Conference Realignment

Status
Not open for further replies.
#351      
illiniguy
RabidDawgClassic said:
red coat waiting on mary GIF by Comedy Dynamics
Click to expand...
nypost.com

George Washington University ending use of ‘Colonials’ nickname

George Washington University officials announced the school will retire the “Colonials” name used by its athletic teams, citing “division among the community about the moniker.”
nypost.com nypost.com
 
Last edited:
#354      
spotter
www.heartlandcollegesports.com

How Colorado Lost $70 Million By Leaving the Big 12

It has been 12 years since the Colorado Buffaloes left the Big 12 for the Pac-12. And while the phrase “Go West, young man”, was often associated with chasing the American dream and escaping poverty for a better tomorrow, it has has been anything but that for the CU. In a new study done by […]
www.heartlandcollegesports.com www.heartlandcollegesports.com
 
#355      
Fighter of the Nightman
illiniguy said:
nypost.com

George Washington University ending use of ‘Colonials’ nickname

George Washington University officials announced the school will retire the “Colonials” name used by its athletic teams, citing “division among the community about the moniker.”
nypost.com nypost.com
Click to expand...
I’m all for letting the Chief go and moving on, and I think it’s generally best to err on the side of tolerance … but nobody should have any problem admitting there are elements within that broad group who want to take things beyond a point that’s reasonable. And I think this is an example of that. If “Colonials” - referencing the fact that George Washington led Colonial forces against the British Empire - is offensive, so is the name of their university. And the name of our nation’s capital. And probably so is the very mention of 90% of American statesmen and cultural figures before the 1960s who (whether liberal or conservative) felt absolutely no shame of the fact we were a nation formed by English settlers…
 
#356      
ChiefGritty
illiniguy said:
nypost.com

George Washington University ending use of ‘Colonials’ nickname

George Washington University officials announced the school will retire the “Colonials” name used by its athletic teams, citing “division among the community about the moniker.”
nypost.com nypost.com
Click to expand...
What's incredibly funny about this is that they are changing the nickname to "Revolutionaries", which is just sort of telling themselves a cuddlier bedtime story about the exact same history in a 2023 political activism context.

There's nothing new about the perspectives of naive college kids and their goofball professors, claims to the contrary are just a failure to know the relevant history.

What is new is that the students of Universities are ever more treated as customers, justifiably so given the obscene price they and their parents are paying, and "the customer is always right". And then of course we have the social media machine to grind this into suitable culture war grist for mass consumption.

That doesn't ultimately benefit the actual needs of these kids or the institution (or these political causes really, to the extent they possess goals beyond changing mid-major basketball team names), but that's the dynamic at play.
 
Last edited:
#357      
Ransom Stoddard
Fighter of the Nightman said:
I’m all for letting the Chief go and moving on, and I think it’s generally best to err on the side of tolerance … but nobody should have any problem admitting there are elements within that broad group who want to take things beyond a point that’s reasonable. And I think this is an example of that. If “Colonials” - referencing the fact that George Washington led Colonial forces against the British Empire - is offensive, so is the name of their university. And the name of our nation’s capital. And probably so is the very mention of 90% of American statesmen and cultural figures before the 1960s who (whether liberal or conservative) felt absolutely no shame of the fact we were a nation formed by English settlers…
Click to expand...
It isn't about leading colonial forces against the empire, it stems more from colonialism (of all sorts) having a strong history of oppressing or obliterating the indigenous population. Indigenous folks in North America, South America, India, Australia, and big chunks of Africa regard European colonialism as a very evil thing, so I kind of get why that's not a great nickname to use in 2023.
 
#358      
Dkayak
ChiefGritty said:
That doesn't ultimately benefit the actual needs of these kids or the institution (or these political causes really, to the extent they possess goals beyond changing mid-major basketball team names), but that's the dynamic at play.
Click to expand...
They graduate thin-skinned people doomed to struggle when leaving their academic bubble. The real world is nuanced with shades of gray, with not nearly as much black-and-white as their indoctrination suggests. Colonials, revolutionaries, potato, potauto, etc. Who cares? It’s just symbolism and generally harmless.

As someone with 1/16 Native American ancestry, I’d love to see the Chief returned but they didn’t ask my opinion. These days even a half dozen aggrieved students and Professors have veto power.
 
#359      
drsmitty74
Dkayak said:
They graduate thin-skinned people doomed to struggle when leaving their academic bubble. The real world is nuanced with shades of gray, with not nearly as much black-and-white as their indoctrination suggests. Colonials, revolutionaries, potato, potauto, etc. Who cares? It’s just symbolism and generally harmless.

As someone with 1/16 Native American ancestry, I’d love to see the Chief returned but they didn’t ask my opinion. These days even a half dozen aggrieved students and Professors have veto power.
Click to expand...
Just people looking to find purpose in life, and their purpose today, is finding crap to be offended by.
 
#361      
ChiefGritty
drsmitty74 said:
Just people looking to find purpose in life, and their purpose today, is finding crap to be offended by.
Click to expand...
But that's my point, college kids making the observation that "Colonials" can be twisted into a reference that runs counter to the prevailing left wing dogma is a tale as old as time, that could have happened in 2003, 1983, 1963 on a University campus.

The machinery by which that becomes a formal change in the University nickname, and a headline for out-of-town national newspapers beaming to the most triggered possible segment of the audience on social media, that part of it is new.

We carry machines in our pocket whose purpose is to make us feel more alienated from one another at every little spare moment. Not great!
 
#362      
Fighter of the Nightman
Ransom Stoddard said:
It isn't about leading colonial forces against the empire, it stems more from colonialism (of all sorts) having a strong history of oppressing or obliterating the indigenous population. Indigenous folks in North America, South America, India, Australia, and big chunks of Africa regard European colonialism as a very evil thing, so I kind of get why that's not a great nickname to use in 2023.
Click to expand...
I mean, I kind of reject the basic "it's the current year" logic for supporting something inherently, but I digress.

My point is that the university VERY clearly (at least IMO) chose that nickname because they are George Washington University, and their mascot seems to make this evident. There is no reason to think they were trying to glorify the general act of colonization when they picked that name and mascot, so cries for them to change it are probably from people looking for something to protest for the sake of having something to protest (when one's identity is too tied up in an ideology and you accomplish a lot of your ideology's goals, you will naturally look for the next thing).

The Cleveland Indians very clearly picked their name with no specific tribe in mind, and their caricature logo made it evident that they were not really too interested in honoring American Indian culture in any real way. I think we have to be able to distinguish between intent and coincidence. The extent to which the the Colonials of George Washington University relate at all to "colonization" is only because George Washington descended from British "colonizers" who lived generations before him, and the British called the forces fighting for the Colonies "Colonials." Anyone looking at it in "neutral" faith knows it isn't glorifying colonization, just as MSU being the Spartans is not glorifying being overly possessive of a woman (Helen of Troy) and denying her the right to leave her husband without starting a war, lol.
 
Last edited:
#363      
ChiefGritty
Fighter of the Nightman said:
I mean, I kind of reject the basic "it's the current year" logic for supporting something inherently, but I digress.

My point is that the university VERY clearly (at least IMO) chose that nickname because they are George Washington University, and their mascot seems to make this evident. There is no reason to think they were trying to glorify the general act of colonization when they picked that name and mascot, so cries for them to change it are probably from people looking for something to protest for the sake of having something to protest (when one's identity is too tied up in an ideology and you accomplish a lot of your ideology's goals, you will naturally look for the next thing).

The Cleveland Indians very clearly picked their name with no specific tribe in mind, and their caricature logo made it evident that they were not really too interested in honoring American Indian culture in any real way. I think we have to be able to distinguish between intent and coincidence. The extent to which the the Colonials of George Washington University relate at all to "colonization" is only because George Washington descended from British "colonizers" who lived generations before him, and the British called the forces fighting for the Colonies "Colonials." Anyone looking at it in "neutral" faith knows it isn't glorifying colonization, just as MSU being the Spartans is not glorifying being overly possessive of a woman (Helen of Troy) and denying her the right to leave her husband without starting a war, lol.
Click to expand...
No you fool, if they can make enough TikToks to force the administration to change the name to "Revolutionaries" that makes all the obnoxious white doctor's kids from Chevy Chase, MD who weren't smart enough to get into Georgetown the historical successors to Toussaint Louverture.
 
#364      
TentakilRex
Fighter of the Nightman said:
I mean, I kind of reject the basic "it's the current year" logic for supporting something inherently, but I digress.

Anyone looking at it in "neutral" faith knows it isn't glorifying colonization, just as MSU being the Spartans is not glorifying being overly possessive of a woman (Helen of Troy) and denying her the right to leave her husband without starting a war, lol.
Click to expand...
Trust me, the Ancient Spartans have way more issues than the Helen of Troy thing. You could make a pretty edgelordy sci-fi dystopia based on Ancient Sparta lol.
 
#365      
superfan
Colonials is retired because we shouldn't honor colonials and being used as a symbol of a university is a form of honor. Also, Chief Illiniwek was retired because being used as a symbol of a university is harmful and degrading.
 
#366      
lstewart53x3
superfan said:
Colonials is retired because we shouldn't honor colonials and being used as a symbol of a university is a form of honor. Also, Chief Illiniwek was retired because being used as a symbol of a university is harmful and degrading.
Click to expand...
Colonials used as a symbol of a university is a form of honor. Cheif Illiniwek used a symbol of a university is harmful and degrading. Interesting.
 
#367      
Dkayak
Honorable or degrading? Which is it? Confusing rules.
 
#368      
drsmitty74
superfan said:
Colonials is retired because we shouldn't honor colonials and being used as a symbol of a university is a form of honor. Also, Chief Illiniwek was retired because being used as a symbol of a university is harmful and degrading.
Click to expand...
Its Going Down GIF by Philips Norelco
 
#371      
Bucktown
Ransom Stoddard said:
It isn't about leading colonial forces against the empire, it stems more from colonialism (of all sorts) having a strong history of oppressing or obliterating the indigenous population. Indigenous folks in North America, South America, India, Australia, and big chunks of Africa regard European colonialism as a very evil thing, so I kind of get why that's not a great nickname to use in 2023.
Click to expand...
First it IS about leading colonial forces against an empire. Twisting the interpretation to suit a grievance in a completely different situation is disingenuous. Second, nearly every group of people throughout history including many, many 'indigenous folks' moved into other people's territory and oppressed them. Is that good, or an excuse for other bad behavior? Of course, not. But this modern narrative that the Europeans are somehow so much worse in their migration to new lands and no good came from that migration is a farce and is being used as a wedge for larger political goals.
 
#372      
Ander1345
Bucktown said:
First it IS about leading colonial forces against an empire. Twisting the interpretation to suit a grievance in a completely different situation is disingenuous. Second, nearly every group of people throughout history including many, many 'indigenous folks' moved into other people's territory and oppressed them. Is that good, or an excuse for other bad behavior? Of course, not. But this modern narrative that the Europeans are somehow so much worse in their migration to new lands and no good came from that migration is a farce and is being used as a wedge for larger political goals.
Click to expand...
It's not twisting anything unless it's being asserted that the colonies that eradicated large swaths of indigenous peoples are not the same colonies that fought the British Empire.

Realizing something was wrong and that it should never be done again is *not* weakness, it's very much the opposite.
 
#373      
Dkayak
Bucktown said:
First it IS about leading colonial forces against an empire. Twisting the interpretation to suit a grievance in a completely different situation is disingenuous. Second, nearly every group of people throughout history including many, many 'indigenous folks' moved into other people's territory and oppressed them. Is that good, or an excuse for other bad behavior? Of course, not. But this modern narrative that the Europeans are somehow so much worse in their migration to new lands and no good came from that migration is a farce and is being used as a wedge for larger political goals.
Click to expand...
Good points. First you remind us there’s more semantics than substance here —- our founders could just as accurately be called the anti-colonists. Second, you remind us that who’s doing the colonizing depends on where you draw the baseline in time. Populations have always migrated geographically over time, displacing and conquering one another . . . Greeks, Romans, “barbarians”, Persians, Franks, Saxons, Germanic tribes, Assyrians, Babylonians, other Asian empires, African nations, and individual Native American tribes. The Aztec, Maya, and Inca empires did a lot of conquering and colonizing before Columbus. Why is 1492 the objective baseline for bad colonial behavior? The Colonials controversy is just semantics.
 
#374      
RabidDawgClassic
Just wondering… how many of you have a strong opinion, one way or another, about freshmen cap burning?

Anyone? Anyone?

Bueller? Bueller? Anyone?

Well, back in the 1900’s, it was a huge tradition, not just at the University of Illinois, but at other universities as well. At Illinois, freshmen were required to wear green beanies all year. If they were seen in public without them, they were “punished.” (At Ohio State, offenders were thrown into a lake.) It was sanctioned hazing, as school officials knew about it and, in some cases, ordered the punishment. At the end of the year, the caps were burned in a public bonfire ceremony.

In 1931, the cap burning ceremony turned into a riot and the university decided it was a bad idea in general, and abolished it. Students were upset and held an unsanctioned cap burning ceremony the following year. How dare those fat cats in their ivory towers take away the students’ beloved tradition! No doubt, many harbored a grudge about this years after graduation.

Now, freshmen caps and the burning ceremony are forgotten relics of a bygone era.

So, where am I going with this? Well, so many of you carry a grudge that Illinois’ beloved tradition of a guy wearing an Indian outfit and dancing at ballgames was scrapped 16 years ago. I loved Chief Illiniwek as well and have fond memories, but it’s beyond time to move on. A hundred years from now, we’ll all be dead and no one alive then will care even one iota that people in the early 2000’s felt put upon when their halftime entertainment disappeared.

They’ll care about that just as much as we care about freshmen caps.

IMG_7440.jpeg
 
Last edited:
#375      
ChiefGritty
Bucktown said:
First it IS about leading colonial forces against an empire. Twisting the interpretation to suit a grievance in a completely different situation is disingenuous. Second, nearly every group of people throughout history including many, many 'indigenous folks' moved into other people's territory and oppressed them. Is that good, or an excuse for other bad behavior? Of course, not. But this modern narrative that the Europeans are somehow so much worse in their migration to new lands and no good came from that migration is a farce and is being used as a wedge for larger political goals.
Click to expand...
Ander1345 said:
It's not twisting anything unless it's being asserted that the colonies that eradicated large swaths of indigenous peoples are not the same colonies that fought the British Empire.

Realizing something was wrong and that it should never be done again is *not* weakness, it's very much the opposite.
Click to expand...
Dkayak said:
Good points. First you remind us there’s more semantics than substance here —- our founders could just as accurately be called the anti-colonists. Second, you remind us that who’s doing the colonizing depends on where you draw the baseline in time. Populations have always migrated geographically over time, displacing and conquering one another . . . Greeks, Romans, “barbarians”, Persians, Franks, Saxons, Germanic tribes, Assyrians, Babylonians, other Asian empires, African nations, and individual Native American tribes. The Aztec, Maya, and Inca empires did a lot of conquering and colonizing before Columbus. Why is 1492 the objective baseline for bad colonial behavior? The Colonials controversy is just semantics.
Click to expand...

I think we're missing the forest for the trees here a little bit.

Say for the sake of argument that the United States should be looked at as a project of genocidal pillage and plunder against Native Americans, a historical evil-doer. A popular view in some quarters, an unpopular view in others, but let's just stipulate that as true for the moment.

Non-native students dressing themselves in native garb to perform as a symbol of a public institution created by that evil doer government? Okay, I can connect the dots there of saying "stop doing that".

Changing the nickname of The George Washington University from "Colonials" to "Revolutionaries", on the other hand, is honoring the exact same history in the exact same way! Arguably even worse than that, if you take the evil-doer perspective, it's OBFUSCATING the historical crimes of the United States by dressing them up as liberatory against the British Empire rather than the Anglo settler-colonial project it actually was.

It fails on its own terms.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back