Monthly Archives: May 2022

Indians, Native Americans, American Indians are all labels foisted upon the indigenous people of America and so what is a newspaper to do when selecting the supposed correct label?

In his book The Day the World Ended at Little Big Horn, Joseph M. Marshall III reviewed all of these labels and then wrote, "We prefer to be identified by our specific tribes or nations, of which there are nearly five hundred ethnically identifiable in the United States."

He goes on, "However, in the interest of avoiding confusion within the pages of this work, I have chosen to used the word Indian mostly in those instances when there is a necessary reference to more than a specific tribe or native nation."

And so in this era of political correctness even the great Sicangu author, Joe Marshall, has to admit that he is also faced with this recurring dilemma. Any writer covering issues related to events and people associated with Indian country faces this same question and must decide whether to follow political correctness or go along with historic usage.

If one visits an Indian reservation (there's that word Indian again) and speaks to the elders of the tribe, he or she will find that they refer to themselves as "Indian," without reservation (no pun intended).

I am a firm believer that most historians are wrong when they credit Christopher Columbus for coining the word "Indian" because he thought he was landing his ships in India. In 1492 there was no country known as India. Instead that country was called Hindustan. I think that is closer to the truth that the Spanish padre that sailed with Columbus was so impressed with the innocence of the Natives he observed that he called them Los Ninos in Dios. My spelling may be wrong on the Spanish words, but the description by the padre means something like "Children of God."

After many years of usage the word Indios emerged and to this day the indigenous people of South and Central America are called Indios. I am told that as the word wound its way North it evolved into "Indian." Of course some will say that there was a place called the East Indies in 1492 and Columbus may have thought he was headed for that region.

So how and when did the efforts to politicize the name start? I suspect that some of it started when Native Americans enrolled in some of the white colleges. I think they found the word "Indian" offensive and set about to remake it. They found that the word Indian was often used in a derogatory fashion such as "drunken Indian" or "rotten Indian." Perhaps the white people would have found it more difficult to say "drunken Native American?"

And finally, when some Indian journalists made it to the newsrooms of large and prestigious mainstream newspapers, they reacted to the word "Indian" as they did when they were in college. They went to their editors and tried to impress upon them that the paper should no longer use the word "Indian," but should, instead, switch to Native American or Native.

I first ran across this sudden change when I was mailed a copy of my weekly column that had appeared in the Lincoln (Neb.) Star Journal. In every place I had used "Indian" the editorial page editor edited it to read "Native." Of course I was appalled. If I had intended to use "Native" I would have used it and I resented the fact that the EPE had changed the word in order to fit his presumption of political correctness.

I immediately dropped him a note and asked, "When you come across organizational names like National Congress of American Indians or National Indian Education Association are you going to change them to read National Congress of Native Americans or National Native Education Association."

How about newspapers like "Indian Country Today," my former weekly paper? "Native American Country Today" just doesn't have the same ring to it.

The local daily newspaper in Rapid City, SD decided to drop the use of the word "Indian" and replace it with "Native American." I believe they did so when they, with unintended fanfare, used a headline that highlighted the word "Indian" when describing the new education director for the Rapid City Schools. A howl went up in the Indian community, but the howl was less about political correctness than about the bad usage of the name in that particular context. I believe it is a policy that needs to be reconsidered because anyone born in the United States of America is a Native American, but they are not American Indians.

Politically correct labels have been applied to other races in the past and since Indians are always the last to be labeled for anything, I suppose our time has come.

(Tim Giago, an Oglala Lakota, was born, raised and educated on the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota. He was a Nieman Fellow at Harvard in the Class of 1991 and founder of The Lakota Times and Indian Country Today newspapers. He founded and was the first president of the Native American Journalists Association. He can be reached at najournalist@msn.com)

See more here:

The Name "Indian" and Political Correctness | HuffPost ...

1994 American comedy film

PCU is a 1994 American comedy film written by Adam Leff and Zak Penn and directed by Hart Bochner about college life at the fictional Port Chester University, and represents "an exaggerated view of contemporary college life".[3] The film is based on the experiences of Leff and Penn at Eclectic Society at Wesleyan University in Middletown, Connecticut.

Preppy pre-freshman (pre-frosh) Tom Lawrence visits Port Chester University (PCU), a college where fraternities have been outlawed and political correctness is rampant on campus. During his visit, accident-prone Tom manages to make enemies with nearly every group of students, and thus spends much of his visit evading the growing mob upset with him.

During his visit, Tom also finds himself in the middle of a war between "The Pit" and "Balls and Shaft", two rival groups. Among the members of the latter is Rand McPherson, who, with the other Balls and Shaft members, want the outlawed Greek system to return. Meanwhile, "The Pit", an unofficial group, runs the former "Balls and Shaft" frat house in a highly disorganized manner. Currently inhabited by seniors Gutter and Mullaney, mid-year Freshman co-ed Katy, and led by multi-year senior James "Droz" Andrews, The Pit is a party-centric house that rebels against the politically correct protests; their counter-protests and parties are a frequent source of complaint forms.

Other factions on campus include a commune-style house of pot users called Jerrytown that Gutter often frequents, a radical feminist group known as the Womynists, an Afrocentric group suspecting the Pit of conspiring against them, and the college president, Ms. Garcia-Thompson, who is obsessed with enforcing "sensitivity awareness" and multiculturalism to an extreme. She proposes that Bisexual Asian Studies should have its own building, as well as a plan to change the campus mascot to a whooping crane instead of an offensive Native American character during their Bicentennial Anniversary. Garcia-Thompson conspires behind closed doors with Balls and Shaft to get the established residents of The Pit kicked off campus and give Rand control of the house. She provokes the Pit residents with a damage bill from their past semester. Left unpaid, the campus would seize their house, leaving them homeless and unable to continue attendance at PCU without getting jobs.

The Pit responds by throwing a party to raise the funds needed. The Womynists take offense to The Pit's flyers advertising the party, and hold a protest outside as the house residents conspire to steal alcohol and convince students to attend. The party at first appears to be a failure. However, a series of unlikely events results in George Clinton and Parliament-Funkadelic performing at the party. Students begin streaming in (initially to seize Tom for his prior mistakes) and the party successfully raises the funds to keep the house. Garcia-Thompson (after being locked in a room by Droz with the song "Afternoon Delight" playing on repeat), deciding to act on the many complaints against The Pit, shuts down the party and expels the residents of The Pit in spite of their fundraising efforts. Tom then informs Droz about an overheard conversation with the Board of Trustees: the President's politically correct changes are negatively affecting both their past legacy and media publicity.

At the bicentennial ceremony the following morning, Droz and former Pit residents succeed in liberating the Whooping Crane and provoking the other students into an impromptu protest against protesting (chanting "We're not gonna protest!"). The demonstration establishes that even with The Pit shut down, the President cannot control the student population, resulting in the Board of Trustees summarily firing her. Meanwhile, Rand complains about all the other student groups, unaware that Droz has surreptitiously used the podium microphone to broadcast his rant to the entire campus.

Later, Tom heads home having decided to commit to PCU as the Pit has moved back into their house. As he sits on the bus, he sees Rand, who is now in Tom's position at the beginning of the film: being chased by the students across campus.

Principal photography took place almost entirely in and around Toronto with the University of Toronto serving as Port Chester University. Some limited second unit shots were shot on the Wesleyan campus.[5]

Jeremy Piven complains in the DVD audio commentary that actors were not allowed by the director to improvise at all. He was able to include some limited improvisation by appealing to the writers directly. Production schedules were challenged when Piven, who is active in anti-malaria charities, contracted malaria on a trip to Guatemala which affected him while filming.[6]

On Rotten Tomatoes the film has an approval rating of 44% based on reviews from 16 critics.[7] On Metacritic the film has a score of 42% based on reviews from 13 critics, indicating "mixed or average reviews".[8]

Roger Ebert said the film "begins with a terrific premise, but immediately loses faith in it."[9]It has also been ranked among the ten best college movies by The Huffington Post.[10]

With a budget of $8 million, it grossed $2,129,483 on opening weekend contributing to a final domestic total of $4,330,020.[2]

The soundtrack, released on May 10, 1994 by Fox / Arista, features songs from the feature film.[11] Steve Vai wrote the score for the movie, which he would later release on his compilation album The Elusive Light and Sound, Vol. 1. The album is notable for the Mudhoney's cover of Pump It Up.

Original post:

PCU (film) - Wikipedia

Every American should read 1984. Written just after WWII, this chilling dystopia predicts with stunning accuracy what happens when free speech is obliterated, as well as the nightmare effects of censorship.

George Orwell was a committed socialist, so much so that he fought, and almost died, in the Spanish Revolution on behalf of the communists. However, he became deeply disenchanted, when communist dictators like Stalin and Mao betrayed the revolution with mass surveillance, brutal repression, systematic murder, and totalitarianism.

Orwell stated that 1984, was based chiefly on communism, because that is the dominant form of totalitarianism, but I was trying to imagine what communism would be like if it were firmly rooted in the English speaking countries, and was no longer a mere extension of the Russian Foreign Office.

Yet you and I dont have to imagine anymore, as the White House just created their new Disinformation Governance Board inside the Department of Homeland Security.

Yes, you read that right. The bureaucrats who should be (but arent) protecting our Southern Border armed with the militaristic might of the Federal Government have become the new Ministry of Truth.

In 1984, the Ministry of Truth was the propaganda arm of the government. By controlling the news, the media, entertainment, and education, they created a world where only One Truth is allowedthat which was approved by the government.

By rewriting past news accounts and books, the Party literally remade history into what they wanted it to be. By militarizing the Thought Police to investigate thoughtcrime, they eliminated people who had opposing views. But perhaps the most devious attack was Newspeak, the deliberate culling of words, like freedom and democracy, from the English language, in order to make these heretical thoughts essentially impossible.

When I first read 1984 in the early 80s, I never dreamed any of it could ever happen here.

Then came political correctness.

Surprisingly, the term originated in 1917 Soviet Russia. Over the past few decades, freedom-loving people have allowed the woke crowd to use political correctness to control what you and I are allowed to think and say.

Who among us thinks the government should add to its work list the job of determining what is true and what is disinformation? writes Politico, And who thinks the government is capable of telling the truth? Our government produces lies and disinformation at industrial scaleand always has.

Yet the White House wants to double-down on the repression of free speech, giving the woke PC police a military arm to enforce their odious mind control.

In a separate but interrelated story, the leftist mainstream media is furious that Elon Musk just bought Twitter.

The left used to love Musk as the guy who built green electric cars and private spaceships. They used to applaud him when he enthusiastically supported Obama and sarcastically attacked the Right.

Now, Twitter executives cry at board meetings at the thought that the media giant might have to allow free speech back on their platform. Now, the media is accusing Musk of being a racist and a right wing ideologue for suggesting that Twitter shouldnt censor opposing political views.

Remember, this is the same Twitter that suspended New York Post, Babylon Bee, and other media outlets in an attempt to silence them. Its the same platform that quashed countless facts that were later proven to be true. In short: it is the same platform that censors free speech.

Which leads us to a horrible truth: people today would rather sit comfortably in their safe space, than engage in free speech. People today would rather hide inside a plastic bubble, than hear opposing views. People today would rather be told what to think, than actually think for themselves.

This is how democracy dies. This is how dictatorships win. If we are to remain a free people, we must listen to each other and respect each others positions, whether we agree with them or not. Our goal should never be robotic agreement; but rather, curious empathy. We should embrace our differences, rather than eliminate opposing voices.

And we should never allow any Government to become the Truth Police.

State Representative Dave Belton represents the citizens of District 112, which includes Morgan County and the eastern side of Newton County.

See the rest here:

Reading between the lines of "1984" in 2022 | Opinion | morgancountycitizen.com - Morgan County Citizen

2022 is a big year for anniversaries: the Queens 70th anniversary, the BBCs centenary and the 25th anniversary of the death of Princess Diana, to name a few. Its also the worst year for anniversaries because the people in charge of celebrating them are obsessed with political correctness.

The Big Jubilee Read, a celebration of great books written during the first seventy years of the Queens reign, has already taken an almighty kicking from Private Eye, The Telegraph and Alex Larman in The Critic among others, because of the bizarre omissions (childrens classics including The Lord of the Rings, the Harry Potter books and His Dark Materials, famous writers from Doris Lessing, AS Byatt and Kingsley Amis to Ian McEwan, Julian Barnes and Harold Pinter) and the woke choices.

Now comes the BFIs attempt to celebrate the BBCs centenary with what they have called 100 BBC TV Gamechangers. More political correctness. The Chinese Detective (notable for having the first British East Asian lead in a British television drama) but not The Singing Detective; Madhur Jaffreys Indian Cookery (one TV series) but not Fanny Cradock (24 TV series 1955-75); Ballet Negres (1946), excerpts from the repertoire of Europes first Black dance company, one of only two BBC programmes from the 1940s; but not Muffin the Mule, the first childrens programme to appear from the BBCs then new television studios at Lime Grove, the first televised Olympics or the beginning of the BBCs dedicated TV news service.

Theres a Scottish comedy show, Chewin the Fat, which the BFI contributor admits was virtually unknown and unseen elsewhere in Britain, but not Fawlty Towers, League of Gentlemen or Little Britain. Of course, theres one ethnic minority which doesnt feature in the BFI list. None of the great dramas by Jack Rosenthal, Stephen Poliakoff or Frederic Raphael about different aspects of Jewish life or history. Whenever you see woke lists, you always know theres one group who will be missed out.

Then there are the bizarre choices and even more curious omissions. Jed Mercurios Cardiac Arrest but not Line of Duty; Peter Watkinss Threads, about a nuclear attack made at the height of CND, but not War Game or his pioneering drama-documentary, Culloden; plenty of David Attenborough but no Ascent of Man, no Moon Landing, and no Life Story, Mick Jacksons brilliant drama about the discovery of the structure of DNA with Jeff Goldblum, Tim Pigott-Smith, Juliet Stevenson and Alan Howard. Theres the BBC Proms but nothing by Christopher Nupen, Camberwick Green but nothing from Watch with Mother.

Of course, there are some outstandingly good choices: Arena, Civilisation and Ways of Seeing from the arts, Life on Earth and Blue Planet, some great childrens programmes from The Sooty Show and Playschool to Blue Peter and Vision On (but its worth noting that theres only one childrens programme since Teletubbies), and great dramas, from The Forsyte Saga to The Billy Trilogy and Boys from the Blackstuff.

Each choice has a section called How it changes TV. Some of the choices were pioneering: from Ways of Seeing and Arena to Pennies from Heaven and The Office. They all radically changed the nature of arts programmes, drama and comedy. Vision On was designed specifically for children with hearing impairment and Something Special pioneered the use of Makaton.

Some of the most interesting choices didnt change the form of TV at all, but did introduce different voices, especially since the 1970s: new Black and Asian comedy shows and dramas, including The Lenny Henry Show and Goodness Gracious Me, gay drama series like Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit. But arguably there are equally important firsts: the first well-known and much-loved Black childrens TV presenters like Floella Benjamin and Derek Griffiths on Play School; Cy Grant, the first black person to be featured regularly on television in the United Kingdom, mostly due to his appearances on the BBC current affairs show Tonight; Moira Stuart, the UKs first female African-Caribbean television newsreader; and Diane-Louise Jordan, the first Black presenter on Blue Peter in the 1990s.

But many of the choices didnt change TV at all. They may have been outstanding and/or popular, but how did Strictly (Come Dancing + mostly minor celebrities) change TV? Or Amy Jenkinss overrated drama, This Life? The Six Wives of Henry VIII was hugely popular in the early 1970s, but like so many dramas of the time it remained confined to the studio, with huge, clunky old cameras; it now looks old-fashioned compared to Peter Kosminskys Wolf Hall.

Which brings us to technology. There is no room here for the first use of colour TV, the first satellite transmissions, the first use of lightweight cameras in TV drama and in news, the change from film to video.

There are other dramatic changes. If you look at the BBCs timeline celebrating 100 years of the corporation, there are references to the 1951 General Election with Truly comprehensive analysis and results for the first time; the first BBC daily news TV programme in 1954; the first TV programme for deaf children in 1955, a forerunner to Vision On; Edward II with Ian McKellen in 1970, which showed the first same-sex kiss on British television; Does He Take Sugar?, a series which began in 1977 offering a new perspective on the lives of disabled people. These are all programmes which changed British television for the better, but they didnt make the BFI list. The BFI seem more interested in ethnic minorities (no, not that one), transsexuals, feminists, left-wing drama and refugees. If only the BBCs centenary had been twenty years ago.

We are the only publication thats committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one thats needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout the pandemic. So please, make a donation.

More:

Why 2022 is the worst year for anniversaries - TheArticle

A recent Marist Poll showing a Republican advantage in the upcoming election has some additional good news for the GOP big gains among Hispanic and other non-White voters.

The survey, taken in late April, reflects a national trend signaling Hispanic and non-White voters are increasingly disenchanted with the Biden administration and with Democrats who run Congress. In rising numbers, they plan to pick GOP candidates in November, when every House seat and 34 Senate seats are up for grabs.

A Wall Street Journal poll in March found Hispanic voters picked a Republican candidate over a Democrat by 9 percentage points on the generic congressional ballot.

The survey found that support for Democrats among Black voters had shrunk dramatically, from 56% in November 2021 to 35% in March. Black voters increased their support for GOP candidates, the poll found, from 12% to 27% from November to March.

Republican strategists are optimistic, but say the upcoming election will truly test whether the trend spotted in polls will provide real gains to the party, which has traditionally lagged behind Democrats when it comes to Hispanic and non-White voters.

Weve seen a surge in polling showing Hispanics are moving to the GOP, but have yet to see any real evidence in recent special elections and off-year elections, said Republican strategist Ryan Girdusky.

The Marist poll of registered voters showed that 47% planned to vote for a GOP candidate, compared with 44% who said they would more likely choose a Democrat. Independent voters picked Republicans over Democrats 45% to 38%.

Among Hispanics, whose vote has become increasingly critical in swing areas of the country, 52% said they would pick a Republican if the election were held immediately, compared with 39% who planned to vote for a Democrat.

Half of non-White voters said they would pick a Democrat, but 41% said they would choose a Republican candidate.

The big gains for the GOP suggest that while President Biden will not be on the ballot, hes poised to cast a long shadow over the results.

Voters are increasingly concerned about inflation, high gas prices, crime and other economic woes that have persisted or worsened under the Biden administration.

Among Hispanic voters polled by Marist, 60% disapproved of Mr. Bidens handling of the economy, while 33% said they approved of his job performance. Non-White voters disapproved by a margin of 50% to 43%.

Giancarlo Sopo, a Cuban American Republican strategist, said the Marist poll shows Hispanic voters are unhappy about the economy and other issues, including rising crime.

The data strongly suggest Bidens Hispanic woes stem from concerns over the economy and public safety, Mr. Sopo tweeted. Hispanics disapprove of economic handling by 27 points. This makes sense. The median Hispanic household income is $55k. Inflation is bad for everyone and brutal for Latinos.

Mr. Girdusky said Senate and House races in Nevada, Texas, Arizona, and in Californias Central Valley, where Hispanics make up a substantial part of the electorate, will tell us how substantial the movement is.

According to the nonpartisan, nonprofit National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials, 1 in every 10 voters in 2022 is expected to be Latino, an increase of more than 34% since 2014.

In Arizona, where Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly is defending a seat that could determine whether the party maintains the Senate majority, Hispanics are expected to make up nearly a quarter of all voters.

Mr. Biden won the state by fewer than 10,000 votes in 2020, and Arizona voters have since then soured on the administration.

An OH Predictive Insights poll taken in late March found 55% of Arizona voters were unhappy with Mr. Bidens job performance. Among the respondents, 22% were Hispanics.

The wavering Hispanic vote will be critical in Nevadas Senate race, where Democratic Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto is battling Republican challenger Adam Laxalt.

More than 16% of the 2022 electorate in Nevada is expected to be made up of Hispanic voters. They helped Mr. Biden narrowly win the state in 2020, but polling in late March found Hispanic voters in Nevada now favor Mr. Trump by 19%.

The Blueprint Polling survey found Ms. Cortez Masto and Mr. Laxalt tied among Hispanic voters.

Democrats told The Washington Times they plan to educate Hispanic voters on the difference between the two political parties on taxes, health care and other issues.

While Democrats lower costs and invest in communities, Republicans plot to hike taxes on working families and attack affordable health care, all while emboldening the extremists and White supremacists in their rank, said Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokeswoman Hallen Kalla.

Mr. Sopo told The Washington Times that Democrats need to focus on issues that are most critical to Hispanic voters and not political correctness and making minorities feel like victims in America, which he said, is just not how most Hispanics view ourselves or this country.

Link:

Republicans making critical gains among Hispanic and non-White voters ahead of 2022 election - Washington Times