Palisades Tahoe

[KustyTheKlown]

lol. cool.

 

[NYDB]

not surprising

 

[urungus]

That's complete horse**** based on (very) modern revisionist thinking.

For starters, the former two are, in fact, being called "offensive" by self-righteous morons (almost exclusively WHITE liberals) who just want to be perceived as SJW. So while I agree with you, it's intellectually dishonest to pretend the counterfactual is the case.

But as for the latter two, nobody ever meant anything pejorative with the usage of either terms, which is the true litmus test of "derogatory" vernacular. To disagree with that is to be intellectually dishonest for the sake of desperately desiring to appear righteous. The, "Cleveland Indians" is a hate slur? Really? No, go **** yourself, I'm not going to fall-in-line and be bullied into pretending that a lie is the truth.

Opinion: Dear white people, stop telling Native Americans like me whether we're offended by the Washington Redskins

My tribe doesn’t identify as 'redskins' – this is a derogatory term coined by colonialists often historically used interchangeably with 'savages'

www.independent.co.uk

 

[ThatGuy]

That's a harsh opinion based on a facile understanding of history, as well as the undeniable truth that to the victors go the spoils. Obviously Lee was on the wrong side of history when in came to slavery. But in Lee's mind, the south was being oppressed, and as such had a right to separate from the north. This is not the mindset of a "traitor". Obviously you disagree, so it saddens me to learn that you believe George Washington, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, George Mason, and countless others were "traitors", as I personally believe them to have been great men who led a great cause to separate from the British Empire.

Point about the founding fathers is true but Robert E. Lee was definitely a traitor to the USA. He had a chance to join the Union Army and chose his own state instead. Therefore he was a traitor to America but not Virginia if we are being pedantic. If we want to look at him on a personal level or at his military achievements that is one thing, he was undeniably a great tactician and seemed to be a halfway decent person caught up in the evils of slavery. Another thing to take into account is after the Civil War we had to come back together as a nation so history was written in a way to make certain Southerners tragic heroes. The same thing happened to the Emperor of Japan after WW2.
As for Indians and Redskins, I’d say redskin is definitely a derogatory term and Indian is not. Though I try to say Native American out of respect. But times and vernacular language change so what we see as “politically correct” now may not be in 20 years anyway, so changing words that offend is a losing game.

 

[PAabe]

I was under the belief that most people to whom it applies prefer "American Indian" or "Indian" over "Native American" (if they do have a preference) but that also is something that would vary person to person and I also I'm not one myself so I probably shouldn't be talking

Regarding history I believe it is important to consider the context and to consider how we ourselves could have acted given the same background/upbringing, situation, and circumstances of birth before judging anyone

 

[jimmywilson69]

That's probably note "woke" enough for some people, but probably a good take.

 

[jimk]

Point about the founding fathers is true but Robert E. Lee was definitely a traitor to the USA. He had a chance to join the Union Army and chose his own state instead. Therefore he was a traitor to America but not Virginia if we are being pedantic. If we want to look at him on a personal level or at his military achievements that is one thing, he was undeniably a great tactician and seemed to be a halfway decent person caught up in the evils of slavery. Another thing to take into account is after the Civil War we had to come back together as a nation so history was written in a way to make certain Southerners tragic heroes. The same thing happened to the Emperor of Japan after WW2.
As for Indians and Redskins, I’d say redskin is definitely a derogatory term and Indian is not. Though I try to say Native American out of respect. But times and vernacular language change so what we see as “politically correct” now may not be in 20 years anyway, so changing words that offend is a losing game.

I was under the belief that most people to whom it applies prefer "American Indian" or "Indian" over "Native American" (if they do have a preference) but that also is something that would vary person to person and I also I'm not one myself so I probably shouldn't be talking

Regarding history I believe it is important to consider the context and to consider how we ourselves could have acted given the same background/upbringing, situation, and circumstances of birth before judging anyone

If I recall from my school days history classes (I was a history minor in college), the early citizens of the USA placed a very high value on states rights, self-determination, and state-autonomy. Over the subsequent 200+ years of our union the central government has acquired more power and control, for better or worse. I believe Robert E. Lee grew up in a time/context in America where there was a much or more loyalty to state as to country.

 

[BenedictGomez]

If I recall from my school days history classes (I was a history minor in college), the early citizens of the USA placed a very high value on states rights, self-determination, and state-autonomy. Over the subsequent 200+ years of our union the central government has acquired more power and control, for better or worse. I believe Robert E. Lee grew up in a time/context in America where there was a much or more loyalty to state as to country.

This is undoubtedly true. Recall there was some serious resistance in our founding to a United States with a strong Federal Government, as opposed to essentially a more loose confederation of individual states sharing some services (e.g. defense).

And ignoring the Civil War specifically, why shouldn't a state be allowed to secede if its citizens wish? If tomorrow a preponderance of California citizens meeting some predefined state constitution threshold number voted, and decided The United States is too conservative, why shouldn't they be allowed to leave? Or conversely, Idaho doing the same thinking The United States too liberal. I have doubts as to what "freedom" means if laws must be made to keep people in.

 

[urungus]

And ignoring the Civil War specifically, why shouldn't a state be allowed to secede if its citizens wish? If tomorrow a preponderance of California citizens meeting some predefined state constitution threshold number voted, and decided The United States is too conservative, why shouldn't they be allowed to leave? Or conversely, Idaho doing the same thinking The United States too liberal. I have doubts as to what "freedom" means if laws must be made to keep people in.

What if only part of California wanted to secede (eg “Jefferson” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_(proposed_Pacific_state) ) ? Or just one city ? Or even a single homeowner ? Should they all be allowed to form their own countries in the name of “freedom” ?

 

[BenedictGomez]

What if only part of California wanted to secede (eg “Jefferson” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_(proposed_Pacific_state) ) ? Or just one city ? Or even a single homeowner ? Should they all be allowed to form their own countries in the name of “freedom” ?

Not likely; because every entity you mentioned is legally bound under its respective state constitution. Now if California amended its constitution (or has done so) to allow that to happen I suppose there'd be an argument, though it would be tough because it needs Congressional approval as well.

 

[Smellytele]

Killington wanted to succeed from Vermont to NH a few years back. Really was trying to get VT/county to lower their tax burden

 

[machski]

Pittsburgh, NH wanted to secede from the US. Still has its free republic name all over the place up there too.

 

[thebigo]

The NH legislature has proposed consideration of the following amendment during the next session. By statue it will be placed on the 2022 ballot if 60% of the legislature approves.

"New Hampshire peaceably declares independence from the United States and immediately proceeds as a sovereign nation. All other references to the United States in this constitution, state statutes, and regulations are nullified."

 

[thetrailboss]

What if only part of California wanted to secede (eg “Jefferson” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_(proposed_Pacific_state) ) ? Or just one city ? Or even a single homeowner ? Should they all be allowed to form their own countries in the name of “freedom” ?

I think that part of Oregon also wants to join this new state of "Jefferson." I went to Klamath Falls two years ago for work and there were signs everywhere urging folks to support the "State of Jefferson" petition.

 

[dblskifanatic]

I was under the belief that most people to whom it applies prefer "American Indian" or "Indian" over "Native American" (if they do have a preference) but that also is something that would vary person to person and I also I'm not one myself so I probably shouldn't be talking

Regarding history I believe it is important to consider the context and to consider how we ourselves could have acted given the same background/upbringing, situation, and circumstances of birth before judging anyone

I am 30% Native American (Algonquin) and when I lived in Colorado I had Navajo friends and they all used Native American. I think people over think this topic. In Colorado they passed a bill to remove names of schools that had tribe name and mascots and Native American Guardian's Association (note the name of this association) have filed a lawsuit. They would rather have the names on the schools to help teach history of the proud nations.

Civil rights lawsuit to be filed against Colorado over passage of Native American mascot bill

A civil rights lawsuit is expected to be filed against Colorado following the passage of SB 21-116 also known as the “Prohibit American Indian Mascots” bill.

www.koaa.com

 

[BenedictGomez]

I am 30% Native American (Algonquin) and when I lived in Colorado I had Navajo friends and they all used Native American. I think people over think this topic. In Colorado they passed a bill to remove names of schools that had tribe name and mascots and Native American Guardian's Association (note the name of this association) have filed a lawsuit. They would rather have the names on the schools to help teach history of the proud nations.

If by "people", you mean, "white liberals", then yes.

 

[PAabe]

Some people get mad at like the Boy Scouts for using native american names for different things and stories in ceremonies but you sadly don't really see that many things about them anymore.

And not saying Westerns always have the most accurate representation but you dont see as much Western-genre media either.

Native Americans are an interesting and very important part of the Americas and you just dont really hear about them as much at least partially because there are concerns of being politically incorrect.

 

[Edd]

Some people get mad at like the Boy Scouts for using native american names for different things and stories in ceremonies but you sadly don't really see that many things about them anymore.

And not saying Westerns always have the most accurate representation but you dont see as much Western-genre media either.

Native Americans are an interesting and very important part of the Americas and you just dont really hear about them as much at least partially because there are concerns of being politically incorrect.

There's a couple of new shows spotlighting native Americans in the modern day: Rutherford Falls on Peacock and Reservation Dogs on FX/Hulu. RF is a more standard sitcom. RD is a wild, inventive show, well worth a watch..

 

[ThatGuy]

Reservation Dogs is a great show.