Trump's racist name games are straight out of a totalitarian playbook
This week, Trump called for the team names of the Washington Commanders and the Cleveland Guardians to be restored to the Redskins and the Indians, complete with the resurrection of the old Indians' mascot/logo Chief Wahoo, a thoroughly racist caricature.
'The Washington 'Whatever's' should IMMEDIATELY change their name back to the Washington Redskins Football Team,' Trump wrote in a social media post that seemed designed to distract America's attention away from Jeffrey Epstein, adding, 'Our great Indian people, in massive numbers, want this to happen. Their heritage and prestige is systematically being taken away from them. Times are different now than they were three or four years ago. We are a Country of passion and common sense. OWNERS, GET IT DONE!!!'
The owners, of course, won't get it done. They know how that would play out after their multimillion-dollar rebranding efforts. As for Native Americans clamoring for going back in time, I'd like to see the polling on that assertion.
Oh, wait, a 2020 poll of Native Americans by UC Berkeley and University of Michigan researchers found that half believed the name 'Redskins' offensive, while 65% said they found the 'tomahawk chop' stadium gesture at odds with, you know, not being a racist.
No doubt Trump has conducted his own poll because he went further, vowing to block the Commanders from building a new stadium in the nation's capital if the team's owner refuses to make their racist name great again.
That threat to billionaire Commanders owner Josh Harris — who also has a stake in the NBA's Philadelphia 76ers and the NHL's New Jersey Devils — comes as his football team is scheduled to move back to the District of Columbia and a new stadium in 2030.
But after a decades-long pressure campaign that resulted in the 2021 name change, reverting to the old one will likely prove more difficult than repainting an end-zone logo.
Trump is also very offended that the name of Cleveland's baseball team no longer offends so many people and is pressuring the owners of the team formerly known as the Indians to re-offend.
So far, that doesn't seem likely.
'Not something I'm tracking or have been paying a lot of attention to, but I would say generally I understand that there are very different perspectives on the decision we made a few years ago,' Guardians President of Baseball Operations Chris Antonetti said. 'But obviously it's a decision we've made and we've gotten the opportunity to build the brand as the Guardians over the past four years and are excited about the future.'
Trump's pressing the issue of sports team names is part of a larger rebranding offensive designed to take the country back to the bad old days.
When Trump isn't threatening the NFL, MLB and network late-night talk show hosts, he's been busy erasing U.S. Army base names and renaming U.S. Navy ship names he doesn't like.
After the George Floyd murder in 2020, Congress voted to change seven Army bases named after Confederate generals, most prominently Fort Bragg in North Carolina and Fort Benning in Georgia.
Braxton Bragg was regarded as one of the most incompetent rebel generals, but he happened to be from North Carolina, and Henry Louis Benning was a leading white supremacist who once said, 'If things are allowed to go on as they are … we will have black governors, black legislatures, black juries, black everything. Is it supposed that the white race will stand for that?'
Our terribly clever secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, used a fascinatingly cute gambit to restore the base names: He found soldiers who had a connection to the bases while sharing their old names. Goodbye, Braxton Bragg, hello Roland Bragg, a World War II paratrooper.
Sen. Angus King, the Independent from Maine, told Hegseth the bases were named for 'people who took up arms against their country on behalf of slavery,' which didn't seem to faze the former Fox News weekend analyst.
'There is a legacy, a connection' for older U.S. Army veterans, Hegseth countered, to which King responded that his answer and actions were 'an insult to the people of the United States.'
Throw in the recent decision by Trump and Hegseth to change U.S. Navy ship names, most prominently those named after the late San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk and the late civil rights icon, Rep. John Lewis, and the at-best thinly disguised pattern is laid bare.
Want more? The Pentagon's pogrom/purge of alleged DEI promotion in its online presence and libraries initially wiped out any mention of Navajo Code talkers or the Tuskegee Airmen, a far greater affront than any sports franchise name.
All of this adds up to more than a diversion from the Epstein case.
If they do, we're history.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Brazil scrambles as U.S. tariff deadline looms, talks stall
By Luciana Magalhaes, Lisandra Paraguassu, Bernardo Caram and Ana Mano SAO PAULO (Reuters) -Brazil is scrambling to avert punishing 50% U.S. tariffs in a week's time, but high level talks are stalled and U.S. companies are reluctant to confront U.S. President Donald Trump over the issue, officials and industry leaders say. Trump linked the tariffs, which he has said would come into effect on Aug. 1, to Brazil's treatment of former President Jair Bolsonaro, who is on trial over charges of plotting a coup to stop President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva from taking office. Lula has called the threatened duty "unacceptable blackmail." No new diplomatic talks have occurred since last month, and a Brazilian counter-proposal sent in May went unanswered, two diplomats with knowledge of the matter told Reuters. Brazilian Vice-President Geraldo Alckmin told reporters on Thursday that he reiterated the country's willingness to negotiate in a Saturday discussion with U.S. Secretary of Commerce, Howard Lutnick. The lack of communication has left Brazil with dwindling options as the deadline approaches. "If he wanted to talk, he would pick up the phone and call me," Lula said of Trump at an event on Thursday. The White House didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Negotiations are complicated by U.S. concerns over the prosecution of Bolsonaro, a Trump ally, one diplomat said, calling it a major roadblock. Trump announced the proposed 50% tariffs on Brazil on July 9 despite a U.S. trade surplus with the country - lining it up for one of the world's very highest such levies, close to China's 55% rate. In a series of 18 meetings, Alckmin has urged representatives from U.S. firms including General Motors, John Deere and Alphabet Inc to press Washington on the issue. However, the companies are reluctant to confront Trump for fear of retaliation, according to a government official and Ricardo Alban, president of Brazil's main industry lobby, CNI. "Things are very tense," Alban told reporters on Thursday. Also on Thursday, a group of Democratic senators condemned the tariffs on Brazil as a "clear abuse of power" in a letter to Trump. The tariffs could have a severe economic impact. The CNI estimates over 100,000 Brazilian jobs could be lost, potentially trimming 0.2% from the country's gross domestic product. The country's powerful agribusiness lobby, CNA, projects the value of its U.S. exports could fall by half. Alban said the potential blow to exporters could be worse than the COVID-19 pandemic, adding that business leaders are asking the government for aid, suggesting new credit lines. In response, some companies are already adjusting their trade strategies. Motor maker WEG is considering a plan to use its plants in Mexico and India to supply the U.S., its chief financial officer told analysts. Meat exporter Naturafrig Alimentos has begun redirecting shipments to other countries, according to commercial director Fabrizzio Capuci. Other companies are turning to the courts. Orange juice producer Johanna Foods, for example, has sued the Trump administration over the proposed tariffs. Companies in sectors ranging from steel to chemicals are also facing export contract cancellations, according to one advisor who asked not to be named. Abiquim, an association that represents chemical companies in Brazil, confirmed cancellations due to the threat of tariffs, without naming the companies affected. A lobby group representing steel companies declined to comment.
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump says US may not have a negotiated trade deal with Canada
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The United States may not reach a negotiated trade deal with Canada, U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday, suggesting his administration could set a tariff rate unilaterally. Trump, speaking to reporters as he left the White House for a trip to Scotland, said, "We haven't really had a lot of luck with Canada. I think Canada could be one where there's just a tariff, not really a negotiation." The two nations are trying to work out a trade deal before August 1, when Washington is threatening to impose 35% tariffs on all Canadian goods not covered by the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement. Carney's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Canadian officials have increasingly made clear that the chances of a deal by August 1 are unlikely. Dominic LeBlanc, the federal cabinet minister in charge of U.S.-Canada trade, told reporters in Washington on Thursday after two days of talks that "we've made progress, but we have a lot of work in front of us." LeBlanc said Canada would take the time necessary to get the best deal possible. Carney indicated last week that Canada might not be able to persuade the United States to lift all its sanctions.
Time Magazine
11 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
Colbert Is Practically Daring CBS to Shut Him Down Early
'Over the weekend it sunk in that they're killing off our show,' Stephen Colbert reflected at the top of The Late Show on Monday, following a tempest of outrage over CBS's suspiciously timed cancellation of the program that had only gained strength over the weekend. 'But they made one mistake: They left me alive!' The audience responded with chants of 'Stephen! Stephen!'—which, in retrospect, was the first clue that the host's taunt was not entirely a joke. Since then, Colbert has been ripping into Donald Trump with renewed relish, often while also flaying CBS and its parent company, Paramount. By doubling down on attacking his most powerful enemy, at a time when network execs are facing such intense scrutiny for what many believe was a politically motivated firing, he isn't just making the most of the 10 months he has left—he's essentially daring his bosses to kill the show sooner. (Think an expensive contract would be enough to keep a host judged to be a liability on the air? Kindly recall NBC's Megyn Kelly debacle of 2018.) If they take the bait, Colbert will have his most damning evidence yet that what they called a 'purely financial decision' was, at least in part, political. For those who don't keep daily tabs on late-night talk shows—which, let's be honest, is the vast majority of us these days—it's worth reviewing this week's Late Show highlights. On Monday, Colbert devoted his whole monologue to Trump. First he addressed his cancellation ('Cancel culture has gone too far'), expressing relief that 'I can finally speak unvarnished truth to power and say what I really think about Donald Trump—starting right now,' then feinting in the direction of understatement: 'I don't care for him. Doesn't seem to have, like, the skillset to be President. Just not a good fit, you know?' He moved on to reports claiming that his show, despite winning its broadcast time slot, was losing some $40 million a year: 'I could see us losing $24 million, but where could Paramount have possibly spent the other 16… oh yeah.' In an instantly viral soundbite, Colbert responded to Trump's social media posts calling him talentless and gloating over his show's demise by asking: 'Would an untalented man be able to compose the following satirical witticism?: Go f-ck yourself. ' Then he prefaced a riff on the Wall Street Journal 's Epstein birthday letter bombshell with: 'The President was buddies with a pedophile.' 'It's a great day to be me because I am not Donald Trump,' Colbert greeted the audience on Tuesday, before discussing reports that FBI agents were ordered to scour the Epstein files for Trump mentions. 'All the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't hide who Dumpty humped with his friend,' he quipped. Also: 'It's not a great look when you fly on the pedophile's plane enough times to earn diamond pervert status.' In response to Trump's apparent fixation on arresting Barack Obama, Colbert wondered aloud: 'What the f-ck is wrong with this guy?' Finally, he seemed to pivot away from the President with a bit about soaring beef prices. But then he brought Trump into that story as well, suggesting that his tariffs were partly to blame. Wednesday's Late Show opened by poking fun at Coca-Cola's plans to oblige POTUS by manufacturing cane-sugar-sweetened soda in the U.S. with a faux advertisement for cocaine-enhanced 'Don Jr. Coke.' A monologue that kicked off with a few jokes about the impending heatwave soon segued to a familiar subject. 'One person who's already sweating is Donald Trump,' Colbert said, before pausing to let the audience boo. To no one's surprise, the host made a meal out of the news that the Justice Department had, in May, informed the President that his name was in the Epstein files. 'He's in the file! He's in the file!' Colbert chanted, rubbing his hands together and approaching the camera with a gleeful grin. 'You know how they say there's no such thing as bad publicity? They're not talkin' about this.' He went on to show a greatest-hits collection of Trump-Epstein photos, casually drop 'Micropenis DJT' into a list of fictional Trump nicknames, and roast Trump for the mathematical impossibility of his promised prescription-drug-price reductions. And then he circled back to 'how [Trump is] making my network crawl,' citing the President's claim that he would secure another $20 million in free airtime from CBS. 'By bending the knee, they lost like $40 million this year,' Colbert said. 'They better watch out. They might get canceled for purely financial reasons .' Colbert ended his show's four-day week, on Thursday, with more than eight minutes on the Epstein saga. First there was a cold open skit that used a montage of Three Stooges eye-poking clips to mock Attorney General Pam Bondi for citing a torn cornea as her reason for missing an awkwardly timed speaking engagement at a summit on sex trafficking. In his monologue, Colbert tore through the latest Trump-Epstein headlines ('What are you gonna tell me next—that the Pope is in the Catholic files? That a bear is on the cover of this month's Modern Woods Pooper ?'), from Epstein's evasiveness on Trump in a 2010 deposition to Mark Epstein's claim that his brother dumped Trump after deciding he was 'a crook' to the Ghislaine Maxwell of it all. When he finally moved off the topic, it was for a bit lampooning the President's recent statements on artificial intelligence that mostly seemed to be an excuse to direct viewers to Wednesday's already-notorious season premiere of South Park (also a Paramount property), which included an extremely NSFW parody PSA starring an uncanny, AI-generated Trump. I'd call this a mic drop, but I have a feeling Colbert will have plenty more to say come Monday. When you consider how litigious Trump has been with regard to practices that legal precedent supports as protected speech—of which satire and commentary are two—Colbert's stand is a risky one. But whether you think his response to The Late Show 's cancellation is brave or foolish, you can't deny that he's playing his cards perfectly against Paramount and CBS. If the powers that be pull him off the air before May 2026, he'll have all but proven that their decision to dump him was about more than the cost of making his show. And if they resign themselves to letting him say whatever he wants for the next 10 months? Well then, he'll get to say whatever he wants for the next 10 months. I can't imagine either option making his bosses jump for joy.
