The Indian removals which destroyed one quarter of the Cherokee tribe, were actually conceptualized by Jefferson and then extended and carried out by Jackson. There were great debates about whether the “redskins” were human and whether they had souls.
Crossposted at Native American Netroots
I heard a descendant of Moxtaveto (Black Kettle), speak about the racism of Sports Mascots. She said the focus was on the name “Redskins.” She went on to explain how, after American Indians were mutilated and exterminated, the name used to refer to the mutilated American Indian was “Redskin.” As if anyone thinks the killers said anything that would indicate the reality of what they had done at the time. “Redskin” was a term used to dehumanize and enable the genocide.
REDSKIN A 500 YEAR HATE CRIME,
is being used in educational presentations throughout the United States to effectively reveal the history of racial and religious hatred behind the term Redskin Indians and clearly shows the harm brought by ridiculing minorities. It is appropriate for adults and children in middle school or older.
Disgustingly so, “Redskin Indians” refers to literally skinning American Indians. “But his (Jackson’s) Indian Fighters had a very peculiar preoccupation, that was skinning the Indians on the battlefield. They used to make pants” it says in the video. Reverend Goat Carson, who is “Internationally recognized for his presentations,” discusses it in “REDSKIN A 500 YEAR HATE CRIME.”
Telling it like it is Reverend Goat cuts through the barriers created by America’s history books. “REDSKINS” makes human beings out of the Indian children and elders who were mutilated and skinned for their religious and racial heritage.
Furthermore, if anyone doubts that manifestations of that hate are less than current, I relate the following.
PORTLAND — The FBI is investigating recent posts on craigslist that offered to sell “Maine Indian scalps” to “white people only,” according to court documents and the leader of the Penobscot Indian Nation, who reported the situation to state and federal officials.
The person who posted the items claimed to have six scalps and related artifacts that were obtained by bounty hunters in the 1700s and came into his possession through a private family collection.
– snip –
“Even if it is hair, with a little bit of flesh on it, that is human remains. That could be one of our ancestors,” Mitchell said. “This doesn’t just affect people in the past. It affects us today, people who are living.”
So one last time, “Redskin Indians” refers to literally skinning American Indians. “But his (Jackson’s) Indian Fighters had a very peculiar preoccupation, that was skinning the Indians on the battlefield. They used to make pants” it says in the video.
It goes on to say “they’d be able to take an Indian and skin him from the hip down and make themselves a pair of pants.” Next, it talks about how they made reins for their bridle to ride their horses and that “redskins” became a joke. Hence, “the depth and pervasiveness of the racism against Indigenous Peoples so deeply engrained in the history and psyche of the United States and the dominant culture.”
One last time, “Redskin” was a term used to dehumanize and enable genocide.
Consolidated Indigenous Shadow Report says about Indian Mascots on page 72.
Although the United States would probably respond that racist mascots and logos are an exercise of free speech that it has reserved under the Convention, they reveal the depth and pervasiveness of the racism against Indigenous Peoples so deeply engrained in the history and psyche of the United States and the dominant culture.
8 comments
Skip to comment form
Author
Author
I’ve long disagreed with these Indian mascots, but that info takes it to another level.
Here’s an ancient drawing of native two-spirit people being slaughtered by dogs, in the very early days of Europeans on this continent.
This is almost certainly not the case (pdf), but an example of popular etymology. What’s unfortunate is that the internet has made popular etymology a more widespread phenomenon, since people pick up stories like this and pass them along without any sources or information.
I know this issue has come up in your diaries before, and I know the question that the evidence is almost overwhelmingly against this idea, but you still present it as fact. Why?
It’s enough that skinning did take place, and that alone should horrify us. And that the term ‘redskin’, whatever its origins, is an offensive term in the 21st century, and should not be the name of a professional sports team. So I agree with you 100% on the conclusions that you reach, but not the way that you get there.