Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

[PCM]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

Another question is then, is if the vast majority of Sioux approve the continued usage of the nickname, why haven't those of the Standing Rock tribe voted for it?

Tribal members could vote on the issue if the Standing Rock Tribal Council would allow a referendum, but it won't. So ask yourself: If members of the tribal council think that the majority is on their side, why not allow a tribal vote and put the issue to rest once and for all? The answer to me is obvious. The Standing Rock Tribal Council members who oppose UND's use of the Fighting Sioux nickname are not at all confident in how such an election would turn out. They fear a result similar to what happened at Spirit Lake where the tribe voted 2:1 in support of UND.

Recent history suggests that could very well be the case.

The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe will continue to be known as Sioux, following a special election on the reservation.

Voters rejected a proposal to change the tribe's name from Sioux to "Oyate," a word that means "people or nation."

The name change was adopted in 2002 by the Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux tribes in South Dakota.

http://www.bismarcktribune.com/news/local/article_15a342a9-041f-51ab-9373-3896f785fa05.html

Which shows that not only is the Standing Rock Tribal Council able to authorize special elections on issues such as this when it chooses to do so, but also that many tribal members prefer to be known as Sioux rather than the more traditional tribal name of Oyate.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

Which shows that not only is the Standing Rock Tribal Council able to authorize special elections on issues such as this when it chooses to do so, but also that many tribal members prefer to be known as Sioux rather than the more traditional tribal name of Oyate.

Even though Sioux is supposedly derogatory...

 

[HoosierBBall_GopherHockey]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

Tribal members could vote on the issue if the Standing Rock Tribal Council would allow a referendum, but it won't. So ask yourself: If members of the tribal council think that the majority is on their side, why not allow a tribal vote and put the issue to rest once and for all? The answer to me is obvious. The Standing Rock Tribal Council members who oppose UND's use of the Fighting Sioux nickname are not at all confident in how such an election would turn out. They fear a result similar to what happened at Spirit Lake where the tribe voted 2:1 in support of UND.

Recent history suggests that could very well be the case.



http://www.bismarcktribune.com/news/local/article_15a342a9-041f-51ab-9373-3896f785fa05.html

Which shows that not only is the Standing Rock Tribal Council able to authorize special elections on issues such as this when it chooses to do so, but also that many tribal members prefer to be known as Sioux rather than the more traditional tribal name of Oyate.

So it looks like Tribal Council members serve for four years. When was the last election?

 

[HarleyMC]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

Mommy, why does the man try to impress people with his vocabulary? Isn't he just making the same, tired, elitist PC arguments everyone else makes? Does he ride his bike with "no hands?" Is this his term paper for Ward Churchill's class?

Right on time, yet another flaccid example of Old Pio-us finger pointing. I was hoping for something a bit more substantive, but I guess DU grads obviously lack reflexivity. I must admit your necromantic exchange with your "Mommy" is frighteningly reminiscent of the movie, "Psycho". Do you dress your Mommy in frilly things too?

This, for the most part, is inaccurate. First, no American Indian tribe in North Dakota -- Sioux or otherwise -- was consulted on the court settlement between the NCAA and the State of North Dakota. This has long been a bone of contention with the tribes.

Second, I don't recall anyone ever assuming that either the Spirit Lake or Standing Rock tribes would "offer compliance and sanctioned use of the nickname." The only assumption was that the councils of the two tribes might be willing to negotiate a deal with UND that would allow the university to continue to use the Fighting Sioux nickname. Within days after the settlement was announced, members of the two tribes held a news conference at UND to say that they had no intention of changing their position against the nickname and, therefore, negotiations were pointless.

Third, the idea that UND has no "special relationship" with Standing Rock "anywhere close to the extent that FSU has with the Seminole tribe" is, frankly, laughable. The only thing that UND doesn't have that FSU has is permission to use the tribes's name. In all other aspects, the level of services, scholarships and opportunities that UND provides to members of Standing Rock and all other tribes in North Dakota makes FSU's relationship with Florida's Seminole tribe a joke.

You seem to have misunderstood, I'm addressing the issue of "namesake tribes" and by "tribes" I was referring specifically to the tribes involved. And it is all accurate and well documented. I'm not in the habit of making stuff up. Laughable? You obviously know very little about the relationship between the Seminole tribe and FSU. I suggest you investigate further as to how collective cultures define the construct "relationship" within that context. There you will find your answer.

Moreover, in my view this is probably the most recognizable weakness in the ongoing debate surrounding this issue. Very few people on this thread, including yourself, understand the sociocultural and psychospiritual dynamics from a Native American perspective. Native Americans are ontologically tribal collectivists, transcendental, shamanistic, ascribed, hierarchical, ethnocentric and hegemonic in their governing structures. One will inevitably be pulling the shoelaces out of one's teeth if attempts are made interact with the core tribal framework of Native American epistemology from a individualistic, deductive, and empirically based mindset.

Trust me, that's the core intercultural communication problem here. Regardless of UND's program incentives to provide educational resources to Native Americans, it means very little in terms of establishing a relationship with the Standing Rock Tribe ruling council. They simply don't care. Although they would admit it's a good thing, it's basically insignificant to their tribe and their decision making procedures.

That's why so many are puzzled when they read accounts indicating they don't have time to discuss the nickname issue or it's too expensive to bring the issue to a vote. Of course they have time and I'm sure if there was any willingness to change whatsoever the money would suddenly appear. But that is simply their way of publically "saving face" and retaining their "honor" and it essentially means they will NEVER, and I mean NEVER change their stance on the nickname. The nickname, the UND constituency, and as in this case, college sports (i.e. ice hockey) mean very little in terms of their intrinsic worldview. Make no mistake about it, they've most likely already invoked their ancestor spirits and the answer has been deposited in their etheric soul...their ontology of self.

That is the highest level of authority and decision making among traditional Native Americans today. You'd think we would have learned that by now. But some of us are too fixated on our ego defense mechanisms and venues of entertainment to comprehend it. As a result and you can write it down, Standing Rock will not change (regardless of Murphy's favorable sentiments), and the NCAA will not either regarding their documented position in the 2007 resolution.

Again, the ND legislature is not going to bully the NCAA into recanting their position. That would inevitably create a legal precedent according to case law and effectively undermine the NCAA's legal authority and legitimacy as a governing body. Unfortunately if UND does not relinquish the nickname, I suspect by August (unless an injunction is filed by the ND legislature against the NCAA) the NCAA will have their attorneys poised and on call, as they impose immediate and binding post season sanctions on the University of North Dakota. That's like having a prison record for the rest of your life. It stays as a matter of public record.

The next step will be to encourage member institutions to refuse to play UND because of their nickname stance. That will not only effectively damage their hockey program and affect other schools as well, but it will seriously damage UND's reputation in the short term as a progressive institution of higher learning. I wouldn't recommend going down that road. That's why it's expedient, at this stage of the nearly 40 year controversy, that UND continue with the: 1) task force development to transition towards retiring the nickname by August, 2) recording the history and tradition of it's use according to the prescribed implementation plan, and 3) move towards formally staffing the "New Directions" Task Group asap under the direction of President Kelley to discuss and present options for a new nickname and logo.

Let me say that even though I'm a Gopher fan, I have no hidden agenda by commenting on the UND nickname issue. Although a rival, I still appreciate the unique motif of the UND nickname and logo. To be completely honest, I wish this wasn't happening and UND could retain them. Whereas as a UND fan, you obviously have a much more vested interest in the outcome than I do. Yet I fully believe it will be a lose-lose situation if UND does not meet the NCAA deadline, even if an injunction is filed and signed by the Governor of North Dakota.

Another tribe along with UND students oppose UND nickname.

Tribal members could vote on the issue if the Standing Rock Tribal Council would allow a referendum, but it won't. So ask yourself: If members of the tribal council think that the majority is on their side, why not allow a tribal vote and put the issue to rest once and for all? The answer to me is obvious. The Standing Rock Tribal Council members who oppose UND's use of the Fighting Sioux nickname are not at all confident in how such an election would turn out. They fear a result similar to what happened at Spirit Lake where the tribe voted 2:1 in support of UND.

Recent history suggests that could very well be the case.

http://www.bismarcktribune.com/news/local/article_15a342a9-041f-51ab-9373-3896f785fa05.html

Which shows that not only is the Standing Rock Tribal Council able to authorize special elections on issues such as this when it chooses to do so, but also that many tribal members prefer to be known as Sioux rather than the more traditional tribal name of Oyate.

From a Native American perspective, the decision making process doesn't always work that way, nor does it have to. Your assumptions appear to be invalid.

Even though Sioux is supposedly derogatory...

No. That is not the main issue.

 

[PCM]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

You seem to have misunderstood, I'm addressing the issue of "namesake tribes" and by "tribes" I was referring specifically to the tribes involved.

So was I. But the fact remains that other non-Sioux tribes in North Dakota have complained that they, too, should have been involved in the legal settlement agreement between the State of North Dakota and the NCAA.

And it is all accurate and well documented. I'm not in the habit of making stuff up.

Then I suggest that you provide some documentation because much of what you wrote is pure fiction.

Laughable? You obviously know very little about the relationship between the Seminole tribe and FSU. I suggest you investigate further as to how collective cultures define the construct "relationship" within that context. There you will find your answer.

What I'm saying is that how the NCAA defines a special relationship between a tribe and a university is laughable. I know what UND does for all tribes in North Dakota, not just the Sioux tribes. There are very few public universities in the country that come anywhere near UND in terms of providing real programs, real services and real educational opportunities for American Indians that have a real impact on their everyday lives. The last time I checked, there was not a single university in the upper Midwest with the enrollment of American Indians as UND.

But apparently you're greatly impressed that in 2005 when the NCAA imposed its policy, Florida State had a record eight Seminole students enrolled and three actual Seminole alumni.

Trust me, that's the core intercultural communication problem here. Regardless of UND's program incentives to provide educational resources to Native Americans, it means very little in terms of establishing a relationship with the Standing Rock Tribe ruling council. They simply don't care. Although they would admit it's a good thing, it's basically insignificant to their tribe and their decision making procedures.

I've had long discussions about the Fighting Sioux nickname with American Indians on both sides of this issue. Have you?

From a Native American perspective, the decision making process doesn't always work that way, nor does it have to. Your assumptions appear to be invalid.

My assumptions could be invalid, but someone asked my opinion and I gave it. My assumptions are based on my knowledge and experience.

 

[cross cheque]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.


You played youtube videos for the sioux indians of the US? Your contributions are far exceeding my expectations .

As shown in this report, in general compared with other groups, AIAN adults are more likely to have poorer health, unmet medical needs due to cost, diabetes, trouble hearing, activity limitations, and to have experienced feelings of psychological distress in the past 30 days.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr020.pdf

According to the CDC native americans in Alaska are not doing "just fine" like you previously stated. So now that we know you were lying about the status of native americans in Alaska, tell us what you do to help them or any other race of indians in the United States.

 

[Wreckincrew]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

Duh?!?! He defends them anonymously on message boards!
Isn't that enough?

 

[wasmania]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

Right on time, yet another flaccid example of Old Pio-us finger pointing. I was hoping for something a bit more substantive, but I guess DU grads obviously lack reflexivity. I must admit your necromantic exchange with your "Mommy" is frighteningly reminiscent of the movie, "Psycho". Do you dress your Mommy in frilly things too?



You seem to have misunderstood, I'm addressing the issue of "namesake tribes" and by "tribes" I was referring specifically to the tribes involved. And it is all accurate and well documented. I'm not in the habit of making stuff up. Laughable? You obviously know very little about the relationship between the Seminole tribe and FSU. I suggest you investigate further as to how collective cultures define the construct "relationship" within that context. There you will find your answer.

Moreover, in my view this is probably the most recognizable weakness in the ongoing debate surrounding this issue. Very few people on this thread, including yourself, understand the sociocultural and psychospiritual dynamics from a Native American perspective. Native Americans are ontologically tribal collectivists, transcendental, shamanistic, ascribed, hierarchical, ethnocentric and hegemonic in their governing structures. One will inevitably be pulling the shoelaces out of one's teeth if attempts are made interact with the core tribal framework of Native American epistemology from a individualistic, deductive, and empirically based mindset.

Trust me, that's the core intercultural communication problem here. Regardless of UND's program incentives to provide educational resources to Native Americans, it means very little in terms of establishing a relationship with the Standing Rock Tribe ruling council. They simply don't care. Although they would admit it's a good thing, it's basically insignificant to their tribe and their decision making procedures.

That's why so many are puzzled when they read accounts indicating they don't have time to discuss the nickname issue or it's too expensive to bring the issue to a vote. Of course they have time and I'm sure if there was any willingness to change whatsoever the money would suddenly appear. But that is simply their way of publically "saving face" and retaining their "honor" and it essentially means they will NEVER, and I mean NEVER change their stance on the nickname. The nickname, the UND constituency, and as in this case, college sports (i.e. ice hockey) mean very little in terms of their intrinsic worldview. Make no mistake about it, they've most likely already invoked their ancestor spirits and the answer has been deposited in their etheric soul...their ontology of self.

That is the highest level of authority and decision making among traditional Native Americans today. You'd think we would have learned that by now. But some of us are too fixated on our ego defense mechanisms and venues of entertainment to comprehend it. As a result and you can write it down, Standing Rock will not change (regardless of Murphy's favorable sentiments), and the NCAA will not either regarding their documented position in the 2007 resolution.

Again, the ND legislature is not going to bully the NCAA into recanting their position. That would inevitably create a legal precedent according to case law and effectively undermine the NCAA's legal authority and legitimacy as a governing body. Unfortunately if UND does not relinquish the nickname, I suspect by August (unless an injunction is filed by the ND legislature against the NCAA) the NCAA will have their attorneys poised and on call, as they impose immediate and binding post season sanctions on the University of North Dakota. That's like having a prison record for the rest of your life. It stays as a matter of public record.

The next step will be to encourage member institutions to refuse to play UND because of their nickname stance. That will not only effectively damage their hockey program and affect other schools as well, but it will seriously damage UND's reputation in the short term as a progressive institution of higher learning. I wouldn't recommend going down that road. That's why it's expedient, at this stage of the nearly 40 year controversy, that UND continue with the: 1) task force development to transition towards retiring the nickname by August, 2) recording the history and tradition of it's use according to the prescribed implementation plan, and 3) move towards formally staffing the "New Directions" Task Group asap under the direction of President Kelley to discuss and present options for a new nickname and logo.

Let me say that even though I'm a Gopher fan, I have no hidden agenda by commenting on the UND nickname issue. Although a rival, I still appreciate the unique motif of the UND nickname and logo. To be completely honest, I wish this wasn't happening and UND could retain them. Whereas as a UND fan, you obviously have a much more vested interest in the outcome than I do. Yet I fully believe it will be a lose-lose situation if UND does not meet the NCAA deadline, even if an injunction is filed and signed by the Governor of North Dakota.

Another tribe along with UND students oppose UND nickname.



From a Native American perspective, the decision making process doesn't always work that way, nor does it have to. Your assumptions appear to be invalid.



No. That is not the main issue.

jesus harley get a F$$cking job

 

[Osorojo]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

There has not been much mention of an interesting aspect of this situation: the limits, if any, to the power of big government. The Sioux do not comprise a majority of the N.D. State legislature, which declared that UND could employ "The Fighting Sioux" title without permission. This legislature probably would not declare the right of NDSU to call itself "The Battling Squareheads" rather than "The Bisons," even though they had a better excuse to do so. Why not? Does one ethnic group have more inherent rights than another?

The N.D. state legislature would probably not grant Tyson permission to adopt the name "The Con Agra Raptors", but presumably would support Tyson's right to the "Fighting Sioux" title. Do corporations have more rights than societies of human beings?

The power of government has limits. Awarding the use of the unique name of one culture to a completely unrelated group far exceeds these limits and is an abuse of power.

 

[HarleyMC]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

jesus harley get a F$$cking job

Yay!!! Was is back!

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

There has not been much mention of an interesting aspect of this situation: the limits, if any, to the power of big government. The Sioux do not comprise a majority of the N.D. State legislature, which declared that UND could employ "The Fighting Sioux" title without permission. This legislature probably would not declare the right of NDSU to call itself "The Battling Squareheads" rather than "The Bisons," even though they had a better excuse to do so. Why not? Does one ethnic group have more inherent rights than another?

The N.D. state legislature would probably not grant Tyson permission to adopt the name "The Con Agra Raptors", but presumably would support Tyson's right to the "Fighting Sioux" title. Do corporations have more rights than societies of human beings?

The power of government has limits. Awarding the use of the unique name of one culture to a completely unrelated group far exceeds these limits and is an abuse of power.

And the government of North Dakota feels that the NCAA is outside its own limits of power and is fighting back. The fact that the NCAA cares more about a nickname than actually preventing the corruption that is rampant amongst those in control of these "student athletes" is absurd.

 

[Jeo]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

Does one ethnic group have more inherent rights than another?

The NCAA is ok with Athenians, Aztecs, Celtics, Celts, Cowboys, Crusaders, Dutch, (Flying) Dutchmen, Gaels, Illini, Irish, Pioneers, Saxons, Scots, Spartans, Swedes, Trojans, Vandals, Vikings, and Warriors (when not relating to Native Americans), not too mention the exceptions granted to the Chippewas, Choctaws, Seminoles, and Utes. \

I believe the answer is yes according the the NCAA

 

[Osorojo]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

This topic concerns the actions of the University of North Dakota and the government of North Dakota, not the actions of the NCAA. It may be that the institutions and people of North Dakota aspire to no higher ethical [or academic] standards than those of the NCAA.
Until that sorry state is conceded the "They did it too!" argument above is out of place in this discussion.

 

[Jeo]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

This topic concerns the actions of the University of North Dakota and the government of North Dakota, not the actions of the NCAA. It may be that the institutions and people of North Dakota aspire to no higher ethical [or academic] standards than those of the NCAA.

The actions of the NCAA have everything to do with this discussion.

This legislature probably would not declare the right of NDSU to call itself "The Battling Squareheads" rather than "The Bisons," even though they had a better excuse to do so. Why not? Does one ethnic group have more inherent rights than another?

Until that sorry state is conceded the "They did it too!" argument above is out of place in this discussion.

If I cant use other real life examples than I am pretty sure your ridiculous fake examples are also invalid.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

This topic concerns the actions of the University of North Dakota and the government of North Dakota, not the actions of the NCAA. It may be that the institutions and people of North Dakota aspire to no higher ethical [or academic] standards than those of the NCAA.
Until that sorry state is conceded the "They did it too!" argument above is out of place in this discussion.

The NCAA has no business telling UND what their nickname can be. The State of North Dakota stepped in to stop the NCAA from forcing this upon UND.

 

[davyd83]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

The NCAA has no business telling UND what their nickname can be. The State of North Dakota stepped in to stop the NCAA from forcing this upon UND.

Do you believe that the Standing Rock Tribe has no right to object? The UND doesn't have to drop their nickname. They just don't get to host NCAA tourney events and they don't get to wear that name or logo in such tourneys.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

Do you believe that the Standing Rock Tribe has no right to object?

Yes they do have every right, some white student at UND has no legit "right" to object though...they chose to go to that school, knowing full well it uses the Nickname "Sioux," and their opinion on the matter (as well as the NCAA's) is irrelevant.

The UND doesn't have to drop their nickname. They just don't get to host NCAA tourney events and they don't get to wear that name or logo in such tourneys.

Of course that is true, but this still isn't the NCAA's business, regardless of the level of punishment. How hypocritical is it for the NCAA to force other schools to drop "Indians" and other specific tribes, yet remain headquartered in Indianapolis, Indiana? Answer that one.

 

[davyd83]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

Yes they do have every right, some white student at UND has no legit "right" to object though...they chose to go to that school, knowing full well it uses the Nickname "Sioux," and their opinion on the matter (as well as the NCAA's) is irrelevant.
Of course that is true, but this still isn't the NCAA's business, regardless of the level of punishment. How hypocritical is it for the NCAA to force other schools to drop "Indians" and other specific tribes, yet remain headquartered in Indianapolis, Indiana? Answer that one.

Be careful, we were nearly engaged in logical, healthy debate there for a moment.

 

[SoCalSiouxFan]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

So has there been any discussion about the fact that even if UND stops using the Sioux, they will still be hostile and abusive because Dakota is still in the name? I mean that is an indian tribe too right?

Does that also mean all schools with Indian names should change their name. Should Minnesota Gophers be changed to ...oops Minneapolis is an Indian name also ... Hennipin County Gophers?

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Fighting Sioux to fight on...For one more year at least.

Be careful, we were nearly engaged in logical, healthy debate there for a moment.

How is it not logical to question the NCAA's feelings on the subject when they have no problem continuing their operations in a city and state that use a "hostile and abusive" name by their own standards? If they were serious about this they would prove it by moving somewhere else that doesn't disrespect native american heritage (according to NCAA).