|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Feature
|
|
News :: Civil & Human Rights |
|
"Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
Current rating: 0 |
by tarkusinc
(No verified email address) |
15 Apr 2004
|
This morning, a multicultural coalition 40 University of Illinois students, faculty, alumni, community members, and Native peoples have occupied Swanlund Administration Building on the Urbana-Champaign  campus
of University of Illinois in protest of the continued use of  "Chief Illiniwek" and the U of I Board of Trustees' disregard for  democracy.
We need your help and support!
1. Contact Trustee Eppley at (312) 372-1121 and tell him "I support  the occupation and urge the Board to end the controversy and eliminate the "Chief" today!" You can also leave a message for the  Board at their office at (217) 333-1920 or at mthompsn (at) uillinois.edu.  Please copy all emails to prc (at) prairienet.org.
2. Come to Swanlund Administration Building (601 E. John St, on corner of 6th & Wright) now to show your support for the occupation! Â
We will be picketing and rallying all day outside of Swanlund. If  you'd like to lend additional support, we desperately need money for  food,
supplies,other essentials for the occupation, and (potentially) bail money if arrests occur. Checks can be made out to "PRC" with "occupation" in the memo. |
Statement from the PRC:
Today, April 15th, 2004, is the day the Board of Trustees was supposed to hold a Board meeting on the Chicago campus, yet the Board cancelled this meeting to avoid addressing a resolution seeking to eliminate "Chief Illiniwek." Perhaps they thought that if there were  no meeting, there would be no controversy - nothing could be further  from
the truth! In an attempt to ignore the concerns of Native peoples and avoid charges of racism from communities of color, the  Board has put the University's mission, future, and democratic ideals  in jeopardy, and eroded the trust of the students, staff, faculty,  and alumni of this institution. This is unacceptable.
The Board has sought to ignore and trivialize this issue for over 15 years, but today they can ignore it no longer. Chairman Eppley, in
canceling today's meeting, was reported to have said that, "there  wasn't sufficient new business to warrant a new board meeting (in  April)."
Perhaps the current occupation of their main administrative  building will give the Board "sufficient new business" to call a meeting and address this issue.
After 15 years, we have exhausted every other available means of educating the Board about what the rest of the world already knows:  that "Chief Illiniwek" is racist, offensive, and must be eliminated  now to make this University welcoming to students and communities of  color.
But the Board has not listened, and we regret that their actions and inactions have made this occupation both necessary and inevitable. |
Related stories on this site:
"Anti-Chief" update: Interview with sit-in-er Antar Jackson
| 
This work is in the public domain. |
Comments
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by W.M.
WMorris44 (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: -2
15 Apr 2004
|
|
Your inability to respond in a civilized manner simply sets the movement back. |
|
some quick comments |
by ijustkrushalot
uiuc.edu (unverified) |
Current rating: 3
15 Apr 2004
|
news gazette article: http://news-gazette.com/story.cfm?Number=15817
I particularly love how you clowns managed to shut out a lady who looks about 70 years old, and can't go home because she is in a car-pool... genious
this little publicity stunt shows to the university community just how desperate for attention the PRC is. If i hadn't already lost all respect for your 3rd grade antics, i would have today.
Are classes SERIOUSLY THAT BORING!? |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by W.M.
WMorris44 (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: -2
15 Apr 2004
|
The collateral damamge being caused by a few fanatics will do more harm than good.
There are ways to fight this, but this shouldn't be one of them. |
|
I DO NOT support your sit in. |
by B.M.
illinoisalumni.org (unverified) |
Current rating: -6
15 Apr 2004
|
Good luck with making absolutely no progress for your cause.
Long live the Chief! |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by TJ
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 2
15 Apr 2004
|
I find this extremely interesting to see how the premise of the protest is, in part, because of "the U of I Board of Trustees' disregard for democracy."
If I recall correctly, the Board had an opportunity to vote on the issue recently. However, the item regarding the Chief was pulled by the initiator of the item, Frances Carroll, a noted Chief opponent.
It's pretty hard to cry about the outcome of the game when you purposely forefit it. |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by Smart...
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 1
15 Apr 2004
|
|
Thank You very much! By doing this, you now give the MUCH larger ProChief contingent a precedent in which they can "peacefully" shut down the entire campus, if you ever manage to get rid of the Chief. |
|
Can you say "Backfire"? |
by PS
PS (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: -1
15 Apr 2004
|
Nice to see that you guys know how to alienate the fence-riders. All you're accomplishing is turning more people against you.
Well done! |
|
Childish |
by Tiki
Kru (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: -5
15 Apr 2004
|
The anti-chief factions don't get their way soio they go and disrupt the administration of the university, like a group of spoiled three year olds.
...and the chief is a diruptive force on campus? As I see it, only disrutive people I see are the ones preventing poor old ladies from getting to work.
I will thank the anti-chief forces for steeling my resolve to make sure that the opinions of the vocal few are not pressed upon that of the majority.
Long live the Chief! |
|
What right do you have |
by 98
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: -2
15 Apr 2004
|
|
To waste my tax dollars by shutting down a building at the University of Illinois? If there is ever a vote that comes before the people of the State of Illinois, you can be guaranteed that I will vote against your cause. |
|
One Person or Someone's Mailing List? |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 19
15 Apr 2004
|
It's rather odd that after this story has sat here all morning without any comments, in the last 20 minutes it gets a whole bunch of comments all of the sudden by posters (apprearing to be separate people). Is this really the case, is it just one lonely disgruntled pro-Chief supporter, or has the fact that UC IMC has an Feature covering the protest suddenly become the topic of some right-wing mailing list?
In any case, as someone who came to the area in 1975 (long before some of the loudest pro-Chief voices were born) and wondered why a noted university had such a regressive, insulting, and racist caricature as a mascot, I would like to point out that the pro-Cheif supportes are NOT the overwhelming majority they like to paint themselves as. I still wonder why some people are so stuck in the first half of the 20th Century in their preferences for racist depictions of oppressed minorities. And as a student at this great university, it still distresses me that the pointlessness of speding so much time and effort by por-Chief types to preserve their racist mascot could be much better spent on making sure this university is fully funded in this time of fiscal crisis.
Oh, I get it...it's far more important for some people to "Save the Cheif" than it is to have the faculty, staff, and facilities to support a great university. And it's far more important to them to preserve an insulting caricature than it is to repair the harm done in this nation's name to its first citizens. |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by Surf
nopcu.edu (unverified) |
Current rating: 4
15 Apr 2004
|
Thanks for keeping Cantor from working today... If she does nothing else before moving to Syracuse, I'll be very happy.
Now, how about going with her? Their mascot the Orangemen sounds oppressive... |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by ijustkrushalot
uiuc.edu (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
15 Apr 2004
|
|
to answer your question ML... we are all different posters.. the link got posted on a message board... |
|
So ML... |
by W.M.
WMorris44 (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: -2
15 Apr 2004
|
...Are you actually endorsing the activities of today?
I am NOT pro-Chief, but I wish they would've found a better way to voice a united displeasure at the BOT's cancellation of the meeting. |
|
Fine By Me |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 17
15 Apr 2004
|
Ignoring injustice and failing to address it have consequences. One is that it can lead to ratcheting up the level of protest activity. After some 15 years, several invesitigations that have called attention to the problem without result, and endless opportunites missed to resolve it, it does not surprise me that some people have taken this step. I personally believe that it is more surprising that this has not occurred yet, so it should not be a shock to anyone that a sit-in has occurred.
Besides, W.M., I find it a bit odd that you claim to be anti-Chief, when you have come through the door along with all these pro-Chief types. As one of them has admitted, the reason for this flood of messages is that there was a post at a pro-Chief message board asking that this story be flooded with comments protesting the sit-in. I find it rather odd, to say the least, that a supposedly pro-Chief person like yourself takes his/her cues from pro-Chief message boards....so I have reason to believe that you are not who you claim to be. |
|
Pictures from Swanlund |
by PR
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 16
15 Apr 2004
|
Click on image for a larger version
 | Click on image for a larger version
 |  | Click on image for a larger version
 |  | Click on image for a larger version
 |
|
At the time these were taken, the sit-in had been going on for 5 hours. |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by Tiki
kru (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: -1
15 Apr 2004
|
Besides, M.L.., I find it a bit odd that you make these anti-Chief statements, when you have come through the door along with all these pro-Chief types. As one of them has admitted, the reason for this flood of messages is that there was a post at a pro-Chief message board asking that this story be flooded with comments protesting the sit-in. I find it rather odd, to say the least, that a supposedly pro-Chief person like yourself takes his/her cues from pro-Chief message boards....so I have reason to believe that you are not who you claim to be.
It cuts both ways. |
|
The message board this was linked from is not pro-Chief |
by PS
PS (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
15 Apr 2004
|
It's U of I related, but takes no stand on the Chief.
So what you're seeing is a cross-section of the general population, not an influx from a pro-Chief forum.
The vocal minority does not have the right to over-ride the wishes of the silent majority. |
|
Your Ignorance Is Manifest |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 12
15 Apr 2004
|
Tiki,
It's not odd at all that I am here. Your ignorance apparently extends beyond your support of a racist mascot. I happen to be an editor here, so it is not at all odd that I noticed the unbalanced and artificial anture of the posting pattern associated with the majority of comments to this article so far. |
|
BTW: Facts? |
by Tiki
kru (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 5
15 Apr 2004
|
"I would like to point out that the pro-Cheif supportes are NOT the overwhelming majority they like to paint themselves as."
I too would like you to point this out, and preferrably back it up with facts....because I have an election from a month ago that the student population backs the chief by clear majority.
I'll hang up and wait for your response.... |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by PS
PS (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: -2
15 Apr 2004
|
|
ML-did it ever occur to you that the reason that the majority of the replies to this article are not in agreement with your viewpoints is because the majority of people are not in agreement with your viewpoints? |
|
NOT A Symbol of This Great University |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 11
15 Apr 2004
|
|
The only thing clearly shown by the election results is that most of the student body is, if not outright hostile toward the Chief, are at best apathetic about his existence. So that makes the Chief, by any measure, neither representative of the student body nor a viable symbol of unity. |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by 98
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: -1
15 Apr 2004
|
Gee you're an editor for a web site promoting an anti-chief cause, and we're supposed to take you as unbiased. You say that the "majority" is ficticious... Apparently you missed the vote that showed 2/3 of students support the chief...
And just in case you want to group me in with the people that have no "personal" stake, you should know that I am also part Native American. |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by W.M.
WMorris44 (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 2
15 Apr 2004
|
As PS says, it was *not* a pro-Chief message board. It was an Illinois message board.
Whether or not you believe it, I couldn't care less. It's not like I'm threatening to suddenly support the Chief because I disagreed with today's actions.
I was just expressing my frustration that today's protest couldn't be handled in a more PR-friendly way.
While I understand your point that previous activities have failed to produce results, you also have to understand more drastic measures like this will also energize the other side, as evidenced by the string of Pro-Chief posters. Will this negative effect outway the positive? Only time can tell. But it's a risk I don't think should've been taken. |
|
Huh? |
by PS
PS (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
15 Apr 2004
|
|
If memory serves me correctly, approximately 70% of the students that voted in that election supported the Chief. In a presidential election, the national media would call that a "landslide". How can you characterize the results of the most recent election as even MARGINALLY anti-Chief? The anti-Chief faction got their lunches handed to them, plain and simple. Your ability to try to spin that to your advantage is inspiring, but somewhat Quixotic. |
|
Don't Sweat It, W.M. |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 13
15 Apr 2004
|
I really find the long string of comments, as far as I can tell from people who've never been here before, rather amusing. As for their being stirred-up and creating a "problem," that is rather laughable. I'm sure Dr. Martin Luther King is chuckling in heaven over your handwringing about stirring up the opponents of injustice.
As far as I can tell, the energizing of the pro-Chief types is mostly hot-air. It rather reminds me of an undergrad staying up all night by drinking espresso to study. And the next day, getting all the answers wrong because they are so burnt out they're stumbling through the test in a haze of their own hubris. |
|
Using the same article |
by Tiki
kru (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
15 Apr 2004
|
"..., I would like to point out that the pro-Cheif supportes are NOT the overwhelming majority they like to paint themselves as."
At least my ignorance doesn't extent to the actual spelling of the word "CHEIF" (or the word supporters for that matter), editor. Seeing by your difficultly with spelling the most simple of words, I have reason to believe that you are not who you claim to be.
Remember, you were the first to call people’s legitimacy into question… |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by W.M.
WMorris44 (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
15 Apr 2004
|
It's not really handwringing, but I suppose you're right.
I'd just prefer to focus efforts on having people withhold donations, (as I have) and going after the corporations that sponsor university events, rather than recycling tactics from the 60s. These days, I expect money is the only thing the University will listen to. |
|
Well, That Settles One Thing |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 15
15 Apr 2004
|
Tiki,
If stumbling over a word or two defines someone's legitimacy, that certainly settles the question of pResident Bush's legitimacy, does it not?
;0) |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by ijustkrushalot
uiuc.edu (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
15 Apr 2004
|
these kids use "democracy" as thier ralleying cry... yet... they have to resort to hijacking an administration building to get their way...
no matter what you stance on the chief is (i am semi-neutral)... i think the time has come to say that this type behaviour is UNACCEPTABLE and is not the way to get things done... i realise they will never accept that the campus is generally against them... but still, they should not be permitted to try and hijack the campus. I hope the campus police put an end to this if they try and shut down the administration again tomorrow |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by xian
xianb (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 23
15 Apr 2004
|
Sit-ins are hardly "3rd grade antics". They are tried and true strategies of non-violent civil disobedience. It was interesting to see the diversity of the crowd supporting the lock-in. Several people I talked to commented on how this was the most diverse impromptu gathering they'd ever seen in town. What's the explanation for that?
It's too bad that people, male or female of any age were inconvenienced by the sit-in. But attempting to engage in discourse over the enduring "inconvenience" of ethnic stereotyping was not producing any concrete action on the issue.
I fail to see how this could "set the movement back", after all, as the NG pointed out, the last time this happened was when the GEO occupied the building. Do you remember the outcome of that situation? |
|
ML, We finally agree on something! |
by Tiki
kru (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
15 Apr 2004
|
I hope you weren't assuming because I'm pro-chief, I'm pro-Bush. I'm about as anti-Bush as they come...
I know you've been around too long ML to be ignorant enough to believe people and their beliefs are that cut and dry.
Pro-chief (and anti-chief for that matter) people come from all walks, my friend. |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by 98
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
15 Apr 2004
|
|
Alright Xian, let say you're right, and this strategy actually works... why won't the large Pro -Chief contingent do sit-ins across the entire campus? This isn't a fight that goes away if you happen to win a battle... unfortanetly feeling are very strong on both sides... maybe you feel that the Chief dishonors Native Americans, because it doesn't specifically portray the Illini, but instead takes pieces of different Native American cultures, and combines them to make the whole that is Chief Illiniwek. When I see the Chief, I personally feel that he always does what he can to be reverent of the culture that he is portraying... If you want to get rid of Chief seats, I can understand that... but the way this is being handled is silly, because the same thing can be done by the other side... |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by Parrothead
none (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 2
15 Apr 2004
|
|
I don't think we should be surprised that ML saw the fact that a vast majority of students voted pro-Chief somehow shows that students are "if not outright hostile toward the Chief, are at best apathetice to his existence." After all, he wants to get rid of the Chief even though polls of Native Americans say the majority don't support his removal. |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by xian
xianb (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 21
15 Apr 2004
|
"Why won't the large Pro -Chief contingent do sit-ins across the entire campus?"
Well, that is certainly within their means as well. While it is inconvenient for others, whether you agree with their ideology or not, you have to admit that performing a sit-in which risks arrest and imprisonment certainly takes courage and conviction in one's values. I am skeptical it would happen, but if a pro-chief group decides that they are willing to risk that for their cause, I would admire their conviction even while believing that their movement is rooted in racial oppression.
I can't speak for ML as I'm not sure who that is, but reading his posts, his is referring to the fact that a majority of students didn't bother to vote in the election on this referendum. I wouldn't say that show that a majority are anti-Chief. But the other poster who said that "Apparently you missed the vote that showed 2/3 of students support the chief" is completely fabricating the situation.
I don't really care what the majority thinks. I'm more interested in the arguments involved on either side. If the majority of students voted to ridicule my ethnic group, I sure wouldn't abide by that, so think it would be selfish to abide by a majority decision in this case either. |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by 1997UofIGrad
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
15 Apr 2004
|
Hey Protesters! I heard there is a sale on bongs and incense at the Den!............
That ought to clear them out from the admin. building.
Why don't you transfer to Madison, you'd fit right in there. |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by UIHuskie
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: -3
15 Apr 2004
|
"And as a student at this great university, it still distresses me that the pointlessness of speding so much time and effort by por-Chief types to preserve their racist mascot could be much better spent on making sure this university is fully funded in this time of fiscal crisis."
Wait, isn't it the anti-Chief group that is the one spending all this time, money, and effort on getting rid of the Chief? I don't see any effort being expended by the pro-Chief crowd today to ensure that the Chief stays a part of this University. I do see the anti-Chief group turning away people trying to make a living from their job, and by acting like little three year-old children because they didn't get their way. And isn't the anti-Chief crowd being the divisive ones, as proven by their nice little stunt today? You don't see the pro-Chief organizations blocking buildings and wasting people's precious time and shoving their own personal beliefs down other's throats.
Great job guys for proving the point of every pro-Chiefer out there. The second the Chief would be gotten rid of, you'd find something else to complain about, and waste even more of your time on that. Maybe you guys deserve a dose of reality, or better yet, a dose of what life is actually like in the real world, where people don't have hours on end to spend wasting their time attempting to remove a University symbol that is overwhemlimgly supported by the most important people at the said University, its students.
Long live the Chief. |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by Surf
nopcu.edu (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
15 Apr 2004
|
My favorite part is that they are "demanding" additional funding for a whole host of minority programs OTHER than Native American studies as well... What's that? A little something extra for the effort?
As for the money issue, you can be sure the money the school would lose from alumni by removing the Chief FAR outweighs what they lose by keeping it... |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by ijustkrushalot
uiuc.edu (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
15 Apr 2004
|
i would love someone to independently verify this...
i heard a rumor that the mob out side of Swanlund could have dug themselves a nice grave by intentionally blocking a postal worker from delivering the mail (serious offense)... does anyone else know about this? |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by Jack Ryan
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 13
15 Apr 2004
|
Dear Pro Chief Supporters,
I have had the pleasure of knowing M.L. for at least two years. Anytime he/she disagrees with a viewpoint, there is usually must be some sort of conspiracy against him.
I particularly like the Left's explanation for the student vote that would be defined a "Landslide" in any other election. If you will recall, this is a vote that they said should never take place to begin with.
M.L. The reality is that former Florida Attorney General and The U.S Supreme court stole this one too.
Long Live The Chief!!! |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by W.M.
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: -2
15 Apr 2004
|
If they did bar a mailman from entering, it is indeed a felony.
Which just helps illustrates my initial point that there were better ways to do this. |
|
Re: Blocking the mail carrier |
by PS
PS (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: -2
15 Apr 2004
|
Nice move, if the police at the scene are to be believed.
Anyone for felony charges? Obstruction of a mail carrier is a federal offense.
Well done. That'll show everyone what lengths the PRC will go to to...do what? Cast their members into harm's way?
I'd be willing to bet that people aren't going to be NEARLY as willing to work around you guys tomorrow. Expect arrests...or a couple of really pissed off people playing Red Rover with some of your blockade lines..... |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by Jack Ryan
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 4
15 Apr 2004
|
M.L.
Man you're getting clobbered here from the normal people. You know, you see them everyday. They have things to do, people to see, friends. That sort of thing.
You better get some help putting all of these postings in the Hidden Articles section. You could develop carpel tunnel or something.
Jack |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by Dr. John Hilty
jhilty (nospam) shout.net (unverified) |
Current rating: 25
15 Apr 2004
|
The "pro-chief" comments are being posted by the same person or a small group of persons who obviously know each other. In either case, the mentality underlying these comments is one and the same. It is also interesting that these supposedly proud supporters of the current university mascot are unwilling to reveal their true identities. This is typical troll behavior.
The profusion of pro-chief comments is a clear indication that the sit-in at the administration building is having two desired effects: 1) It is annoying the pro-chief segment of the population, and 2) It has successfully attracted public attention and comment. So far so good.
First, let's be clear about one thing: the chief mascot is a symbol of hatred, oppression, racism, and genocide, and that's precisely why the pro-chief supporters love it (even though they won't admit this to either themselves or others). Once again the dark side of human nature reveals itself -- the same side of human nature that committed genocide against the native Amerindians and drove the few survivors off their land.
Let's look at the historical context of this chief symbol. It was adopted as the university mascot during the 1920's. What happened during this time period? There was a resurgence of the Ku Klux Klan, which had an active chapter at the University of Illinois. In Champaign-Urbana, blacks weren't allowed to eat at the same restaurants as white people, and they were forced to sit in the balcony of movie theaters.
During the 1920's, a growing number of people were subjected to mandatory sterilization in the United States if they were in prison or institutionalized for mental illness or mental disability. Meanwhile, fascism and Nazism continued to spread throughout Europe. It was within this context that the chief became the mascot of the university.
Since then, many of the preceding evils have been eliminated or reduced, but some of the symbols of this past remain with us. One of these symbols of evil is the Confederate flag; another one is the current mascot of the University of Illinois. There is nothing honorable about this mascot and there never was.
The chief mascot has been a source of chronic controversy since the 1980's. Nor does it seem likely that this controversy will end soon. The Board of Trustees should have retired the chief a long time ago when this controversy first appeared. It is the responsibility of the university to provide enlightened leadership to the broader community and repudiate these symbols of hatred and denigration.
It has been asserted that the sit-in at the Administration Building is "uncivilized." This is ludicrous. A sit-in is a non-violent form of social protest. that predates the 1960's. GM-workers had sit-ins in factories during the 1930's so that they could bargain collectively for higher wages and benefits. Blacks used sit-ins at lunch-counters and buses to end segregation in the South during the 1950's.
I think the last comment by PS about the possibility of police intervention and arrrest is very revealing -- the brutality of the police and prison state is what every fascist loves -- it's their answer for everything. |
|
I'm a fascist? |
by PS
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: -4
16 Apr 2004
|
Dr. Hilty, if you truly believe that support for the Chief as a symbol of OUR University makes me a fascist, then I have very serious reservations about quoting anything ELSE from your rebuttal....but I will.
"First, let's be clear about one thing: the chief mascot is a symbol of hatred, oppression, racism, and genocide, and that's precisely why the pro-chief supporters love it (even though they won't admit this to either themselves or others). Once again the dark side of human nature reveals itself -- the same side of human nature that committed genocide against the native Amerindians and drove the few survivors off their land."
Actually, I think the vast majority of people see Chief Illiniwek as a symbol of pride and strength. The only hatred is coming from you and your compatriots who are trying to paint all Chief supporters with one broad, poorly-aimed brush by claiming that we support genocide, oppression, and racism.
The Chief isn't the skull of our vanquished enemy, stuck on a pole and tied to the gates of the state. Instead, the symbol exists to pay honor and tribute to the peoples that founded the state that pays your salary-a people who no longer exist, for the most part because of inter-tribal warfare. If you're going to point the genocidal finger, make sure it starts with the inter-tribal warfare that Native Americans waged among themselves for years. Are THEY also racist?
"Let's look at the historical context of this chief symbol. It was adopted as the university mascot during the 1920's. What happened during this time period? There was a resurgence of the Ku Klux Klan, which had an active chapter at the University of Illinois. In Champaign-Urbana, blacks weren't allowed to eat at the same restaurants as white people, and they were forced to sit in the balcony of movie theaters."
Your pretext in this paragraph is so ludicrous it's almost humorous. To say that tying the Roaring 20's to the KKK to the Chief is a stretch is understatement to the "n"th degree. I suppose that the well publicized alcohol problems suffered by some Native Americans is a result of Prohibition, which was also in effect at this time? Neither premise has any basis in fact...and Champaign Urbana wasn't alone in having racially divided issues at that time, so the Chief could have been introduced virtually anywhere in the country and the same weak argument could be made. Again, your premise has no basis in fact-you're just throwing mud on the wall.
"During the 1920's, a growing number of people were subjected to mandatory sterilization in the United States if they were in prison or institutionalized for mental illness or mental disability. Meanwhile, fascism and Nazism continued to spread throughout Europe. It was within this context that the chief became the mascot of the university."
Here's another verse, same as the other verse. I could go through history books and pick out just as many positive events that happened in the 20's to counter your "fascist regime bastards" examples, but I won't. Your agenda really comes out in this paragraph, though-if someone doesn't agree with your message, they're supporters of the police state and have their thumbs on the heads of the downtrodden.
I'll come back to this response and continue it-you've got some whoppers in the seconfd half of your post that I have yet to address.
Phil the Fascist |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by PM
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 2
16 Apr 2004
|
Congratulations to the PRC for breaking the stalemate on the university's most divisive issue! Thanks to everyone participting in the sit-in for having the courage to engage in direct action.
I would LOVE to see the pro-Illiniwek forces stage a campus-wide race rally! |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by ijustkrushalot
uiuc.edu (unverified) |
Current rating: 2
16 Apr 2004
|
The pro-chief factions have had rally's before... they have always been peacefull... rally's have been done either off campus, on the quad at night, or on the west side of memorial stadium... usually consisting of local politicians voicing their support, and the occasional performance by the MI drumline.
Even if the chief were to be abolished... i doubt that anyone would stoop this low for attention... i imagine that there would be protests at athletic events for quite a long time... but i think most of the pro-chiefers are reasonable enough not to invade an office building in order to grab attention |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by 1992 UI Grad
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: -1
16 Apr 2004
|
I don't think you Anti-Chief people understand the true sentiment of most of the people who don't support your cause.... Most reasonable people would find it hard to argue against the point that the Chief in itself could be offensive to some people (including Native Americans). What most people don't understand is how this issue could possibly boil to the top of anyone's priortiy list given the state of affairs in the world today. Off the top of my head, I think I could easily reel off many more deserving issues. Please tell me how your time wouldn't be better spent on any of the following causes:
- Child abuse
- Poor Education Systems
- Homelessness
- US Foreign Relations / Policy
- Pollution
- Drug Abuse Prevention
- Crime Prevention
- Child Pornography
- Terrorism
- Cancer
- AIDS
- Corporate Greed
- Etc....
Please tell me how you prioritize the Chief "battle" ahead of any of these issues (and hundreds of others)...
All this bad judgement and you are wasting Illinois taxpayer dollars at the same time. Congratulations!!! |
|
Many Relationships |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 15
16 Apr 2004
|
Let's look through the list of social ills that '92 UI Grad provided for stuff currently relevant to the genocide conducted against North America's native populations, as symbolized in the continued existence of the Chief as a mascot:
- Child abuse, check
- Poor Education Systems, check
- Homelessness, check
- US Foreign Relations / Policy, check
- Pollution, check
- Drug Abuse Prevention, check
- Crime Prevention, check
- Child Pornography
- Terrorism
- Cancer, check
- AIDS
- Corporate Greed, check
Looks like 9 of the 12 issues s/he raises are relevant. (BTW, I did not include terrorism, since by the 'modern' definition is isn't really applicable; however, the violent genocide _against_ Native Americans in the past can certainly be described as terrorism, as could the hassling of Native Americans by pro-Chief supporters on this campus that has occurred in recent years, so maybe the count is really 10 out of 12 issues as being relevant.)
So I'm unsure whether the '92 UI Grad didn't learn much about what Native Aericans are faced with when s/he was here (no surprise, given the lack of concern inherent in seeing the First Nations as something passe', as is typical of most Chief supporters) or s/he just doesn't care (just as likely, depsite the claims that people like him/her make about "respecting" native peoples). |
|
Re: "Anti-Chief " Sit-in in Progress |
by 5
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 22
16 Apr 2004
|
Please take a moment to read this rebuttal to pro-Chiefers. I posted it last November, and rather than take up alot of space here, I have provided a link.
http://www.ucimc.org/newswire/display_any/14052 |
|
