The professional football team in Washington, D.C. has an offensive mascot, the Redskins. There have been endless debates about the historic use of the name. Some argue the name “redskins” was used as a slur and to refer to bounties on Native American scalps, while others say the usage has been more benign. But historic usage aside, if the name is offensive to the Americans it depicts, it is offensive to keep using it.
Because of a recent court ruling removing trademark protection for “redskins,” the name may finally change in the fairly near future. That’s a good thing. But according to a survey by the Huffington Post, the favorite to replace Washington Redskins is Washington Warriors (57% support). That’s a bad thing.
“Warriors” has long been pushed heavily in social media. The suggestion is often accompanied by a logo depicting the Pentagon, the headquarters of the U.S. Department of Defense. Other options show soldiers in video game style art.
We’re all eager for this debate to be over, but I have to say I hate this idea.
If the U.S. only entered necessary wars, such as World War II, I would be slightly more comfortable with this. But the fact is, over the last half century, the military industrial complex that Republican President Dwight Eisenhower warned us about, has made a habit of regularly leading us into a series of unnecessary wars that have had tragic consequences for brave American soldiers and the entire nation.
Part of the way the neoconservatives and defense contractors promote profit-generating military interventions is to glorify wars and warriors with cartoonish depictions like those used in the Washington Warriors logos. Haliburton’s version of “support our troops” is to send young kids to unnecessary wars, and then salute them at sporting events. My version of “support our troops” is to keep our troops the hell out of unnecessary wars. Haliburton’s version is carrying the day, and that needs to stop.
There are 15 cabinet level departments in the federal government. Others promote learning, economic security, scientific discovery, natural resource management, environmental protection, justice, law enforcement, and health improvement. Those are heroic pursuits in their own right, so why does the department responsible for getting us mired in Vietnam and Iraq get singled out for glorification? Of all the things we want our nation’s capitol to be known for, we choose it’s checkered record of war-making?
Relax, I wouldn’t advocate naming the football team after any of those departments or their work. There are hundreds of possibilities, so digging into the bureaucracy for the name isn’t necessary.
But the last thing America needs is more glorification of the military industrial complex’s war-making machine. We have had enough of making bloody wars look like a cartoon video game back home. We have had enough of wars that are rarely fought by the sons and daughters of those getting us into the wars. We have enough American men and women unnecessarily maimed and killed. We’ve had enough of federal debt driven by trillions of dollars in unnecessary wars.
Starting with the name of Washington’s football team, let’s stop glorifying all of that. Just stop.
– Loveland
Great post, Joe, on the “Warriors” and the signal that sends about our national image. America’s best side, and symbolized by our national capitol, is the example we have set for democracy and self-government, of the people, by the people and for the people. So let’s have fun proposing mascot names in that vein. How about the Washington Federalists? Or shortened, The Feds? The Solons (from ancient Greece, for wise rulers)? The Statesmen? The PluribusUnums? The Constitutions? Or have some self-deprecating fun. The Bureaucrats? The Revenooers?
That’s the spirit! Washington Republicrats? Hacks? Partisans? Pols? Babykissers? Obstructionists? Stuffed Suits? Blowhards? ‘Mericans?
Seriously, though, I’m with you, Dane. I’d go aspirational rather than realistic. Something like Statesmen.