The Mopologists Celebrate the 4th of July

[_Doctor Scratch]

I think that, from where most of us are sitting, July 4, 2020 was an American holiday that was all about division. You had Trump at Mt. Rushmore, and then disregarding health officials' advice by having large gatherings where masks were optional. And meanwhile, you had public officials elsewhere canceling fireworks and grimly reporting that their ICU capacity was being pushed to the breaking point. Meanwhile, average Americans continue to struggle with the concept of being cooped up. It may be that stir-craziness is setting in.

So, what were the Mopologists up to? Well, for one thing, there was a pretty glaring instance of racial tokenism on "SeN." Celebrating holidays means that the Mopologists don't have to be on their best behavior anymore, I guess: they can cut loose and do the morally crappy things that they wish they could do 24/7. In any event, just look at Dr. Peterson's opening salvo here:

With his permission, I again share a thought-provoking Facebook entry posted by a friend, neighbor, and fellow Interpreter Foundation volunteer:

“Please Keep the Name Redskins” by Tom Pittman
I am Native American. I am a member of the Tlingit tribe of Southeast Alaska. I am of the Raven moiety, and of the T’akdeintaan (Sea Pigeon) clan. My Tlingit name is Koohook. My mother raised me in the ways of our people: I harvested herring eggs, fished, hunted, wore regalia, danced, sang, ate Tlingit foods, and learned what my mom called “Native values”.

(and yes: Dr. Peterson's actually colored Pittman's text red.)

So, think about this. Or, really, you don't have to, because it's obvious what the train of thought was, and yet the lack of self-reflection that we've come to expect is still in full effect. "With his permission," DCP says. So, he (i.e., DCP) saw this on Facebook; sees that Pittman is Native American, and then actually reaches out to him and asks for permission to reprint this item on 'SeN.'" If this isn't tokenism, then I don't know what is. DCP has shown zero interest in Native Americans or Native American issues elsewhere on his blog, and in fact, he openly lets Midgley say pretty awful things about indigenous peoples--including the Maori, and also including Midgley's dismissive attacks on Dr. LOD. DCP probably assumed that he could quote Pittman's remark and use it to (a) score a political point, and (b) make it seem as if he cares about non-white viewpoints. But at the end of the day, it's clear what he cares about:

Just to put this in perspective:
Although I’m not opposed watching part of an occasional football game, I’m far and away not much of a serious football and I’m definitely not particular fan of the NFL. In other words, the names of NFL teams aren’t high on my list of issues. I don’t really have a dog in this fight. But I like accurate history, and I think that Tom’s perspective is worth hearing.

Right. This is a "liberal issue"; it's a race-related issue, and if the "rabble" get their way, then the name will be changed. As he says, "I'm definitely not particular [sic] fan of the NFL" and "I don't really have a dog in this fight" (interesting choice of words, there). If that's the case, then why post? And why prop the whole thing up with this Native American man's thoughts? DCP should butt out if this isn't his fight. He claims that he cares about "accurate history," but since when has this ever been an issue of "accurate history"? It's an issue of what the largely white ownership of the Redskins wants to do vis-a-vis PR, versus whether anyone cares what actual Native American's think, and how much of a say they get to have in how Native people get represented in public: that's Pittman's basic point, which sails right over DCP's head.

But, no, there are points to be scored, so we get this shameful tokenistic nonsense on the Fourth of July.

[_Philo Sofee]

I have serious doubts Peterson will even understand you post. I'll bet you 116 lost golden plates he won't. I predict personal persecution victim complex in 3... 2... 1...

[_Dr LOD]

This is the usual way White people go about things like this. Go find an individual that agrees with you, and then elevate them to a chief. It is very easy in this case because this guy thinks he is a Lamanite still.

Here is a pretty extensive list on actual tribal groups who are against the name.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... tes#Tribes

[_Lemmie]

Further thoughts from SeN on the 4th...this time around he assumes there are no Native Americans?

The United States of America didn’t simply grow organically out of shared language and kinship on the basis of ancient and medieval foundations, the way England and France and many other nations have. From America’s earliest days, it has been a nation of immigrants.

There was a France long before the current Fifth Republic. Egypt has existed since its unification under Menes or Narmer around 3150 BC. The United States of America, by contrast, came into being on 4 July 1776, with the signing of the Declaration of Independence:

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... -2020.html

The Reverend makes an excellent point:

The genocide against First Nations peoples and the theft of their land are crimes that cry out for justice. We keep repeating the same crimes over and over again. I am at a loss for how we move forward when most white people don't even acknowledge the problem.

[_Dr LOD]

The United States of America didn’t simply grow organically out of shared language and kinship on the basis of ancient and medieval foundations, the way England and France and many other nations have. From America’s earliest days, it has been a nation of immigrants, genocidal conquest, began by European nations and continued after its creation as a nation

Fixed it.

[_Dr LOD]

I just looked through the comments section of this post. Poor Tom Pittman, He is having to wade through the village idiot John P Lambert, in addition Kiwi57 and Chris 365 interjecting their stupidity and politics into the conversation.

If I was Pittman I would be walking away from that experience shaking my head. Someday he will realize that he as a Lamanite is just a mascot for the LDS church in the same way someone dressed up as a "redskin chief" is on NFL game day.

Here are my favorites: with my commentary in green.

From Chris 365 http://disq.us/p/2acypil
Modernity has made certain lifestyles difficult. My friends in the Wyandotte Nation in Oklahoma are moving on generally much better than my friends in the Navajo Nation in Arizona. But what it means to be a Navajo is increasingly difficult to live when you have car payments, repair bills, utilities, etc. that need paying.
Modernity was foisted on a group of people that didn't technologically evolve out of it -- it's not that they aren't "ready" for it, but their cultural heritage never had a chance to adapt to these changes like they would have if technology was developed within and they are trying to live with their feet in both worlds, surrounded by many of the easy vices. Like liquor? Come on you meant to say it after all us Indians are drunk.

John Pack Lambert
http://disq.us/p/2aesp11

Have you read the statements of Spencer W. Kimball about the Native Americans and their destiny? Yes that we will turn albino. He had some very strong stuff to say, and had a clear vision.
.........
Since President Kimball's time the Church has not pushed as hard on Native American issues (because science made the past a little awakward especially DNA), but to be fair the end of the Indian Placment Program was complex and long, and it was disliked by many and was clearly a beneficial program for its time but involved too much disruption to families especially to children too young to be justified forever (it had many of the same negative end results as the boarding schools, by erasing culture)
Some days I wish we could have something similar for African-American member teenagers to get them out of truly toxic settings in inner cities like Detroit. Too many of the youth in my branch end up pregnant or incarcertated before they even finish high school, and we have only once seen an inner city youth go on a mission from my branch. Maybe we need stronger homes, and we need more father role models and not single parent member mothers, but it just feels like the homes can only provide so much, and a branch with an anemic youth program because of so few youth just is not in all cases providing enough. I really feel we need to get some of these youth out of a city that is truly toxic, and wish we could send them out at age 12 or 13.

Personally I think they should change their name to the Washington Pamunkey's and pay the Pamunkey's a royalty for the tribe name use. Too many people do not realize there have been any Native Americans in Virginia since Rebecca Rolfe (a.k.a. Pocahontas) died.

[_Lemmie]

Modernity was foisted on a group of people that didn't technologically evolve out of it -- it's not that they aren't "ready" for it, but their cultural heritage never had a chance to adapt to these changes like they would have if technology was developed within...

So...only people born in Detroit can drive a stick shift? The lack of logic here is mind boggling.

[_I have a question]

How many Native Americans form part of the Washington Redskins set up? I'm guessing not many.

If I may make a recommendation that will negate any necessity to change their branding - only employ Native Americans in the team, in the backroom staff, in the management, in the catering and hospitality etc. Make the Washington Redskins a torch for the people who were the original founding fathers of the continent upon which American Football is now played, a representation and remembrance of the peoples from whom the land was stolen.

Mind you, that kind of thinking would cause all sorts of problems for the Miami Dolphins...

In a more serious frame of mind...

Redskin is a slang term for Native Americans in the United States and First Nations in Canada. The term "redskin" underwent pejoration through the 19th to early 20th centuries[1] and in contemporary dictionaries of American English it is labeled "usually offensive",[2] "disparaging",[3][4] "insulting",[5] or "taboo".[6]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redskin
...how has it not been changed already?

Although the term has almost disappeared from common use, it remains as the name of many sports teams, most prominently the Washington Redskins, and the term's meaning has been a significant point of controversy. After decades of opposition to the name of the team by Native Americans, major sponsors have responded to opponents of systemic racism in the wake of the killing of George Floyd. FedEx, Nike, and PepsiCo now advocate a change, and the NFL and management has announced that a process of review of the name will now begin.[8]

I would suggest that whilst they are waiting for the thinking to be redone, simply refer to themselves as Washington. They can do that straight away without any long process of contemplation.

[_I have a question]

Major US retailers Walmart and Target have dropped American football team Washington Redskins' merchandise from their websites.
Last week, the Washington DC-based team said it would be reviewing its name following demands from sponsors.
It has faced years of pressure over a name seen as offensive to Native Americans.
The decision to review the name comes amid a fresh focus on racism, sparked by worldwide protests.
Walmart said on Twitter that it would be "discontinuing the sale of items that reference the team's name and logo".
Target told CNN in a statement that they were "in the process of removing the items from our assortment".
The team agreed last week to reconsider its name after its major sponsor, FedEx, called for a name change. The request was made on behalf its own investors.
FedEx has naming rights to the Redskins' 82,000-seat stadium in Maryland.
Earlier this month, 87 investment firms and shareholders wrote to FedEx, along with fellow Redskins' sponsors Nike and PepsiCo, calling on the firms to sever ties with the team, according to trade publication AdWeek.
Dan Snyder, owner of the Washington Redskins, has resisted calls throughout the years to choose a new name.
However officials last Friday said they would "undergo a thorough review". This is a change from Mr Snyder's stance in 2013, when he vowed to never change the team's name.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53325382

It's sad that the teams owners are only considering a name change because it will cost them money not to do so. They aren't considering it because it's the right thing to do - were that the case they'd have changed it decades ago. They aren't considering it because racism is a massive problem and they want to support the drive for a more inclusive, less discriminatory society - were that the case they'd be already in the process of changing it before the threats of financial repercussions came pouring in.

They are only considering it because people are going to stop giving them money if they don't.

There's a lesson in there for Latter Day Saints who want to see changes in the way their Church is operated...

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I'll just leave this one here:

"DanielPeterson Mod > gemli • 12 hours ago

gemli: "Slavery is abhorrent because I am a human, and it is contrary to a human's well-being and autonomy."

Dowsin' Dan: Quite a number of humans over the centuries have believed that owning slaves enhanced their well-being and increased their autonomy.

gemli: " It is "evil" because you wouldn't want to be a slave, and neither would I."

Dowsin' Dan: I wouldn't want to be a mine worker, either. Or a short-order restaurant cook. Or an airport bootblack. Or a migrant field laborer. Perhaps you too wouldn't like to be. But does that make the existence of mine workers, short-order restaurant cooks, airport bootblacks, or migrant field laborers evil? What makes slavery wrong? It can't merely be your or my personal distaste for being a slave."

- Doc