A few years ago, Dr. David Yeagley, who’s since been hounded out of academe for being a conservative Indian, wrote in favor of American Indian mascots. I thought his reasoning was compelling. He saw the mascots as a salute to the fierce warrior spirit of the tribes, not a denigration. I quote at length:
… Well, the way I figure it, anyone who could whip our Indian behinds like the white man did deserves our highest respect. And anyone who can whip a Comanche (my tribe) deserves the Medal of Honor.
I admire a man who can beat me. I dare say, deep inside all Indians at least those who are still warriors at heart there is a special admiration for the white man.
When the Comanches first encountered the white man, his behavior didn?t shock them. They saw that he took what he wanted by force. And they understood. Because the Comanches did the same to their weaker neighbors.
If my ancestors had been strong enough, they would have taken the white man?s land, instead of the other way around. And they wouldn?t have felt guilty about it afterwards. You wouldn?t have seen any defeated white people getting affirmative action from Comanches.
When one general surrenders to another, they salute each other. It doesn?t mean that there?s no bitterness between them. It just means that a warrior respects his foe.
White people understand this, because they too come from a warrior culture. The white man has great respect for the Indian. I?m not saying he always treats us the way we want to be treated. But he respects us for putting up a good fight.
Have you ever noticed how cowboy-and-Indian movies always focus on the same tribes? It?s either the Sioux, the Apaches or the Comanches. White people remember those tribes, because they fought hard and were the last to surrender.
Why does the U.S. military have helicopters named “Apache” and “Comanche” but none that are named “Arikara” or “Ojibwa?” They name their weapons systems after the fiercest tribes, because they want some of that fierceness to rub off. …
