Reports detail high COVID-19 burden in

Native Americans
The Native Americans were affected a lot during the COVID-19 pandemic; there were a lot
of COVID-19 cases and more death than the white people. The reasons that contributed to
high contact of COVID-19 to the Native Americans is due to sharing houses which
minimizes distancing which was one of the requirement of avoiding the virus, challenge of
accessing healthcare and transportation, and low household income. The Native Americans
are also involved in other diseases which includes heart disease, diabetes and smoking which
limits them a chance of recovering from COVID-19.

These should be a guideline to educate people on how to live a healthy life and the
appropriate measures needed to reduce COVID-19 incidence so as to avoid more deaths in
our communities. These guidelines included stay at home, use of masks and remote
association with people. These measures reduced the spread of COVID-19 at a higher rate.

In North Dakota reservation, there were a lot of COVID-19 cases and the CDC came up with
a program that attributed to the decline in cases. Those with COVID-19 and those who had
close contact were instructed to quarantine for 24hours of test results. The Spirit Lake
community were very useful during the pandemic, they aided in providing isolation,
quarantine, and symptom monitoring and support services.

Native American Mascot Debate

Is it okay for schools to use Native Americans names and images for sport teams’ logos?

 No because the use of the identity in logos is disrespectful

 Also, it is insulting to do such an act to the nation’s people
 It is also hurtful to the nation’s people because it tends to affect their take on being of
native descent.
 It is also a form of promoting racism among the people
 In essence, the act of putting the Native Americans names and images in logos is
offensive
General Thoughts
In the first place, the fact that the act of using such names and images in sport teams logo is a
debatable issue. All factors considered, I believe debatable topics are offensive to a certain
group. It is therefore obvious that any act that brings about controversy should be avoided. In
this case, I believe people should change their mascots. The act of dressing up like ‘Indians’
is insulting and offensive to one group while it favours the other group. I don’t think there is
any problem when a team uses a logo to display its identity, however, in such a controversial
mode, there may be a need to make changes to end the debate.

100 Years of the Cleveland Indians Mascot

A mascot is simply a logo that represents the team’s identity. Initially, the use of mascot is
not meant to cause controversy, the Native Americans are however offended that the use of
Indians as mascots it’s an act of humiliation to them. The natives are convinced that use of
Indian culture in logos is an act of racial but non-natives are convinced otherwise. For one to
comprehend the importance and effect of the debate, it would be of help to understand the
importance of a mascot to a team. A mascot plays a major role in representing a team. A
mascot is meant to keep team members motivated. In most cases, a mascot must carry a
meaning to a team and a phrase to remind them of a certain approach.

General Thoughts
In my opinion, consider this scenario; there are many Americans with Irish ancestry but they
don’t make protests about the logo for Notre Dame Fighting Irish. Similarly, I have never
heard of any complain about the cartoon character that was used by General Mills with their
Lucky Charms cereal. I am also concerned that we rarely hear complaints from Americans
Italians about Super Mario Bros. I am a fan of Cleveland Indians and I see the native tribe
side of this debate. How about Indians have a conversation with the artists of the local tribes
and tell them they will keep the names because the team is named after Louis Sockalexis? If
they do that, I believe the same protesters will have to travel to Ohio and protest outside
local schools because the schools uses the name Indians and has Indian in the head as their
emblem. In other words, I don’t see the essence of the debate. I believe an influential
activist somewhere is responsible for the controversy.
 More Than a Word Teaser 2
Is a short video about a discussion on the controversy surrounding the Washington teams
name and the Native American-themed mascots and logos. This discussion is way similar to
the discussion offered in “The Daily Show - The Redskins' Name - Catching Racism (ft.
Jason Jones).”

The Daily Show - The Redskins' Name -

Catching Racism (ft. Jason Jones)
In The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, Jason John has a conversation with Native Americans
activists about the Washington Redskins controversial team name. John also offers a
discussion with devoted football fans about the same.
General Thoughts
I view the short video as a fallacy. A fallacy is a common error in reasoning that always
undermines the logic of a certain debate. In this particular instance, the reasoning is
undermining the logic of the debate that arises from the controversy with the Redskins Name.
The Washington Redskins had their name for more than eighty years and had been criticized
for using the term “redskins,” which is an offensive to Native Americans. In July 2020, the
Washington NFL announced the team is retiring the term "Redskins." The Daily Show
pointed out the issue by which an actor, Jason Jones plays Daniel Snyder of Redskins owner.
Daniel appealed his correctness; however, the show disclosed his many fallacies. Finally, the
show indicated the issue that just he is clinging to the team name.

Native American Activism: 1960s to Present

The Native Americans have continued to struggle to fight for their rights, dignity and justice
since 1960s. Students are reminded of the Native Americans in the month of November and
regarded as past tense.
The history of struggle and achievement by the Native Americans

In 1969
There were ninety Native Americans who landed on an island named Alcatraz in San
Francisco Bay. Their main aim was to reclaim the rock. The activist did not mind if the land
was underdeveloped, lacked freshwater, no healthcare or educational facilities, they claimed
they had endured more under Indian reservation.

In 1970
On August 29, the Native Americans reclaimed Mount Rushmore which was promised to the
Oceti Sakowin, they were supported by American Indian Movement. The land owner were
the Oceti Sakowin who were forced out by federal government after gold was found on the
mountain.

On November 26, it was regarded as the first national day of mourning. The National Day of
Mourning is based upon a speech given by Frank James who included harsh truths and ended
with a claim of new beginnings. Until to date the National Day of Mourning is still celebrated
as a day of remembrance and spiritual connection and also to protest against racism and
oppression.

In 1972
There were protestors from Trail of Broken Treaties Caravan who protested to the Bureau of
Indian Affairs offices. They claimed for American majority in determining the right and the
wrongs.

The organizers and parents from American Indian Movement started their schools to replace
the public and BUI schools that were involved in high number of drop outs. The survival
school were meant to teach basic learning, living skills and also Indian culture.

In 1973
The American Indian Movement led 250 Sioux who settled on South Dakota’s Pine Ridge
launching the 71day occupation of Wounded Knee. They wanted to symbolize the unsafe
living conditions and mistreatment from agencies both locally and federal. It is regarded as
one of the American Indian movement’s achievement.
In 1975
Joseph Stuntz who was a member of the American Indian Movement and murdered during a
shootout with the FBI. The Native American builds a Portland, Oregon as a response to the
murder and also demanded the end of undeclared state of martial law.

In 1978
On July 15th, it begins with the longest walk of 30000 marchers who were claiming for Native
American justice. They wanted their problems to be heard, it included unemployment, lack of
housing and healthcare and also cancelling some treaty that were against the Indian tribe.

In 1981
The Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation won the struggle of building of the Orme Dam. This
dam was a disadvantage to the Fort McDowell Yavapai since it could have flooded most of
their ancestral land. Their success is celebrated each year to commemorate the event; it is
referred to as Orme Dam Victory days.

1n 1992
There was formation of the National Coalition of Racism in Sports and Media by the native
leaders who were against the use of Indian images, logos and symbols. The main reason they
were against on the issue of sports mascot, they believed the mascots and symbols were
misleading youth by delivering inaccurate history and encouraging logic and reasoning and
instead of tolerance that defines their history.

In 2004
There were proposals that suggested the development on San Francisco Peaks; the land was
very important to more than thirteen tribes since it had spiritual and cultural importance.
They were likely to damage more trees so as to acquire more land needed for development.
Despite the effort of the protestors the United State government permitted the building of
Snow Bowl ski resort.

In 2011
During the reign of president Obama, the indigenous groups were against the approval of
phase IV of the Keystone XL pipeline project. These projects were to destroy tribal and
spiritual lands which had a significance to the indigenous people. Unfortunately their
proposal was rejected.
In 2013
The Havasupai tribe filed a lawsuit against the forest service who allowed an energy fuel
resource to operate near a national park. The judge favoured the forest service and the
uranium mining continued. That was very unfair, the mining endangered the lives of many
species but still the ruling favoured it.

In 2016
There was formation of a spirit camp which raised awareness on the Dakota access pipeline
and the dangers involved and the urge to protect Missouri river. The pipeline is a threat to the
environment, health and human rights since Missouri river if contaminated will become a
national threat because the river distributes water to many places in the United States.

My thought
The Native Americans had their reasons in protecting their people, environment and other
living thing. They knew the importance of environment and they wanted to conserve it. Some
of their request were a success and others they were denied. The United States should start
embracing the importance of conserving environment and protect the history rather than
destroying.

Below are my reasons why I term the video a fallacy;

 Missing point - Daniel said about the team name “The name of our team is the name of our
team. And it represents honour, it represents pride, it represents respect. Well, that doesn’t
sound that bad. So why was this group of Native Americans active so upset?” It sounds that
everything makes sense, it’s pretty logical; however that conclusion doesn’t connect with the
argument.
 Weak analogy – Daniel said about redskin, “Taken out of context, you can take things out of
context all over that place. But in this particular case, it is what it is, it’s very obvious. That
the name really means honour.” He supposes it simple but it doesn’t make sense.
 Straw man argument– narrator said “Sure, these American activists make a compelling this
case. That is until you hear what is at stake for the true victims -the fans.” The argument was
distorted; it was made weaker if it wasn’t about the original topic. It shows how Daniel
wanted to shift responsibility to the fans.
 Slippery slope- a football fan said “If the Redskins name is changed and I have children on
the day, what would I pass on to them? It’d be tough; it would be like losing a family
member.” The arguer claims that a sort of chain reaction, there is no enough evidence.
  Appeal to ignorance – when Jason Jones said, “No one said racist. No one said racist”, there
is no evidence to say anything against, and so he wants to say “I am right”.
 Load question - Jason Jones asked some fans,” Would you call a Native American a redskin?
Let me ask you if you brought a Native American, wouldn’t they be a little upset?” He asked
a question that it couldn’t answer without appearing guilty.

I tend to think the issue needed a step ahead effort to analyse the issue. I was therefore forced
to use my prior knowledge and relate it to the scenarios in the video.
To understand the episode, I did a preliminary research about the docuseries to have
background information of what the overall series is about. The justification for colonization
by the European powers is largely based on the philosophy of Social Darwinism. The
explosion of technological advancement during the industrial revolution would bring about
major changes to the political and demographic structure of Africa. The emerging military
and steam engine technologies cultivated a sense of superiority in the minds of the early
explorers and colonizing forces.
The third episode is about the killing at a distance. To be honest, the episode was a bit
complex and I am sure I missed more specific details and gathered only the general message.
I therefore have few notes and commentary to make on the episode and for a deeper
understand; I would be required to do an external research on the same. Alternatively, I
would need to watch the episode again and again capturing even the minor details of its
content.