Michael Stuart Kelly Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Jonathan,I agree with this for the underlying emotional attitude.In a city, everything you do comes from someone else.In the country, you may get a lot of things from other people, but you are also instructed and encouraged to get things from the earth.Come to think of it, if someone wanted to promote individualism to city dwellers in general, they should not only tell (and sell) the stories of rugged living, they should also promote activities and courses that make rugged living cool--not as a replacement for hi-tech living, but in addition to it. (I'm not a fan of communes.)I notice that as collectivism has gained ground, the Western has fallen to the wayside in Hollywood.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I notice that as collectivism has gained ground, the Western has fallen to the wayside in Hollywood.Exactly.I think that a big part of the popularity of Duck Dynasty is that it delivers some of what the old Hollywood Westerns used to. It's rugged and fun and not all citified and proper. It's a small bit of rebellion against the collective.J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 DD: "Let's go out and kill something." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 The term "Yankee" often carries pejorative overtones. As does "Canuck." I'm offended and outraged by them. Therefore they should no longer be used as team names.J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Nonsense. "Canuck" only carries pejoratives from teams who lose to them , like the innocuously named Tax Rapers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Same goes for Yankees, as the Charleston Confederates can attest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 The thing about sports leagues, it is fair fights between equallymatched peers. The conflict between "redskins" and , er, Washington was not that. In Canada we have no national team called the Manitoba Metis, for good reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Westerns. The memory of those stirs a hunger in my blood for my youth. Horsebackriding in the mountains around Creede, Colorado.I wonder if the people out there are still "Westerners" as I think of them, or if the pioneering spirit is being lost even among them.--In Atlas, I didn't like the idea of oil derricks spoiling the appearance of the Colorado mountains.--"Redskins" doesn't denigrate the skin color in any case. The name comes from seeing Indians as symbols of bravery. Probably someone's already said that. I haven't read the whole discussion.Ellen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 Westerns. The memory of those stirs a hunger in my blood for my youth. Horsebackriding in the mountains around Creede, Colorado.I wonder if the people out there are still "Westerners" as I think of them, or if the pioneering spirit is being lost even among them.--In Atlas, I didn't like the idea of oil derricks spoiling the appearance of the Colorado mountains.--"Redskins" doesn't denigrate the skin color in any case. The name comes from seeing Indians as symbols of bravery. Probably someone's already said that. I haven't read the whole discussion.EllenI always thought it was racial in the same sense white, black and brown were. I merely thought it was a way to tell brown American Indians apart from Mexicans or any other browns. Racial but not racist. Of course there were many racist movies with evil Redskins being savages. Redskins means a dynamic, assertive people, frankly, and is in contradistinction to American Indian tribes ruined by socialist paternalism following the genocidal 19th century Indian Wars.--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 Brant, I think your impressions are correct and though you would never admit it, fit in with my own theories.To adopt the admirable characteristics of a conquered people and claim them as own, trampling on history in the process, is all too easy as time goes on and the conquered people die out. After all there have been so many conquered, and so few winners, and history like philosophy, is about winners and losers... or maybe not yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 Brant, I think your impressions are correct and though you would never admit it, fit in with my own theories.To adopt the admirable characteristics of a conquered people and claim them as own, trampling on history in the process, is all too easy as time goes on and the conquered people die out. After all there have been so many conquered, and so few winners, and history like philosophy, is about winners and losers... or maybe not yet.Oh, the Americans who aren't Native Americans are being conquered in turn by the very thing that had been let loose by self-aggrandizing government: the poison of moocher food.--Brantconquer, conquered, conquer, conquered, slowly comes the dawn . . . human life goes on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syrakusos Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 Sometimes the conquerors disappear, or seem to. In 450 CE, the Huns were a serious power. After the death of Attila's son in battle, their empire evaporated and other tribes moved in. The people, of course, must have remained. Spain is another case in point, from the early Celts (family name Gallegos today), the Carthaginians (Barca-lona), and of course the Romans, from whom the German Vandals (Vandalusia) adopted the Latin language, and on and on ... India is probably the paradigm for a place that absorbs its conquerors. Last summer, I routinely waited at a bus stop each morning with three women from Uzbekistan. I got some books from the library. Their Turkic language has a ton of Arabic loanwords. Never having been there myself, the traveler's guides say that asking someone's religion is just a social nicety without consequence. The USSR generally was even better for its ethnic groups than was Canada ("a mosaic, not a melting pot"). Nonetheless, the tragedy of Georgians under Stalin is another one of those tallies in the sad story of humanity (or inhumanity, actually) that includes the Native Americans. Ultimately, I think that the problem is complex and no one narrative explains all events. For me, naming sports teams after tribes or ethnicities is just problematic on many levels. I agree that anything can be argued - how have the Blue Devils of Duke survived? - but this particular case is consequential and not mere sophistry.If the Native Americans actually had a place in our culture versus the Boston Celtics, New York Yankees, Tennessee Volunteers, and Dallas Cowboys, the question would not be contentious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 If the Native Americans actually had a place in our culture versus the Boston Celtics, New York Yankees, Tennessee Volunteers, and Dallas Cowboys, the question would not be contentious. Interesting observation. Their place respecting "our" place is mostly as a separate if not subjugated and conquered people. As that doesn't jibe with Americans general present-day view of themselves, they are ignored. African-Americans are a more difficult and contentious problem. No group of people was so damaged by the Great Society and its aftermath as they have been. That and "the war on drugs."--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Two members of Congress wrote a letter to the NFL commissioner about the Washington Redskins name (link). Two others cosponsor a bill to strip the NFL of its tax exempt status. A Forbes article notes the silliness (link). The NFL has lost money its last 2 years. This is about the NFL strictly speaking, which considers itself a trade association made up of and financed by its 32 member teams. NFL teams are not tax-exempt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francisco Ferrer Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 How about this? The Department of Defense gets no more money until it renames all of its helicopters which go by the title of Indian tribes (Apache, Comanche, Chinook etc). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 How about this? The Department of Defense gets no more money until it renames all of its helicopters which go by the title of Indian tribes (Apache, Comanche, Chinook etc).What is wrong with naming a war-bird after famous warrior clan? Would you object to Spartan or Amazon. Or how about Dervish and Berserker?The next time we send 300 whirly birds on an attack it would be perfectly proper to name them Spartans.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francisco Ferrer Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Some members of Congress believe there should be a price to pay for using the name of an Indian tribe. Why should tax-feeders be exempt from the same rule? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jules Troy Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 Hey leave the Edmonton Eskimos out of this that is my team! When I was a kid Dale Potter (#30) was my phys-Ed teacher! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 I didn't want to start a new thread for the following meme, so I found this one:How true...Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now