The American society’s treatment of Native Indians has been under sharp criticism from the American Indians and other minority groups for a long time. According to Spindel (25), a group of Americans perceives the American Indians’ culture as warlike and marked by traditional events such as dancing. However, others perceive the Natives as domicile and peace loving with a knack for been domineered.
This paper categorically depicts the manner in which the American culture uses Indian mascots to enhance the image of colonialism starkly imprinted on Indian American minds. They see them as derogatory, and demeaning to them, their culture, and tradition. The Indians perceive the widespread mascot usage and its general representation as a reminder of the oppression that had been visited upon them and a continuation of an attack on their ideologies and beliefs.
Many organizations that use the American Indian mascot defend this by claiming that they do not want to depict a negative stereotype. However, they claim to emblem the universality and team spirit demonstrated by the Indians across generations. The media uses this to generate heated debates that make organizations to continue using these mascots to ride on the inherent euphoria. There have been concerted attempts by the American Indian society in the United States to curtail usage of the mascots.
For example, most Americans are made to believe that use of the mascots depicts an American society free of racial prejudices. However, scholars of the Indian history and representatives of the Indian culture oppose this strongly. They depict it as dehumanizing and strongly skewed to project a culture marred in retrogressive ideals.
Popularity of the usage of Indian mascots in the 20th century was widespread. Though some organizations have stopped using them, some still hung on to their mascots and do not show any signs that they will stop. Additionally, widespread usage of perceivably derogative words such as ‘redskins’ still exists in many American places.
A case study of Cleveland Baseball Franchise shows the depth of this discussion. The team uses a popular Native American chief’s image as a mascot. This was a highly respected figure in Native American’s history. Though the team claims to honor Louis Sockalexis, the native Indians incessantly see it as a misrepresentation, disrespectful, racially stereotypical, and a dishonor to their traditional chief. Earlier attempts at withdrawal of the use of this mage have yielded no success.
These attempts have been marked by protests and sensationalized media coverage, which Cleveland Baseball has rode on to enhance their economic gains. The University of North Dakota’s Fighting Sioux’ team logo has attracted similar controversy. Through media, the logo has made the team a popular conglomerate. The opponents of its use have tried to engage legal backing all along history with no avail. Notably, the Supreme Court of the US ruled that this was an image like any other and could be used by any organization.
The use the Indian mascot is a controversy that just fails to fade away. The media, philosophers, and historians give varied views on this topic. This generates further discussion and the organizations at the center of all these register immense economic gains. Recently, the Native Americans have tried to get a piece of the profits arguing that without usage of their images this would not be case. Otherwise, as they have done for a long time, they insist that these organizations stop using the images.
Is the question of racial and derogatory representation as popularly contested by Native Americans real? The discussions generate different and varied philosophical views. Supporters argue that the use of such imagery honors them and the people in those images. Some organizations say that they depict bravery, team spirit, and endurance in these images. Hence, Native Americans should derive pride from this.
Following many unsuccessful attempts at redacting usage of these images, some organizations have returned to using the images after stopping because natives had convinced them. This is because of the media coverage whose popularity they want to benefit. On the other hand, there is a group that feels deeply hurt and racially discriminated against by use of these images. They say that the domineering American culture has constantly projected them as a weaker race.
The constant revival of previous injustices visited upon them is the Achilles heel in trying to find a solution. The general implication of this emotional discussion and subsequent exhaustion of the highest legal avenues towards finding common ground is not a good thing. The possibility of hatred that spawns warlike tendencies and conflict is imminent especially in places like Dakota where the population of Indians is high (Spindel, 38).
Generally, other Americans not at the center of this discussion take this as a case of ideological differences. Lack of concern makes the natives to see this as a mass massacre on its culture. They insist that even the judges do not put much attention in cases involving this issue.
However, it important to note that even among the Native American society, there is no best way to approach this subject. Some say that the continued use of the mascots should be patented and benefits given to the community. Others argue that this is demeaning, derogative and a sign of just how the natives have been at the receiving end historically when it comes to various decisions. Lastly, a group of Native Americans feels that the use of mascots honors them in various ways.
They believe that these organizations do not mean harm. Conclusively, the nature of this discussion is a philosophical gridlock even from the Native American society. The early treaties meant to eradicate conflicts between the two tribes still hold emotive concerns within the general society (Spindel, 39).
From an organizational look, the usage of a mascot is an identity in itself. The idea is that it brings luck and success. This contrasts the history of native Indians who complain about historical injustices. If the organizations were to use different mascots, they would lose identity and media coverage, which comes with economic gains. The American government should devise ways to arrive at an amicable solution to this festering debacle.
Hardliners within the community may get restless and spark conflicts. Because the judicial avenue has not arrived at a solution, the government should take a hands-on look at the issue. The American society should look at ways to reassure Native Americans. Lastly, an amicable solution may go a long way in creating better racial relations across America. As it currently stands, many minority groups perceive the US government as making historical decisions that are marred in favoritism.
Works Cited
Spindel, Carol. Dancing at Halftime: Sports and the Controversy over American Indian Mascots. New York: New York University Press, 2000. Print.