Yes. Don't address the Chris Lerch points at all. Instead, try to redirect the issue under the banner of decrying "Political Correctness" as everyone hates that sort of thing. Naturally, that's a red herring since the people that call for the name change list reason after reason for it while supplying loads and loads of actual data from history, sociology and anthropology which without reservation shows how European "conquerors" used varying methodologies to repress and deny aboriginal people their basic human rights all over the world.
Instead .. I'll address Lerch's points ..
As to #1 -- it clearly displays that the moniker was chosen for it's symbolic ability as an "extermination" tool for Bison. How much can I expound on that? Not much ... the inferiority complex of UND students in 1930 is clear. Flickertails could break a Bison's ankle by strategically placing their burrow in the right place. Otherwise, Bison both literally and figuratively WALKED ALL OVER them.
As to #2 -- Most all Native American's were FAR FROM being "warlike". On the contrary, North American aboriginals were quite conservative in their approach to dealing with issues that otherwise lead societies into a war. They preferred their own style of litigation and communication to solve whatever regional issues that separated them from their neighbors. I don't blame foolish flatlander rubes in 1930 for not knowing that. But we know that to be the case now since we've finally started allowing Native Americans to express their history rather than applying convenient and useful rationalizations from when we conquered them. Yes, the victors write history ... know why? So they can justify the immoral excesses they used to become the victors.
As to #3 -- Flickertails is hard to rhyme. LOL. Nuff said ...
There were the reasons that UND became the "Fighting Sioux". There was no intent to honor anyone and professing such now is a complete and utter lie.
.
