MUST CHALLENGE STEREOTYPICAL CULTURAL IMAGES

MUST CHALLENGE STEREOTYPICAL CULTURAL IMAGES

1. RACIST SPORTS MASCOTS DEHUMANIZE JUST LIKE NAZI AND KKK IMAGES

Ward Churchill, professor of American Indian studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder, Associate Director of the Center for Studies of Ethnicity and Race in America, co-director of the American Indian Movement of Colorado, INDIANS ARE US?, 1994, page 70.

Let’s get just a little bit real here. The notion of “fun” embodied in rituals like the Tomahawk Chop must be understood for what it is. There’s not a single non-Indian example deployed above which can be considered acceptable in even the most marginal sense. The reasons are obvious enough. So why is it different where American Indians are concerned? One can only conclude that, in contrast to the other groups at issue, Indians are (falsely ) perceived as being too few, and therefore too weak, to defend themselves effectively against racist and otherwise offensive behavior. The sensibilities of those who take pleasure in the Chop are thus akin to schoolyard bullies and those twisted individuals who like to torture cats. At another level, their perspectives have much in common with those manifested more literally--and therefore much more honestly--by groups like the nazis, the aryan nations, and ku klux klan. Those who suggest that this is “okay” should be treated accordingly by anyone who opposes nazism and comparable belief systems.

Ward Churchill, professor of American Indian studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder, Associate Director of the Center for Studies of Ethnicity and Race in America, co-director of the American Indian Movement of Colorado, INDIANS ARE US?, 1994, page 70-1.

Fortunately, there are a few glimmers of hope that this may become the case. A few teams and their fans have gotten the message and have responded appropriately. One illustration is Stanford University, which opted to drop the name “Indians” with regard to its sports teams (and, contrary to the myth perpetrated by those who enjoy insulting Native Americans, Stanford has experienced no resulting drop-off in attendance at its games). Meanwhile, the local newspaper in Portland, Oregon, recently decided its long-standing editorial policy prohibiting use of racial epithets should include derogatory sports team names. The Redskins, for instance, are now simply referred to as being “the Washington team,” and will continue to be described in this way until the franchise adopts an inoffensive moniker (newspaper sales in Portland have suffered no decline as a result). Such examples are to be applauded and encouraged. They stand as figurative beacons in the night, proving beyond all doubt that it is quite possible to indulge in the pleasure of athletics without accepting blatant racism into the bargain. The extent to which they do not represent the norm of American attitudes and behavior is exactly the extent to which America remains afflicted by an ugly reality which is far different from the “moral leadership” it professes to show the world. Clearly, the United States has a very long way to go before it measures up to such an image of itself.

LIBERATION OF NATIVE AMERICANS WILL HELP LIBERATE OTHERS

1. LIBERATING NATIVE LAND PAVES THE WAY FOR MOST EVERY PROGRESSIVE AGENDA

Ward Churchill, professor of American Indian studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder, Associate Director of the Center for Studies of Ethnicity and Race in America, co-director of the American Indian Movement of Colorado, THE STATE OF NATIVE AMERICA, edited by M. Annette Jaimes, 1992, p 177 When we think about it like this, the great mass of non-Indians in North America really have much to gain, and almost nothing to lose, from native people succeeding in struggles to reclaim the land which is rightfully ours. The tangible diminishment of US material power that is integral to our victories in this sphere stand to pave the way for realization of most other agendas--from anti-imperialism to environmentalism, from African-American liberation to feminism, from gay rights to the ending of class privilege--pursued by progressives on this continent. Conversely, succeeding in any or even all of these other agendas would still represent an inherently oppressive situation if their realization is contingent upon an ongoing occupation of Native North America without the consent of Indian people. Any North American revolution which failed to free indigenous territory from non-Indian domination would simply be a continuation of colonialism in another form.
2. LIBERATION OF NATIVE AMERICA IS KEY TO POSITIVE SOCIAL CHANGE

Ward Churchill, professor of American Indian studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder, Associate Director of the Center for Studies of Ethnicity and Race in America, co-director of the American Indian Movement of Colorado, THE STATE OF NATIVE AMERICA, edited by M. Annette Jaimes, 1992, p 177 Regardless of the angle from which you view the matter, the liberation of Native North America, liberation of the land first and foremost, is the key to fundamental and positive social changes of many other sorts. One thing, as they say, leads to another. The question has always been, of course, which “thing” is to be first in the sequence. A preliminary formulation for those serious about achieving (rather than merely theorizing and endlessly debating) radical change in the United States might be “first Priority to First Americans.” Put another way, this would mean “US Out of Indian Country.” Inevitably, the logic leads to what we’ve all been so desperately seeking: The US--at least as we’ve come to know it-out of North America altogether. From there, it can be permanently banished from the planet. In its stead, surely we can join hands to create something new and infinitely better. That’s our vision of “impossible realism. Isn’t it time we all went to work on attaining it?

Ward Churchill, professor of American Indian studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder, Associate Director of the Center for Studies of Ethnicity and Race in America, co-director of the American Indian Movement of Colorado, STRUGGLE FOR THE LAND, 1993, page 422.

The principle is this: sexism, racism, and all the rest arose here as a concomitant to the emergence and consolidation of the Eurocentric nation-state form of sociopolitical and economic organization. Everything the state does, everything it can do, is entirely contingent upon its maintaining its internal cohesion, a cohesion signified above all by its pretended territorial integrity, its ongoing domination of Indian Country. Given this, it seems obvious that the literal dismemberment of the nation-state inherent to Indian land recovery correspondingly reduces the ability of the state to sustain the imposition of objectionable relations within itself. Realization of indigenous land rights serves to undermine or destroy the ability of the status quo to continue imposing a racist, sexist, classist, homophobic, militarists order upon non-Indians.