"It's always been there" is as adequate a reason for keeping it as it is for changing it (which seems to be the point).

The top points I tried making are raider is not a native american word and that aggression/violence in athletics is a virtue. I reckon this topic is a distraction from topics that actually matter and ultimately an attempted collectivist/marxist attack on what remains of one of Europe's North American colonies.

Now, one good, one bad and one ugly. Good, you were absolutely correct in feeling puzzled. Bad, you missed the author meant: The phrase for the time when you tear down the proud symbols of a society is "after [its] death". Ugly, someone who knew the literal translation of post mortem couldn't put together the above interpretation.

Spot on.

Thank you for sharing these thoughts and how it relates to your story. It is sad to see this kind of thing happening even at a local level. I thought the outrage olympics only played on a big media scale but to see this happen to one's own high school (with this possibly being its only claim to fame) must be sobering if not outright sad.

Afaict, by now it's rather common on the local level. The herd hears what they hear via the TV/Universityindoctrination camps operating as tax free hedge funds and not parroting the propaganda is too much for them to manage.

I am disappointed with the quality of this blog post.

It's called an article. Good luck with your disappointment.

The majority of this post is misdirection from the topic at hand, and you give no reason as to why the mascot should stay besides "it's always been there".

Do you mind quoting the starkest examples from the text of the alleged misdirection ? I did give at least one reason and "it's always been there" is your inference alone -- it's not in the text.

You mentioned in your article that you are part of a minority group. I respect that your identity as a minority is important to you, but it doesn't give you any authority or lend weight to your opinion unless you are a part of the group being racially stereotyped.

What's important to me is the extent to which I can carve myself into individuality in the limited time I have. That'd make being a minority of one important to me, but I don't think that's how you mean. I mentioned it more to underline that racism exists wherever people are, just as violence does. I also don't think that racism is as big of a deal as many USians are currently hyping it. It's more of a distraction from increasing decay and poverty than anything else.

How I see it is being racially stereotyped affords me some authority to comment on the topic generally. My position is it's a poor excuse for collectivists losers who "just want to". That doesn't mean being racists is cool or correct nor does it mean the victims are innocent, myself included.

The history of racism and oppression tied to the Rutland Raiders name and logo cannot be justified by simply saying it doesn't mean that to you. Racist imagery will remain inherently racist no matter if people claim it doesn't represent that anymore.

What exactly is this history that's tied to the name and logo ? The history that I tie it to is championship titles earned.

To counter another one of your arguments, no one is going to bully people who wear Raider gear and no one is going to be burning it. You are patently misrepresenting the people you are trying to refute.

That reads more like what you prettypleaseverymuch want to be the case rather than a claim you could actually support. How in carnation do you know what people you don't even know will do in the future ? Especially in terms of persecuting alleged racists ? It seems to me that removal is something that Michael Reinhol antifa twerp would be in favor of.

I hate to nitpick language and I have been trying to avoid it in this response. However, your use of the phrase "post mortem" is particularly egregious. Post mortem is latin for "after death" (loosely translated). It is often used to discuss what happens after the death of a person, such as discussing post mortem wounds in a murder case, or discussing an award given to a person after their death. There is no reason to use it as you did, and frankly it's puzzling. Next time, look up the definition of a word before posting.

I know what it means, cultures live and cultures die too. Arguably, America died decades ago, the only question on the matter really is how far has it decayed and how fast will the decay proceed.

I will close with a simple statement of fact. Your time at Rutland High School is now past. The traditions that you and your classmates held up as important should be challenged, not because everything old is wrong, but because traditions should not be continued simply for their own sake. I encourage you to re-examine your position through the lens of the arguments I have laid out above. If you continue to hold to the same position, that's fine. A well examined position is the first step to convincing others.

Sure, my time has passed, I'm not trying to go back. The fact of the matter is, most things that are old are correct, that's how they got to be old in the first place. Writing this article and receiving the comments has caused me to learn. More so from Mr. Popescu's comments than yours, but that's par for the course.

"It's always been there" is as adequate a reason for keeping it as it is for changing it (which seems to be the point). Obviously, it has not always been there but it began at some point because some people thought it was appropriate. I do hope you never actually read a history book or even geography book as it will be unbearable to know that most names of things were given to them by their owners with little consideration for the feelings of imaginary people.

> You mentioned in your article that you are part of a minority group. I respect that your identity as a minority is important to you, but it doesn't give you any authority or lend weight to your opinion unless you are a part of the group being racially stereotyped.

Gee, and here I was thinking authority or the weight's of one's opinions does not come from skin color or race. Thanks for clearing it up. In any case, by this line of thought, Rose doesn't sound like much of a minority name nor an authority on the matter.

>The history of racism and oppression tied to the Rutland Raiders name and logo cannot be justified by simply saying it doesn't mean that to you. Racist imagery will remain inherently racist no matter if people claim it doesn't represent that anymore.

Found the racist seeing race where others don't.

> I hate to nitpick language and I have been trying to avoid it in this response. However, your use of the phrase "post mortem" is particularly egregious. Post mortem is latin for "after death" (loosely translated). It is often used to discuss what happens after the death of a person, such as discussing post mortem wounds in a murder case, or discussing an award given to a person after their death. There is no reason to use it as you did, and frankly it's puzzling. Next time, look up the definition of a word before posting.

Now, one good, one bad and one ugly. Good, you were absolutely correct in feeling puzzled. Bad, you missed the author meant: The phrase for the time when you tear down the proud symbols of a society is "after [its] death". Ugly, someone who knew the literal translation of post mortem couldn't put together the above interpretation.

Roses are commie-red,
violence is true,
honor is dead,
and Raiders too? :(

@Author
Thank you for sharing these thoughts and how it relates to your story. It is sad to see this kind of thing happening even at a local level. I thought the outrage olympics only played on a big media scale but to see this happen to one's own high school (with this possibly being its only claim to fame) must be sobering if not outright sad.

I am disappointed with the quality of this blog post. The majority of this post is misdirection from the topic at hand, and you give no reason as to why the mascot should stay besides "it's always been there". Additionally, you seem to be claiming that the Rutland Raiders name and logo honor native peoples. However, it is not possible to honor native peoples if those same people reject your attempt as a negative stereotype.

You mentioned in your article that you are part of a minority group. I respect that your identity as a minority is important to you, but it doesn't give you any authority or lend weight to your opinion unless you are a part of the group being racially stereotyped.

The history of racism and oppression tied to the Rutland Raiders name and logo cannot be justified by simply saying it doesn't mean that to you. Racist imagery will remain inherently racist no matter if people claim it doesn't represent that anymore.

To counter another one of your arguments, no one is going to bully people who wear Raider gear and no one is going to be burning it. You are patently misrepresenting the people you are trying to refute.

I hate to nitpick language and I have been trying to avoid it in this response. However, your use of the phrase "post mortem" is particularly egregious. Post mortem is latin for "after death" (loosely translated). It is often used to discuss what happens after the death of a person, such as discussing post mortem wounds in a murder case, or discussing an award given to a person after their death. There is no reason to use it as you did, and frankly it's puzzling. Next time, look up the definition of a word before posting.

I will close with a simple statement of fact. Your time at Rutland High School is now past. The traditions that you and your classmates held up as important should be challenged, not because everything old is wrong, but because traditions should not be continued simply for their own sake. I encourage you to re-examine your position through the lens of the arguments I have laid out above. If you continue to hold to the same position, that's fine. A well examined position is the first step to convincing others.

Sincerely,
Rose Tyler

Jordon Carvey, cheers!

The only thing that comes to mind is ye olde epistle dedicatory (which is worth a read in any case), specifically the part that goes "bequeath my skills to him who can have them and my sword to him who can lift it" or thereabouts.

> Apologies for evoking the distaste

As the bimbo spontaneously pointed out you personally aren't even a terrible writer, so don't take it that way. The problem's of the group not so much of the scant individuals thinking of it.

> No, I didn't know that and I'm not sure I take your meaning.

There's this ominously retarded online add blasted everywhichway.