They call themselves Redskins at the native american high school I drove by years ago.

I guess the progressives haven't told them what is politically correct.

I can imagine John Oliver making the trek out there and telling them 'Bloody 'ell, you cahn't call yourselves Redskins! It's degrading!"

It's funny how, exactly like in this video where the characters are ignoring the native American's point, the commenters here are ignoring it too, focusing only on the Sterling story.

You're missing the forest for your own trees concerning these government agencies and how they are used by special interests, people-Lands declared federally-owned then 'managed' in this country have been historically for public use. According to the Sierra Club: "Public lands are used in the production of oil, gas, coal, hardrock minerals, timber, and livestock in addition to being used for roads, power and gas lines, and communication facilities just to mention a few. Likewise, the Public lands are an environmental treasure house for recreation and wildlife and scenic wonder from desert to seacoast, mountain top to prairie, grassland to forest -- a shared heritage for now and the future."

Most generational ranchers don't fuck-up the land, they don't abuse it , it's their goddamn livelihood. They know it's vibe way better than the feds and their little friends....

Bundy was paying to, and had a preexisting deal with Clark County and his damn family had been cattlemen on these lands for a few generations, living in harmony with the goddamn turtles, and not trashing the place like newtbox (god you think you know what the fuckit is you know nothing about except what the TV tells you) here and others use in defense of the encroaching and over-reaching bureaucracy whose ONLY goal is to save their own interests in the rights of this land for their nefarious personal good-ol' boy club purposes.

Urbanization and ominous government with peeps with votes never getting involved in righteous decisions during the process of being ASS-RAPED from behind tomes legislation with special interest laws piggy-backed within legislation has ALWAYS been the method of politicians, licking the asses of the money-men.

If people would get an ACTUAL clue abut how the government works to benefit these cunts, they'd start to sound like people who did their homework instead of self-righteous cunts trying to sound smart.

I am happy to accommodate the cries of 'ignorance' and 'fail', heard all this shit before, so go fuck yourselves unless you have anything else to spew but scripted 'what you think you know' horse-shit. I understand that certain types of dum-basses are quite satisfied with themselves to talk a lot and say nothing but whats fed them.

The United States government fucked the Native Americans, now they're fucvkng cowboys and ranchers......No digression with land and money drunk robber-barons, especially when they have dutiful putties to interpret history to suit their delusions.

Wanna fix the situation America? Stop eating their meat. Try turtle soup, the shits awesome.

I guess I am having difficulty squaring two of the things you've mentioned. If a devout Muslim barber can refuse to serve women and this is not seen as discrimination why can't a devout Christian refuse to participate in a gay wedding and get the same respect from you?

As to the idea that religious rights, or rights of conscience are subservient to rights of physical attributes or genetic predisposition I need more convincing. The Civil Rights Act doesn't favor one over the other. Religion ranks as an equal with race, color, sex and national origin. How are physical rights "more protected?"

An instance comes to mind where someone's religious rights are actually weighed as more important that your physical rights. Members of the Native American Church may legally use peyote. You and I will be arrested.

I see the argument of conscience vs. genetics upside down from where you've landed. So does the State of Oregon. Did you know, that if there is no reconciliation between the bakery and the State then State will move to 'rehabilitate?' Because something must be defective in the bakery owner's mind they need to be 'rehabilitated.' That is chilling. The very idea that your thoughts could be somehow suspect indicates that the State has concluded that thoughts are incredibly important. Because thoughts lead to behavior. Not only do they not want you behaving in a certain manner, they don't even want you thinking it. I reference 1984 and Animal Farm.

I am not sure that people know what they are asking for when they back this kind of intrusion. It might seem right to them at this moment, but when their counterparts are are in charge (because the pendulum swings), it makes one wonder what thoughts will be in the dock then. How will that law be used to root out contrary thinking then? I want to be free to think what I want to think. I want the privilege of being right and the privilege of being wrong. I also want you to have that privilege, as well.

As I have mentioned before, I think these laws are blunt. While I agree that people should not be discriminated against and I practice that in my own life, what is to stop the members of Westboro Baptist Church from showing up at a bakery run by gays and demand they cater an anti-gay event? How can they refuse since they already cater other events? We have opened the proverbial can of worms

I don't disagree with your comments about Suey Park, as I said I think she acts crazy and I don't support her approach in any way. I think it's unfortunate that she's leading the charge on the other side of this thing, because I think she's doing a horrible job.

As I see it, Colbert is using Asian Americans (a minority that is also most definitely not atop the social power structure) as an example or prop to try to educate people about racism that's happening toward another group of people. Cool! We're helping out Native Americans. It's not really engaging Asian Americans though, who very commonly have racism directed at them as well. In my readings on this, it would seem a fair number (but NOT all) of Asian Americans grew up being ridiculed by things like "Ching chong ding dong", and it is steeped in an extremely negative racial connotation for that group of people.

I'm stretching to an extreme with this analogy, but I think it's necessary. What if Colbert instead called it the "The Cotton-picking Nigger Foundation for Racial Sensitivity"? I don't know about you, but I think that feels quite a bit more problematic.

But why does that cross a line where "Ching chong ding dong" doesn't? To be honest, while I think I could come up with some ideas that seem quite reasonable to me off the top of my head, I'm not *exactly* sure. Because at the end of the day, here's my reality -- I'm not an Asian American that was ridiculed with that saying and things like it, so I didn't have that firsthand personal experience. For all I know, for a large subgroup of Asian Americans, maybe it *is* very similar to the other example I mentioned would be for blacks.

So rather than thinking I have some magical grasp on what is offensive toward certain groups, I listen very carefully to what they're saying, and what their experience is. I think everybody should do that, and continue thinking about it and conversing about it. Instead, everybody seems to be rushing to Colbert's defense.

Definitely would.. if only she hadn't turned down the offer to take the Randi test.

From Wiki:

"In 2012, the James Randi Educational Foundation awarded Caputo a Pigasus Award for being, in its view, the "psychic" performer who fooled the greatest number of people with the least effort in the preceding year. A Pigasus award was also given to TLC for continuing to air the show.[59] In an article published by Wired Magazine the organization's founder James Randi explained why he believed shows like Long Island Medium were deceptive and potentially harmful to its participants:

Why do these pseudo-psychic spectacles bother those of us at the James Randi Educational Foundation? First, and foremost: They are not true. [...] But much more importantly to us, such performances seem to prey on people at their most vulnerable moments — those who have suffered the loss of loved ones — and these mediums use such grief to make a buck. Psychologists tell us this keeps the grieving stuck in their grief, rather than going through the natural stages of acceptance that are healthy.
—James Randi[1]

In June of that year, Caputo appeared in a commercial for Priceline.com in which she portrayed herself "connecting" with the late Priceline Negotiator character previously played by William Shatner.[60] However, this commercial has sparked controversy, since the commercial appears to make light of the Native American belief of smudging.[61] JREF President DJ Grothe issued a statement decrying Priceline.com: "It is difficult to watch the show and not feel heartbroken for those who are desperate to hear from the departed... and even more so if they are being manipulated by a charlatan." Grothe urged the organization to have their new spokeswoman take the James Randi Million Dollar Challenge and prove her paranormal claims."

@bobknight33, so you did read that article I linked!!!! That is EXACTLY what the native Americans on the rez say!

Who knew that you, of all people, would be sympatico with the oppressed!

what seems weird about the usa as an outsider is how you are american if you are caucasian but if you are not then you are a hyphenated american. african-american, native american. Maybe its because I come from a country with the population of one of your states and the fact that we got rid of racist logos decades ago (see gollywogs) but sometimes you guys seem a little behind the times...not that I'm from a utopia or anything.

Ehhh, you wouldn't keep thinking that if you saw how we treated them.

The best summary I can think of is, when Marlon Brando went to Ottawa to see if he could get funding from the Canadian gov't, for a movie about Native Americans. Trudeau said, "The only difference between your aboriginal peoples and our aboriginals peoples is, you shot and burned yours, we poisoned and starved ours."

It's still a damn mess on most reservations you walk onto. =(

@lantern53

http://www.buzzfeed.com/joeflood/how-the-redskins-debate-goes-over-on-an-actual-indian-reserv

This says it better.

Quote:
People, Native American people in particular, in my limited experience, have the ability to ignore all manner of historical insults — like the Medals of Honor still on record for the soldiers who perpetrated the Wounded Knee Massacre, or the faces of U.S. presidents carved into a site the U.S. government took through warfare, forced starvation, and treaty violations. That resiliency, though, seems a pretty poor excuse for heaping on much smaller insults — like “Redskins” — and justifying them with “See? They’re cool with it.”

It is true that native Americans are as diverse as white Americans in their opinions. There are many many reservations here in the Pacific Northwest. One of the reasons it took so long to finally abandon "Redskins" in our high school is that there were local tribe members who didn't have a problem with it.

If the native tribes weren't monolithic in their response, why should the white people abandon their "heritage"?

I do wonder if we can hear the final sentence of this differently. It may be that some natives are fine with their local high school mascot, for the same reason our local high was -- it is tradition.

But what the vid says is -- we don't call OURSELVES that. And that may be a monolithic truth.

Probably not, though. Humans can be pesky to paint as black or white ... or red.

Enough native Americans are pissed about it. We don't need 100% agreement.

Yeah it's amazing huh, and 'FUCK YOU WHALES, as wail.The examples of native American and Anglo acting for convenience-sake as an analogous gesture is mute, they were ignorant savages back when....Better, stronger, faster is what the world is about nowadays, eh?

That folks can't understand the consternation of someone who may regard Japan with the contempt for the state of their psychological baggage of mindfuck that created the "today of Japan" that should be clearly seen by all humans with a conscience what can be seen clearly by the entire world with half a fucking brain, is not a concern...Love the Japanese, but they like all nations, cultures and peoples are hard-pressed to do the work needed to un-fuck themselves into the next paradigm of 'humans being' as fast as the planet's urgency warrants, all are guilty of an inevitability of self-immolation.

Japanese, Russians, the Swiss, and cunts with no ethnicity or countries that they know of, seem to suffer from the same state of illusion the entire world finds themselves suffering. Plus, females of all cultures are treated for the most part like shit by their males....kind of like most folks sit back and let those aquatic mammals closest to humankinder be so fucked .Incorrect? Provide examples or throw us in some penalty box and cry racism, or any 'ism' box, you fucking morons.

Are we, OVER-generalizing, or is herding mammals into an enclosure and poking them with sticks something that looks a-ok and sanction-able by sane, thoughtful peeps?? I would not wish this fate on a single Japanese citizen be they native or expatriate. Dolphins have cocks, just like humans do.

Have yourselves herded into an enclosure and experience what happens.

Oh and, fuck rules. Always have, always...will.

(Slinks-off to eat a dolphin sandwich and don boots and a vest made from similar hide, and read Mein fucking Kampfire, under the glow of a human-skin nightshade made from faux beaver.)

Fuck'a you DOLPHIN!

Sorry, couldn't help myself

You know the native american's butchered the bufallo by the thousands too right? Just like the early Europeans they learned that driving them off a cliff was a great way to get a whole seasons meat. And they didn't use 'every part of the animal' either.

It's amazing what TV and movies have taught people that simply isn't true.

"as an anarchist i believe all systems of authority and power to be illegitimate until proven otherwise."

I have a different take, in my preferred anarchism. The only one I see as functional, all voluntary hierarchies and authorities are perfectly legitimate. I am free to submit or not to any authority I choose to for my benefit and that is my legitimate right. Also private property owners have a legitimate authority over their property. I can do whatever I want with my property (without violating anyone else's self-ownership and property rights). And under the same conditions, I can legitimately enter into any agreements I want with anyone I want. That would be legitimate private property anarchy.

As of now, the government makes what is naturally legitimate, into something arbitrarily illegitimate, based on the whims of legislators and bureaucrats.

"the burden is on those who profess authority."

I understand what you are saying. And don't think the burden is on anyone. Do not initiate violence on anyone's person of property. Simple. That's it. There's nothing else to prove or not. If anything it is the "burden" to prove you own what you own, in cases of ownership disputes. For that, there is legal precedent on who has the burden of ownership proof etc.

"because even as an anarchist i have to recognize that there needs to be a system which keeps the hands on the scales that keeps the playing field even and the kids playing nice."

The only thing that can interfere and wreck a private property anarchy is aggression, i.e., the initiation of violence against anyone's person and/or property. To prevent that you have legal enforcement and arbitration services (courts). Just like now. Except that there wouldn't be a state monopoly over these. A private law society can work just as well or better than having a monopoly of law enforcement and courts. Monopolies are always inefficient and costly. Always. For any and all goods and services. No exceptions.

"these systems are for the people,by the people and run by the people."

There is not such thing as "the people," in any practical sense. Show me "the people" and I'll show you an abstraction. There are only individuals. "The people" cannot run anything. Even you and I disagree. How are we "the people?" (Furthermore, to have a truly non-violent society, individuals would have the choice as to whether or not to engage in agreements with other individuals. Unlike now, where people are forced into agreements by which "majorities" -- whether actual or rigged -- impose their will upon the minorities. That's what you call "democracy.")

"BUT..you stop there. are you implying that we have a free market now?"

No, we don't have a free market now. We have pockets in which free markets function, however.

"did you actually infer that america begot its wealth and power purely through free market exchanges?"

Yes, mostly it did.

"have you even been paying attention?"

What the fuck does that mean?

"corporate america has been exploiting third world countries for over a century!"

No, some corporations with the help of the US and/or foreign governments have been exploiting some people in third world countries, enriching those corporations and government officials in the US and mostly in third world countries. But this is what made these corporations and government officials wealthy, not what made America as a whole a wealthy nation. America is no longer a wealthy nation as a whole (particular companies are not "America"), but an indebted nation, because of things like these, which go hand in hand with military expenditures too. The average person profits nothing from these corporations and politicians exploiting third world (or any) countries. So no, this does not make America wealthy.

The free market, however (which this exploitation is not), did make America a wealthy nation with rapid economic improvement for the average person (with the regrettable exceptions of African and Native Americans).

"and our government has been the fist that punched the:exploitation,ruination and demise of those countries.hell thats the reason WHY they are third world!"

If you are arguing that the government has been responsible for all this evil, then you are preaching to the choir. Although I take issue with the idea that it is "our government." I don't own it, nor would I want to.

"its shameful and if thats your idea of a free market.
well..you can fucking keep it."

I don't think you have been paying attention, @enoch. No, I don't think we have a free market and you cannot have a free market if there is a government interfering with it. So I don't know what your, "you can fucking keep it," bullshit is about.

"you only seem to address one part of the equation.
or are you oblivious to the harm that corporate america has wrought for the past century?"

Corporate American is a corporatist system, kind of fascist if you want to get technical. It is a mix of private business with government-granted privilege. That is not a free market. Let me say it again, in case you missed it, a truly free market cannot exist while a government monopoly grants privilege to some businesses. That is crony-corporatism, fascism. A free market can only exist as market anarchy. Corporations exploit because of government privilege, be it granted by the US government/state or third world governments/states.

"who or what will keep that behemoth in check?"

Private law based on the rights to contracts and the right of freedom from aggression to person and/or property, enforced by a private legal enforcement system.

The state has not and will not "keep that behemoth in check" as you call it. In fact, the state is the "behemoth." It is absurd to expect the state to police itself. It has not and it will not. That plan is a failure. But "good luck with that."

(btw, I you want to know the real reasons third world countries are third world, particularly Latin America, I suggest you read Alvaro Vargas Llosa's well researched book, "Liberty For Latin America," and see how 500 of state intervention/abuse has led to the current situation. If you want to lecture me about why Latin America is "third world," you'd better do some more research first and really know your stuff. I am quite familiar with the situation there.)

"what do you think will happen when you take regulation off the table?"

When you take government-granted privilege off the table, things get better and corporations and (more importantly) governments cannot abuse individuals, as some corporations and virtually all governments now do. And you replace those privileges (euphemistically called "regulations") with laws based on non-aggression and enforcement of rights to self-ownership and property.

All "exploitation" comes from aggression. All of it.

Aggression means initiating violence. Without government support, no one can initiate violence without becoming a criminal. And criminals shall be dealt with accordingly. But as long as governments/states grant aggression privileges, then you have legalized crime.

"do you understand what feudalism actually is?"

Perhaps you'd like to restate this in a non-condescending way. If you have something to say about feudalism, then say it. Explain whatever you want to explain...

"we are living in what is now being called a "neo-feudalism" state."

I don't care to have a state, so you can take this complaint to the statists. (Good luck with that.)

"you point to the government but not to the invisible hand that owns it.which is corporate america"

"Corporate America" could do little harm if any, if it weren't for some corporations' use of government. Government serves no purpose other than to allow those who control it take from those who don't. The only solution to this is to not have that tool/weapon available to whomever takes control of it. Corporations don't own it. They just use it as much as possible (just like unions do, just like all sorts of special interest groups do, just like voting blocks do, and mostly just like politicians and bureaucrats do, and even citizens who "game" the system in one way or another).

"then again.i am a pretty crappy capitalist."

That likely makes you a "pretty crappy anarchist" too.
No offense intended.
Libertarian socialist kind of contradicts itself, does it not?
Take what you want from this message or not.
Good luck.

@brycewi19, Yeah well, look where they're at-Smack-dab in the middle of the valley of suffering-The damn native Americans never even stayed there all year! These choads are a sun-starved, rag-tag collection of all the dysfunctional, depressed, and derelicts who fled their home cities all over the country and gravitated towards that vortex.

Lived in PDX, worked in Eugene, Oregon has an over-abundance of America's flotsam and jetsam and continually too-stoned-for-their-own-good, hipster flakes and in the rural areas, a certain brand of redneck that makes Texas' seem tame!

Even black folks are afraid of the place! Pasty White People, EVERYWHERE!
Welcome to Oregon!

Up-vote for first-time embed of svoiperez!