Tim, if you don't know that the word sq*** is a slur, you must be living under a rock. Basically every Native person and nearly any book about native topics will tell you that it's obviously offensive.
No one is harmed by removing obvious slurs from the landscape and Indians living in the area will not have to see a nasty racist (and sexist!) term on road signs or hiking trails--a clear net benefit to society.
I have mixed feelings about renamings but IMO removing nasty bigoted epithets from the landscape is a world of difference from even renaming a Jefferson Davis Blvd. or suchlike.
Who freaking cares about changing placenames. That's such a phony "fix", it's insulting. Instead, I'd improve the material lot of Indians in the present day by giving them more tools to deal with their problems.
Not something like this though.
Yes, I do believe that things like this can be in fact vetoed by the broader majority. That's how democracy ought to work.
Nobody is claiming that this will improve the material lot of Indians, so its not a “phony fix”. Indian poverty and prejudice against Indians are different issues and both can be dealt with. What a stupid strawman argument.
I still haven’t heard a single reason why this move is actually bad beyond vague non-arguments like the one quoted above. Why is changing a place name that contains an unambiguously offensive and racist term a problem?
The woke use exceptionally, uselessly broad definition of bigotry categories to justify remaking our culture wholesale. And I am opposed to that. The vacuousness of this all is really cherry on the top as well. Politicians will play their games, and what is fair play will be played with. Not even timeless placenames are safe from political virtue-signalling. I think there's clearly ample evidence that this has gone too far.
Good Lord, this is like talking to a brick wall. This isn’t ”the political class” “doing something and claiming it’s going to make a difference” while not solving “the problem.” The government can do multiple things at once, and there is no reason they can’t take the minor step of changing these place names while also preparing larger more substantive changes.
Furthermore, the term squaw is considered very offensive by just about every native I’ve heard of. It’s a slur. That’s not because of some “uselessly broad definition of bigotry.” Renaming some random creek that contains a racial slur in the American Southwest isn’t “remaking our culture wholesale” and this isn’t “virtue signaling.”
Would you have opposed taking the n word out of place names, as was done in the 1950s and 60s? Was that pointless virtue signaling? If that wasn't, why is this?
