to think about how to deal with such issues. It also means being more intentional now in how we deal with those issues.

The Cleveland Indians were under no serious threat of going out of business by retaining the Indians name. However, we all also know that baseball is facing a demographic cliff with a rapidly aging fan base that is not being replaced by younger people. As younger generations become more accepting of differences, it is not surprising that various institutions (be they corporate or public sector) change to reflect the zeitgeist. It isn't a matter of caving to the "woke crowd." It is a matter of following the money and creating brand loyalty. Let's just face up to the hard truth: the only industries that consider our market demographic highly desirable are reverse mortgages and catheters-by-mail. So, if you really must be upset about this, you would do better to criticize Cleveland's ownership from engaging in such a obvious, cynical marketing ploy.

And, since every thread needs a card

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Z_rIE7Q4Z...600/somali.jpg

I despise anyone who participated in January 6. I'd have to think some more about the forts, I guess my overall point is it seems futile to try to redo things like names that have been there so long that as you point out most people don't even know their significance. To me it's more a feel-good virtue signaling gesture than anything that will make a real difference. Now if you're talking the Confederate flag, that's a living symbol, so I'm in favor of getting rid of that no question.

As I posted before, renaming a school named for Lincoln pushed me over the edge on the cancel culture thing.

The Cleveland Guardians? Yes, It's Official
 

I read your comment and thought of the movie Footloose.

Please don’t ruin it for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

+1

History is generally written by the victors.

Don't read any further then. There be dragons.

https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...ize/shitty.png

Also shitty...

What's the saying, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

There is nothing anyone could possibly say to defend slavery, but from my study the rift between North and South was more complex than slavery.

At the risk of diving in here, I never understood why the US Army named bases/forts after CSA military figures like Lee, Bragg, Hood and Hill who actively fought and led troops and whose orders caused the deaths of thousands of US Army soldiers. I would not expect the British Army to name one of their bases after James Connolly or Michael Collins, nor would I expect the French to name anything after Marshal Petain.

It isn't a given, it's an opinion some people have, these articles aren't some sort of definitive gospel. And tell me exactly how I personally am benefiting from this, I must be missing that.

+1

Lee at least I think is more complicated.

I had no idea of the Lincoln school being renamed until I saw something in this thread. That’s something I’d like to read up on as well as much deeper into these guys the forts were named after.

As someone who was stationed at Ft Bragg for 3.5 years (including 15 months deployed), nobody knew who the hell he was nor did anybody care.

It would be more of a pain in the ass than anything to go about changing the name, but I don’t feel like they deserve a fort named after them. With that said, I do believe hardly anybody knows who these guys are anyway so it probably doesn’t matter anyway. Save the taxpayers some money.

Maybe someday people from all ends of the spectrum will stop getting outraged because some talking heads said to do so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Cleveland Guardians? Yes, It's Official
 

People would have to actually read and study though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In 1984, recall that one of the government's most powerful weapons was simply purging and changing history. I think it's critical to learn from the past and to acknowledge its injustices, but I don't think wiping out the names on schools and dorms and forts and cities and tearinig down statues is the way to do it generally speaking. I agree there might be some really outrageous example where I would agree with it.

I was fortunate to have a history teacher who wrote extensively on the Civil War and what led up to it and I became interested in the subject. I think back to the (alleged) showdown between Andrew Jackson and John Calhoun which I'm not sure had much to do with slavery and more with the direction the country was going in terms of federalism vs states rights.

Jackson: Our federal union, it must be preserved.
Calhoun: Our union, next to our liberty, the most dear.

Still has echoes today.

Really? All 100 million (or however many) white people have privilege and power? Really???? I can introduce you to some poor people in my community (with white skin color) who expose that to be a blatant lie.

Generally speaking, an intelligent black person has privilege and power over a white idiot. A normal black person has power and privilege over a white dwarf. Young, healthy, active people have privilege and power over old, sick people. And so on.

I've seen far, far too many successful people with darker skin and far, far too many failures with lighter skin to buy into your racist nonsense.

Looking at someone, seeing only their race, and from that tidbit of information declaring them privileged and powerful is outright stupid. And that is what this group think mentality is doing - making idiots out of otherwise intelligent people.

You cannot take a hundred million people and ascribe ANY attribute to each and every one of them. It is absurd, and quite obviously racist.

Thank you! I started to respond to that nonsense, but then just hit delete.

There are countless white people living in poverty. They will be glad to hear, no doubt, how they are the beneficiaries of structural racism against blacks. Is that the same structural racism that gave this country a (deservedly) popular two term Black president? Oh wait, he, and every other successful Black person don't count, because they go against the theory.

What about the 620,000 white soldiers that gave their life in the Civil War that black slaves might be free?

+1

I must say the smugness and superiority of someone telling me I am REALLY a racist at some deep down level because I'm a white from a suburb is beyond offensive.

As He died to make men holy, let us fight to make men free.

Or the white cops that go into black neighborhoods every day to try to save black lives. Can you imagine someone having the cojones to tell those folks they are really racist?

A less well known name change
 

Pekin is a town in Illinois.

A pekin duck is a white duck imported from China and is a recognized breed by that name.

Pekin High School athletic teams formerly identified as the Pekin Ducks. I don't know if there mascot looked like Donald (Duck not Trump).

Apparently the Chinese community became offended because people were eating Peking duck in Chinese restaurants.

As a result of this kerfuffle, the Pekin High School teams abandoned the Duck are now referred to as the Pekin Dragons.

Doesn't that make your hair stand on end. This could have been the start of a World War, but in central Illinois news travels slowly, not too many people really cared.

i still like the Cleveland Eeries, even tho the season is over before Halloween night.

Frank, the Pekin High "Chinks" not ducks. The Ducks were from Havana. The Pekin team were made famous by playing the Cobden Appleknockers for a state championship in the sixties. They changed the Chinks mascot shortly after that contest.

the Cleveland Indians...now the Guardians?
 

Another pathetic attempt to whitewash history using ignorant rationale as to what is offensive...The true offensiveness is that the name is not being changed because it is a benefit to the team, its just making the team
seem pathetic in that they cannot function in the cancel culture environment without caving in.
All sports teams are of very little importance anyway, they are all greedy hypocrites

I think your neurons are overactive,champ! I don’t think my prior reply to you was an attack on you.But I’ll “play” if you want!

Something like that. There's really no black or white anymore, everything is shades of grey.



You can fool some of the people all of the time....

And all of the people some of the time....

But you can't fool Mom! :)

This is your briefest post ever.:);):D

From a conference earlier this month

Peter, I wish you could’ve seen when my moms side of the family (Catholic) met my dad’s side (Protestant) started discussing Oliver Cromwell. :eek:

Absolutely agree. Truth is, there has been slavery going back thousands of years in the human race, and that involved people of all colors and nationalities. But today you don't really hear anyone still complaining about the Egyptians, Romans, Vikings, or any other dominant groups that had slavery as a given and accepted part of their culture in the past.

Power and privilege accrues to the educated. Isn't that interesting.......

Maybe all those woke college kids, regardless of race, should self-flagellate, instead of accusing people based on the color of their skin.

No it isn't!!!

Or the slavery that still exists today in parts of Africa:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slaver...mporary_Africa

The continent of Africa is one of the regions most rife with contemporary slavery. Slavery in Africa has a long history, within Africa since before historical records, but intensifying with the trans-Saharan and Indian Ocean slave trade and again with the trans-Atlantic slave trade; the demand for slaves created an entire series of kingdoms (such as the Ashanti Empire) which existed in a state of perpetual warfare in order to generate the prisoners of war necessary for the lucrative export of slaves. These patterns have persisted into the colonial period during the late 19th and early 20th century. Although the colonial authorities attempted to suppress slavery from about 1900, this had very limited success, and after decolonization, slavery continues in many parts of Africa despite being technically illegal.

I didn't think it was an attack either. I just figured you didn't understand the point I was making and I took the opportunity to develop the idea in a bit more detail.

Deleted

Am aware of that, and it is surprising that doesn't get a much larger audience or vocal protest in the world today, at least not as much as there still seems to be for similar issues from 160 years ago. Also today, this modern slavery is not considered as normal and accepted by any of the major nations of today's world.

Agree. To me, the most startling omission is the role black African slave owners played in selling their slaves to the traders who brought them to this country.

The slaves that were brought here weren't captured by a bunch of white guys running around Africa. They were captured and sold by other (black) African people. So how is it all white people are somehow held responsible, while all black people are granted victim status?

There were a lot of white people who vehemently opposed slavery, and a lot of black people who trafficked in it (and still do today according to the Wikipedia article I linked.)

Don't think you or many here get it.

The Indian nation consider themselves a 'people', a descendant race and heritage that would choose to not allow people to simply use the label for their own edification.

So, just like there won't be a Chicago Jews, or San Fransisco Negroes, or Manhattan Muslims, Toronto Asians, New Orleans Africans or other such ridiculous and improper titling, it is reasonable IMO for others not to be able to appropriate and use however they like the naming label Indians - with whatever associations or marketing selling out they choose and with little care for the very proud nation of human beings inhabiting this land pre Western discovery.
Would seem very easy to understand looking at what the Cleveland BBC did previously in creating the Chief Wahoo mascot.

I don't get what people feel is such a hardship to give up, when you are offending people on the one hand, but could so easily remedy with having care over the language one uses.

BTW, my vote would have been for Spiders too.

Whither the Notre Dame Fighting Irish?

Well that’s very apparent since Indians are in India and Native Americans are labeled as Indians because some chucklehead got his navigation all wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

.:D

“Cancel culture” is the people that stormed the Capitol on January 6th right? To void an election in service to one person who doesn’t care about them one way or the other?

Just want to make sure I understand what “cancel culture” is on here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Interesting piece on the evolution/different meanings of the phrase.

https://www.vox.com/22384308/cancel-...ability-debate

I need to stick to the cards.
People are A holes.

Which is probably why there's no statues of George Washington in London.

"Treason doth never prosper, what's the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it Treason."

When you win, it's not treason :)

Maybe what the Cleveland BBC could have done was to check with people from India then to see if they had an issue with their nationality being used as the name for a professional sports team, and if not, just dump any association with the Chief Wahoo mascot or anything related to native Americans and simply declare from now on the Cleveland Indians moniker had nothing to do with native Americans anymore. As someone else pointed out, not all ethnic or other groups have an objection to the use of their name like that. At least I've never heard of anyone complaing about the Fighting Irish, Celtics, or the Vikings, among others.

Most years, it's over by June 1st.

Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week. Don't forget to tip the waitstaff!

The cleveland hugs

Maybe it's active spellcheck at work but if you were indeed top of your class I would assume that you'd spell guerilla correctly...

Well, the Cleveland BBC can do as they see fit. Free market and all. They also dumped Chief Wahoo ~3 years ago.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wokeism Demolition Night at "Progressive" Field please

You should probably avail yourself of the link I helpfully put at the beginning of that paragraph.

Anybody have a guess on the over/under for the duration of this thread?

Now THAT I would pay tickets for and attend.

+1

Saying that white people have privilege doesn't mean that they don't suffer, or that they can't be oppressed for other characteristics like sexuality, sex, being transgender, etc. It just means that they have privilege relative to people who aren't white.

For example, African-Americans have "the talk" with their kids, no matter how privileged they might be in other ways. Barack Obama had it with his kids. If you are black, the criminal justice system is biased against you, all the way from being profiled to the death penalty. There's lots of evidence to support this. The fact that I am at virtually no risk of being killed in an interaction with the police is a form of privilege.

Or, on a more trivial note, swim caps designed for natural black hair were banned for the Olympics because FINA ruled that no athletes need “caps of such size” and the caps don’t follow “the natural form of the head”. This doesn't happen if you're white, because the decision about what kind of swim caps are appropriately sized or what "the natural form of the head" is are made by white people.

Also it turns out that there's research on racism in baseball card collecting:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...90952401000286

I just want to be clear that I'm not trying to accuse anyone of anything, I'm just trying to provide an explanation. This has sort of become a political thread, since the question of the extent of racism in America has always been a political one, but I am trying to be civil and I think it's an important discussion to have.

Ted Clayton