Charles Krauthammer Wants Redskins to Change Name, But Doesn’t Want Anyone Else Saying So

Charles Krauthammer Wants Redskins to Change Name, But Doesn’t Want Anyone Else Saying So


Play all audios:

Loading...

Charles Krauthammer explains today that because words evolve over time, he thinks it’s time for Washington DC’s football team to change its name:


If you were detailing the racial composition of Congress, you wouldn’t say: “Well, to start with, there are 44 Negroes.” If you’d been asleep for 50 years, you might. But upon being informed


how the word had changed in nuance, you would stop using it and choose another.


And here’s the key point: You would stop not because of the language police. Not because you might incur a Bob Costas harangue. Not because the president would wag a finger. But simply


because the word was tainted, freighted with negative connotations with which you would not want to be associated.


….Similarly, regarding the further racial breakdown of Congress, you wouldn’t say: “And by my count, there are two redskins.” It’s inconceivable, because no matter how the word was used 80


years ago, it carries invidious connotations today.


This is perfectly sensible, as is the rest of what he says. So here’s my question: why does he feel the need to start the column with this little swipe?


I don’t like being lectured by sportscasters about ethnic sensitivity. Or advised by the president of the United States about changing team names. Or blackmailed by tribal leaders playing


the race card.


Is he just establishing his conservative cred? Because as near as I can tell, he’s saying pretty much the same thing as Costas and Obama. So why is he annoyed when they say it, but thinks


it’s OK when he says it? If Costas and Obama are right—and he seems to think they are—why is there anything wrong with what they said?


POSTSCRIPT: If you’re interested in seeing exactly how the usage of “redskin” has evolved over time, Ian Gordon has you covered here.


Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.


“Lying.” “Disgusting.” “Scum.” “Slime.” “Corrupt.” “Enemy of the people.” Donald Trump has always made clear what he thinks of journalists. And it’s plain now that his administration intends


to do everything it can to stop journalists from reporting things they don’t like—which is most things that are true.


No one gets to tell Mother Jones what to publish or not publish, because no one owns our fiercely independent newsroom. But that also means we need to directly raise the resources it takes


to keep our journalism alive. There’s only one way for that to happen, and it’s readers like you stepping up. Please help with a donation today if you can—even a few bucks will make a real


difference. A monthly gift would be incredible.


“Lying.” “Disgusting.” “Scum.” “Slime.” “Corrupt.” “Enemy of the people.” Donald Trump has always made clear what he thinks of journalists. And it’s plain now that his administration intends


to do everything it can to stop journalists from reporting things they don’t like—which is most things that are true.


No one gets to tell Mother Jones what to publish or not publish, because no one owns our fiercely independent newsroom. But that also means we need to directly raise the resources it takes


to keep our journalism alive. There’s only one way for that to happen, and it’s readers like you stepping up. Please help with a donation today if you can—even a few bucks will make a real


difference. A monthly gift would be incredible.


Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.


Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.


Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.


Inexpensive, too! Subscribe today and get a full year of Mother Jones for just $19.95.


Award-winning photojournalism. Stunning video. Fearless conversations.


Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.


We’re a nonprofit newsroom, because the truth-telling investigations we’re known for don’t happen under corporate ownership. We shine a bright light into the dark corners of power and report


the facts other media are afraid to touch.


The essential ingredient that makes this possible? Readers like you. Please stand with Mother Jones and make a donation today. These are dangerous times, and we’ve got a lot of hard,


consequential work to do. But we can’t do it without reader support.


We’re a nonprofit newsroom, because the truth-telling investigations we’re known for don’t happen under corporate ownership. We shine a bright light into the dark corners of power and report


the facts other media are afraid to touch.


The essential ingredient that makes this possible? Readers like you. Please stand with Mother Jones and make a donation today. These are dangerous times, and we’ve got a lot of hard,


consequential work to do. But we can’t do it without reader support.