Beware - this troll is about to lob a doozy into the crowd....
In history, aggressors that win do not apologize nor do they pay reparations
Only aggressors who lose apologize and pay reparations.
Whether anyone likes it or not, the European settlers that came to the Americas won the battles with the Natives, and took their land. They own the land, and are the dominant population on this continent.
For 100+ years, the US government basically treated the Natives as prisoners of war, relocating them from tribal lands to barren, desert-like reservations in the West. Land that deprives them of the means of subsistence and viable economic development - lack of arable land, denying integration into towns and cities, etc.
I'm not saying it was a good policy, but when you're the loser in a battle, you get whatever treatment the winner forces on you - including being called names the winner deems appropriate...
In 1987, SCOTUS determined that the Federal and State governments could not infringe on the sovereignty of a tribe to offer gaming on reservations, especially in states which currently allowed gambling. In 1988, Congress enacted IGRA, allowing tribes to offer gambling under a Federal framework, and fulfilling the wish of the Reagan administration that the tribes become economically self-sufficient.
Let's not sugar-coat it - SCOTUS and Congress actions were not means of helping the tribes become economically self-sufficient. Instead, let's call the gambling revenues for what they really are - REPARATIONS...
REPARATIONS for winning
REPARATIONS for taking their land as the spoils of victory
REPARATIONS for the disparaging names used as enemy combatants (and prisoners of war)
REPARATIONS for relocating the tribes to enemy internments (aka reservations)
The US government basically got to wipe its hands free of its historical actions, while the "people" paid the reparations in the form of mindless, yet costly "entertainment".
A solution to the Redskins issue:
1. If they want to eliminate all "stereotypical" nicknames/logs/mascots from American sports, then they need to do the following:
a. Pay all costs incurred by the affected parties to change their nicknames/logos/mascots, legal fees, marketing costs (including rebranding expenditures), etc.
b. Repay the American people all the gaming revenue the tribes have received since 1988. As an example, Indian gaming revenue between 2003 and 2012 was approx. $244.7 B.
-or-
2. They do nothing and keep the status quo. Which means they get to keep running casinos and raking in $28B a year in revenue.
Pride (in being a historical loser) or money? You can one or the other. But not both.
Seems like a fair deal to me....
In history, aggressors that win do not apologize nor do they pay reparations
Only aggressors who lose apologize and pay reparations.
Whether anyone likes it or not, the European settlers that came to the Americas won the battles with the Natives, and took their land. They own the land, and are the dominant population on this continent.
For 100+ years, the US government basically treated the Natives as prisoners of war, relocating them from tribal lands to barren, desert-like reservations in the West. Land that deprives them of the means of subsistence and viable economic development - lack of arable land, denying integration into towns and cities, etc.
I'm not saying it was a good policy, but when you're the loser in a battle, you get whatever treatment the winner forces on you - including being called names the winner deems appropriate...
In 1987, SCOTUS determined that the Federal and State governments could not infringe on the sovereignty of a tribe to offer gaming on reservations, especially in states which currently allowed gambling. In 1988, Congress enacted IGRA, allowing tribes to offer gambling under a Federal framework, and fulfilling the wish of the Reagan administration that the tribes become economically self-sufficient.
Let's not sugar-coat it - SCOTUS and Congress actions were not means of helping the tribes become economically self-sufficient. Instead, let's call the gambling revenues for what they really are - REPARATIONS...
REPARATIONS for winning
REPARATIONS for taking their land as the spoils of victory
REPARATIONS for the disparaging names used as enemy combatants (and prisoners of war)
REPARATIONS for relocating the tribes to enemy internments (aka reservations)
The US government basically got to wipe its hands free of its historical actions, while the "people" paid the reparations in the form of mindless, yet costly "entertainment".
A solution to the Redskins issue:
1. If they want to eliminate all "stereotypical" nicknames/logs/mascots from American sports, then they need to do the following:
a. Pay all costs incurred by the affected parties to change their nicknames/logos/mascots, legal fees, marketing costs (including rebranding expenditures), etc.
b. Repay the American people all the gaming revenue the tribes have received since 1988. As an example, Indian gaming revenue between 2003 and 2012 was approx. $244.7 B.
-or-
2. They do nothing and keep the status quo. Which means they get to keep running casinos and raking in $28B a year in revenue.
Pride (in being a historical loser) or money? You can one or the other. But not both.
Seems like a fair deal to me....
