Washington Racists Get Their Way

For 17 years a group of American Indians has been waging a legal battle against the Washington Redskins. Their argument is simple: Redskin is a racially insensitive word that is disparaging to their people. What was the response by U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly? Nothing. Nothing about the racism, that is. She ruled in favor of the Redskins because the original trademark was issued in 1967 and the group waited too long to challenge that trademark. Judge Kollar-Kotelly readily admitted that she ignored the core issue and did not base her decision at all on whether or not the term “redskin” is a racist one.

Bob Raskopf, the attorney representing the Redskins, made it clear what this was really about when he brought up the financial burden the Redskins would have endured had they lost the trademark. Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld that decision, agreeing that correcting racism is nowhere near as important as making sure rich people get to keep their money.

To be honest, I’m sick of this debate. Mainly because there is no debate. Redskin is a derogatory term for American Indians and if you believe otherwise, you’re ignorant. The argument I’ve heard recently is that the logo depicts Cheif Sitting Bull (I have no idea if that’s supposed to be the case) and so it’s actually quite an honor. I’m sure the people who believe this will attend and enjoy the ribbon-cutting ceremony for the Martin Luther King, Jr. Library For Negroes. Pardon the language, but I’m trying to make a point here.

Here is the quickest way to win this argument. Ask these questions to Judge Kollar-Kotelly or any of the members of the U.S. Court of Appeals:

1. Would you agree that the word “redskin” refers to American Indians?

2. Would you ever be seen on camera referring to an American Indian as a redskin?

Simple as that. This is not an issue of political correctness, as was the case when people took issue with names like “Braves” or any other team name that alluded to American Indians. The team name is a racial slur. This never should have been an issue for the courts. Someone in the Washington Redskins organization should have at some point said– or should now say, “You know what, this isn’t right. It was the team’s tradition, but it’s not the right tradition for the future of the organization.”

As for Judge Kollar-Kotelly and every other member of our legal system who has, for the last 17 years, stood in the way of what should be an obvious decision: What is wrong with you? Do you all actually favor a legal technicality over the option of treating a group of people like they actually matter? It is as though you’ve stood in front of every American Indian offended by this open racial slur and said, “Yes, we can change this, and no, we won’t. Because we don’t have to and we don’t care about you.”

This is not some all-important worldwide organization. Yes, it is tradition, but it is not the tradition of a country, or a church, or a people. It is the nickname of an NFL football team. It is a pastime. It is a game. It is NOT important.

I’m now speaking directly to Dan Snyder, owner of the Washington Redskins. Sir, there is only one reason not to change this offensive nickname, and that is to avoid losing some money on merchandising that already bares this slur but has yet to sell. How much money are you worth, Mr. Snyder? Are you worth enough that you can stand to do the right thing, even if it means losing a few dollars?