Indians/Guardians and the Topps History Police

[steve B]

Originally Posted by todeen

Personally, I'm glad they changed the name of the Indians and Redskins. And how they incorporate team names on cards is unimportant when compared to belittling an entire population of US Citizens. MLB took far too long to do what was right; it should have happened decades ago.

If Topps wants to just state Cleveland on the back of a card, no one is going to be confused. Records and histories move with franchises. This is nothing different.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

I have mixed feelings about it.
In some ways it's further erasing that population of American citizens (who in some ways are citizens of two nations (or more) on the same land. *

As one chief put it several years ago
"The day a sports team name is my peoples biggest problem will be a very happy day. "(may have the exact quote wrong, but it's pretty close)
------------------------

* In CT, the state couldn't prevent foxwoods casino because it was on land federally recognized as belonging to a tribe. As such it was not US territory!
The independent governor was very anti gambling. What he did do was use a very little used piece of the CT constitution that said he could make a treaty with a foreign nation. So he did, granting the tribe exclusive rights to have slot machines in CT for something like 5 million. The legislature wouldn't act because they had a defecit, and it was a bit of money. And just before the election the tribe publicly said they'd had a much better than expected year and gifted the state something like 40 million as a thank you for the treaty that effectively kept other casinos out of the state.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by steve B

I have mixed feelings about it.

In some ways it's further erasing that population of American citizens (who in some ways are citizens of two nations (or more) on the same land. *



As one chief put it several years ago

"The day a sports team name is my peoples biggest problem will be a very happy day. "(may have the exact quote wrong, but it's pretty close)

------------------------



* In CT, the state couldn't prevent foxwoods casino because it was on land federally recognized as belonging to a tribe. As such it was not US territory!

The independent governor was very anti gambling. What he did do was use a very little used piece of the CT constitution that said he could make a treaty with a foreign nation. So he did, granting the tribe exclusive rights to have slot machines in CT for something like 5 million. The legislature wouldn't act because they had a defecit, and it was a bit of money. And just before the election the tribe publicly said they'd had a much better than expected year and gifted the state something like 40 million as a thank you for the treaty that effectively kept other casinos out of the state.

About Native casinos, WA State (where I live) and ID State have had them for a long time! We have 5 within an hour of Spokane...or possibly more.

Our regional multi-state tribes recently co-sponsored a bill that ended the use of tribal mascots in our high schools. The only way to keep a mascot was to regain tribal authorization. Two schools with highly successful sports programs (multi national championships within the last decade - North Central HS in Spokane, and Kamiakin HS in Kennewick) failed to gain reauthorization. So maybe it's a regional thing. I know that ND Natives wanted to maintain their NCAA mascot but could not.

Our local MiLB team (Spokane Indians) has a partnership with our local tribe - the Spokane Tribe - and this partnership has been highlighted by Copperstown HOF. They are owned by George Brett and his brother. They also own the local WHL hockey team, the Spokane Chiefs. Our MiLB mascots are a salmon and a dinosaur. The have uniforms written in Salish. They have a museum walk in the stadium. They donate money to tribal causes - like saving local salmon populations.

When I think of the Cleveland Indians in comparison with my MiLB team they failed at promoting and respecting Native peoples.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

[JustinD]

My first wife was native Chippewa, and as such my son is native and a member of the tribe as well. I can certainly see the benefit of reaching out to local tribes to establish relationships but not erasing Indian imagery in some misguided white savior move. I spent his childhood at tribal events to build his knowledge of culture with powwows and celebrating the traditions.

His tribe has a partnership with Central Michigan College as they are the Chippewas. I honestly have never personally heard anyone at the tribe discuss any concerns with mascots other than this older article here supporting them used positively when asked -

https://www.mlive.com/news/bay-city/...w_chippew.html

As an addendum to this article, the local school district was indeed forced to change their Warrior logo to the chagrin of the tribe in the end that took pride in that representation. The federal government threatened to withhold school funding for the mascot that they deemed offensive on behalf of the tribe who were financially donating to the sports program to support the mascot.

What I found shocking was this quote in a similar article on the mascot forced change from a press release by the Michigan Department of Civil Rights:

stated a press release from MDCR. “Continued use of American Indian mascots, names, nicknames, logos, slogans, chants and/or other imagery creates a hostile environment and denies equal rights to all current and future American Indian students and must therefore cease. ... Because there is now, for the first time, an objective showing that actual harm is resulting and that it disparately falls on American Indian students, there is no longer any need to question what the school, or what the ‘reasonable American Indian’ thinks about the mascot.”

Yep, that just shut down any American Indian that would disagree with their purity plan by disavowing their opinion because any “reasonable American Indian” would of course agree with them.

[packs]

Am I the only one who finds it ironic when people say things like "changing the team name erases Native American culture".

Erasing Native American culture has been government sanctioned since there was a government to put those policies into place. And Native American culture isn't derived from professional sports teams either. There are much more meaningful ways of protecting the culture.

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by packs

Am I the only one who finds it ironic when people say things like "changing the team name erases Native American culture".

Erasing Native American culture has been government sanctioned since there was a government to put those policies into place. And Native American culture isn't derived from professional sports teams either. There are much more meaningful ways of protecting the culture.

Who are you quoting?

[packs]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Who are you quoting?

A common argument put forward by people who are generally against changing the names of teams.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Who are you quoting?

Originally Posted by packs

A common argument put forward by people who are generally against changing the names of teams.

Is it possible that some Tribes take pride in a local team with a Native American team name? Yes. I know tribes in North Dakota were supportive of their NCAA FCS team winning football championships. They were disappointed when NDSU had to become the Buffalos. And the Spokane Indians are an amazing extension of the local tribe for MiLB. Many in the local tribe would be disappointed if the team name changed.

But are there other tribes that hate team names like Savages and caricatures like Chief Wahoo? Yes. Those are racist stereotypes that don't do anything positive or uplifting.

We just need to remember that region to region, and tribe to tribe, Native American opinions about mascots change on how they are represented. And that's okay.

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by packs

A common argument put forward by people who are generally against changing the names of teams.

Ok apologies, I took it as a misrepresentation of what I was saying. Happy I asked.

I was only discussing my experiences living in a mixed family. I am sure they are different than many and assume that everyone will and should have many other thoughts, beliefs, and opinions.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by JustinD

My first wife was native Chippewa, and as such my son is native and a member of the tribe as well. I can certainly see the benefit of reaching out to local tribes to establish relationships but not erasing Indian imagery in some misguided white savior move. I spent his childhood at tribal events to build his knowledge of culture with powwows and celebrating the traditions.

Originally Posted by packs

Am I the only one who finds it ironic when people say things like "changing the team name erases Native American culture".

Erasing Native American culture has been government sanctioned since there was a government to put those policies into place. Advocates for protecting the culture should be concerned with protections outside of professional sports names. There's a lot more good that can be done if you're interested in getting involved.

If you, your wife, or son are interested in Native American history classes, I found these classes on Native American history to be really interesting. I took these to renew my teaching certificate in WA State. They try to be a survey of history across the entire US; but in each hour they zoom in on a particular story. They are $40 each, each including something like 10-15 hours of college professor seminars. They are produced by Gilder Lehrman which works closely with the AP US History program. The Case Studies is taught by a professor at Dartmouth, and the Recasting one is taught by a Native American professor at Yale. I liked the Case Studies one better - I thought the professor was a bit more organized - but they are both good. The last two/three hours in each course try to focus on 20th century changes that try to explain current lobbying by tribes around the country. The professors also make distinctions how tribes in the Northeast have a very different relationship with state governments than tribes in the Midwest, or Tribes in the West. They also try to discuss the ebb and flow of support or lack of support by the Supreme Court. Each class also lightly covers the Civil Rights Era activism by Native Americans - such as occupying Alcatraz.

Case Studies: https://www.gilderlehrman.org/node/500051/spc

Recasting: https://www.gilderlehrman.org/node/500052/spc