Jump to content

Cleveland Guardians Thread: CHEAP OWNERSHIP = No Hitting

malibuspeedrace

By malibuspeedrace
in Cleveland Browns

 Share

Recommended Posts

carl_sjunior

carl_sjunior

Posted
Posted
On 7/29/2021 at 4:11 PM, MWil23 said:

It wasn’t always Indians. Ironically, they named the team that after a (now called) Native American on the team 100+ years ago to honor him in a Jim Crow era. Indian isn't a slur; it’s officially American Indians.

You want to argue Chief Wahoo, great.

You want to argue Native Americans as mascots after we effectively committed national genocide, great.

You want to ignore the history behind it, do some research instead of assuming the worst. The name change intention was actually super great and noble. Societal pressure and standards for the meaning have drastically changed since then. This is revisionist history.

the only thing about that last paragraph is that it ignores that the player in question was mistreated, that people heckled him by making loud native american war cries, and that it wasn't in honor of him, as so much as we were literally inspired to make our team name change by the braves. they went from worst to first and won the world series and the year after we named our team the Indians. mocking the process and hoping for similar success. 

louis sockalexis wasn't even on the team anymore. he died years before the name change. since he was an alcoholic, he was mocked and sportswriters of the day said it was his 'native weakness', and they also mocked a group from his tribe that showed up wo watch one of his games. if people think that jackie robinson endured disgusting treatment, how do you think it went for the native american guy FIFTY YEARS EARLY?!  and the fact that i've seen countless posts like yours where you say things like: 

'You want to ignore the history behind it, do some research instead of assuming the worst. The name change intention was actually super great and noble. Societal pressure and standards for the meaning have drastically changed since then. This is revisionist history.

But yet somehow no one ever seems to know his name in any of these posts, but somehow also know that the team was named in an HONORABLE AND SUPER NOBLE WAY, is funny. if it's so great of a way to honor him, why isn't it a unique calling to his attributes as an individual, instead of a blanket name about his heritage? this dude was literally nicknamed 'deerfoot on the diamond' and from a tribe of penobscot indians, and his grandfather was the the CHIEF OF THE BEAR TRIBE....

they could have picked anything about him and it would have been halfway honorable but they did the most basic name that doesn't describe him at all. it's literally just a label. 

the only correct thing in your post is that everything is revisionist history. including everything you posted that preceded that sentence. 

the most honorable, noble thing done for the guy is having the new plaque in heritage park at the stadium. at least it has HIS NAME and at least, ya'know, a little bit about him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AkronsWitness

AkronsWitness

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, carl_sjunior said:

the only thing about that last paragraph is that it ignores that the player in question was mistreated, that people heckled him by making loud native american war cries, and that it wasn't in honor of him, as so much as we were literally inspired to make our team name change by the braves. they went from worst to first and won the world series and the year after we named our team the Indians. mocking the process and hoping for similar success. 

louis sockalexis wasn't even on the team anymore. he died years before the name change. since he was an alcoholic, he was mocked and sportswriters of the day said it was his 'native weakness', and they also mocked a group from his tribe that showed up wo watch one of his games. if people think that jackie robinson endured disgusting treatment, how do you think it went for the native american guy FIFTY YEARS EARLY?!  and the fact that i've seen countless posts like yours where you say things like: 

'You want to ignore the history behind it, do some research instead of assuming the worst. The name change intention was actually super great and noble. Societal pressure and standards for the meaning have drastically changed since then. This is revisionist history.

But yet somehow no one ever seems to know his name in any of these posts, but somehow also know that the team was named in an HONORABLE AND SUPER NOBLE WAY, is funny. if it's so great of a way to honor him, why isn't it a unique calling to his attributes as an individual, instead of a blanket name about his heritage? this dude was literally nicknamed 'deerfoot on the diamond' and from a tribe of penobscot indians, and his grandfather was the the CHIEF OF THE BEAR TRIBE....

they could have picked anything about him and it would have been halfway honorable but they did the most basic name that doesn't describe him at all. it's literally just a label. 

the only correct thing in your post is that everything is revisionist history. including everything you posted that preceded that sentence. 

the most honorable, noble thing done for the guy is having the new plaque in heritage park at the stadium. at least it has HIS NAME and at least, ya'know, a little bit about him. 

We should have just switched to the Cleveland Tecumseh's or Cleveland Crazy Horses and called it a day.

I know this isnt exactly what you were referring to--but my beef with the entire thing is not renaming the team after something native american, yet noble. I am of firm belief Native American history is being wiped off the face of the earth. Much like the European settlers tried to do with them when they arrived here. Schools dont teach it and when they do, they teach it incorrectly because our education system is beyond broken.

Their story and their history needs to be preserved--whats left of it that is..

1) Not going and talking to Native leaders and communities to figure this out was lazy and stupid.

2) Not figuring out a way to keep the native american theme, but doing so in a more respectful manner is doing them a disservice and is apart of the problem.

Having something Native as a mascot is not putting them down or making light of a situation. All a mascot is is essentially a billboard and free advertising for a idea or topic. We have the Yankees, why does nobody care about that?

The Indians could have worked with Native American tribes/leaders/communities and almost let THEM pick what they want the team to be called so they can feel good about it and prideful of it all while still preserving the Native American theme.

The Guardians of Traffic can kick rocks.

Edited by AkronsWitness
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MWil23

MWil23

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, carl_sjunior said:

the only thing about that last paragraph is that it ignores that the player in question was mistreated, that people heckled him by making loud native american war cries, and that it wasn't in honor of him, as so much as we were literally inspired to make our team name change by the braves. they went from worst to first and won the world series and the year after we named our team the Indians. mocking the process and hoping for similar success. 

louis sockalexis wasn't even on the team anymore. he died years before the name change. since he was an alcoholic, he was mocked and sportswriters of the day said it was his 'native weakness', and they also mocked a group from his tribe that showed up wo watch one of his games. if people think that jackie robinson endured disgusting treatment, how do you think it went for the native american guy FIFTY YEARS EARLY?!  and the fact that i've seen countless posts like yours where you say things like: 

'You want to ignore the history behind it, do some research instead of assuming the worst. The name change intention was actually super great and noble. Societal pressure and standards for the meaning have drastically changed since then. This is revisionist history.

But yet somehow no one ever seems to know his name in any of these posts, but somehow also know that the team was named in an HONORABLE AND SUPER NOBLE WAY, is funny. if it's so great of a way to honor him, why isn't it a unique calling to his attributes as an individual, instead of a blanket name about his heritage? this dude was literally nicknamed 'deerfoot on the diamond' and from a tribe of penobscot indians, and his grandfather was the the CHIEF OF THE BEAR TRIBE....

they could have picked anything about him and it would have been halfway honorable but they did the most basic name that doesn't describe him at all. it's literally just a label. 

the only correct thing in your post is that everything is revisionist history. including everything you posted that preceded that sentence. 

the most honorable, noble thing done for the guy is having the new plaque in heritage park at the stadium. at least it has HIS NAME and at least, ya'know, a little bit about him. 

If you take this guy’s OPINION/and guesswork, sure. It’s a complicated gray area and outright wrong  if you use this source:

https://bangordailynews.com/2020/12/18/news/bangor/this-penobscot-baseball-player-inspired-the-cleveland-indians-name-for-all-the-wrong-reasons/
 

I could also point to several primary sources and family who would state the opposite of the above editor you cited.

 I’m actually pretty informed on this and heard both guys speak. I’ll take the official tribe’s stance from 2000-2004 and his family, as opposed to a guy from Maine 100+ years later.

Then again, I wasn’t there, so I don’t know how his teammates and hometown fans treated him. Undoubtedly he was a victim of racism on various levels.

Edited by MWil23
Link to comment
Share on other sites
carl_sjunior

carl_sjunior

Posted
Posted

And I didn't mean to attack anyone, I just wanted to stress that there is conflicting information out there on this subject and some common sense reasoning and deduction skills can lead us to understand that the name wasn't really the honor they said it was, at least not in the way that it was. And we know just from our own sociological issues with race and revisionism with our history today that this player was at the expense of some really disgusting treatment. They seem to have finally found a place where they have taken steps to honor Louis individually. 

It's just a name, and the new logo sucks. The team is owned by the same people. It doesn't change much for us. However, it bothers me that some people are convinced that by changing the name, we aren't 'honoring' him anymore, when really, it's just that we have found a better and more appropriate way of honoring him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...