Indigenous group condemns Trump's call to restore controversial team names
WASHINGTON — The Association on American Indian Affairs is condemning U.S President Donald Trump's call for Washington's football team to revert to its old name, saying any claim that Indigenous nations support the use of Indigenous-themed mascots is false.
Article content
'These mascots and names do not honour Native Peoples — they reduce us to caricatures,' the Association on American Indian Affairs said in a statement.
Article content
Article content
'Our diverse Peoples and cultures are not relics of the past or mascots for entertainment. Native Nations are sovereign, contemporary cultures who deserve respect and self-determination, not misrepresentation.'
Article content
Article content
The Commanders and the District of Columbia government announced a deal earlier this year to build a new home for the football team. It's not clear if Trump can delay the deal.
Article content
Article content
The president also called for MLB's Cleveland Guardians to revert to their former name, which was also seen as offensive to Indigenous Peoples.
Article content
Article content
In an earlier post, Trump called the NFL team the 'The Washington 'Whatever's' and claimed Indigenous people 'in massive numbers, want this to happen.
Article content
'Their heritage and prestige is systematically being taken away from them. Times are different now than they were three or four years ago. We are a Country of passion and common sense. OWNERS, GET IT DONE!!!' Trump posted.
Article content
The Association on American Indian Affairs is the is the oldest national Native American non-profit in the United States and has been operating for more than 100 years.
Article content
It said Indigenous communities and experts have repeatedly and clearly said that these themed mascots are offensive and dehumanizing.
Article content
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Canada News.Net
8 minutes ago
- Canada News.Net
Trump's tariff, trade deals come under fire from experts at home, abroad
Trump has not only signed an executive order to further modify tariff rates for 69 trading partners, but also announced a few high-profile trade deals that critics dismissed as "exaggerated, wrong, and false." NEW YORK, Aug. 3 (Xinhua) -- U.S. President Donald Trump's new round of massive tariff measures and his approach to recent trade negotiations have drawn strong criticism from experts both at home and abroad. Trump has not only signed an executive order to further modify tariff rates for 69 trading partners, but also announced a few high-profile trade deals that critics dismissed as "exaggerated, wrong, and false." "Whatever progress that's ultimately achieved as part of these new trade deals and duty rates will come at the steep price of significant U.S. tariff increases and the erosion of trust with America's key partners," said Jake Colvin, head of the National Foreign Trade Council. "Institutionalizing the highest U.S. duties since the Great Depression, coupled with ongoing uncertainty, is a recipe for making American businesses less competitive globally and consumers worse off while harming relationships with close geopolitical allies and trading partners," Colvin was quoted in a recent Wall Street Journal report. "As of today, U.S. tariff rates are at levels not seen in a century, which will result in hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxes paid mainly by American companies and consumers," said Scott Lincicome, vice president of general economics and trade at the Cato Institute. Trade policy remains uncertain and the U.S. tariff system has gone from simple and transparent to an impenetrable labyrinth of new requirements that will prove particularly costly for smaller American businesses that can't afford either pricey lawyers and accountants or high tariff bills and fines for noncompliance, The Washington Post reported Friday, quoting Lincicome. Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, said that the effective U.S. tariff rate, which started this year at just over 2 percent, looks to settle somewhere between 15 percent and 20 percent. "The economic damage from the tariffs is mounting... The damage will soon be obvious as inflation ramps up and businesses conclude that the higher tariffs are here to stay," said Zandi in The Washington Post piece. "While economists don't agree on much, they nearly universally agree that broad-based tariffs, such as those being implemented, are a bad idea," said Zandi. "Uncertainty is coming down with more trade deals, but tariffs may settle higher than expected, posing risks to our forecasts," said a Friday research note by Claudio Irigoyen and Antonio Gabriel, global economists with Bank of America Global Research. The higher-than-expected tariffs pose upside risks to inflation forecasts and downside risks to growth forecasts, according to the research note. "It's a very high tariff wall," said Deborah Elms, head of trade policy of the Hinrich Foundation. "The cost is going to be significantly higher for American companies and American consumers who will respond surely by buying less," Elms was quoted as saying in a Friday Bloomberg report. "While we haven't returned entirely to a 'law of the jungle' system, we have taken several huge strides back in that direction," said Stephen Olson, visiting senior fellow at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute and a former U.S. trade negotiator, in a Friday CNBC report. "We've seen numerous changes in the U.S. tariff regime to date, and there could always be more. Companies will be wary of investing and setting plans while uncertainty remains," said Jonathan Kearns, chief economist with Australian investment management firm Challenger Ltd. Kearns, a former high-ranking official with Reserve Bank of Australia, expected greater pass-through to the U.S. consumer in the months ahead, according to the Bloomberg report.
Canada News.Net
9 minutes ago
- Canada News.Net
"We will pay as low as the lowest nation in the world," Trump on Most Favoured Nation drug pricing plan
Washington DC [US], August 4 (ANI): US President Donald Trump while speaking to reporters on Sunday (local time), said that he aimed to lower the prices of pharmaceutical drugs with the Most Favoured Nation prescription drug pricing plan. Trump said before boarding Air Force One in Allentown, Pennsylvania that the US will pay the lowest price just like other European nations do. 'We want the same price as Europe gets. We want the same price as other countries get ... We will pay as low as the lowest nation in the world. The next big move is going to be the price of drugs because you could buy something in London or in Germany some place... sometimes 1/10th the price of what it costs to buy it in New York... We're not doing that anymore,' he said. Trump is increasing pressure on major drugmakers to bring their US prices in line with the far lower ones available to patients in other countries. However, industry experts don't expect the pharmaceutical companies to comply, CNN reported. Earlier on Thursday, Trump sent letters to 17 major pharmaceutical company CEOs on with a list of demands, including that the manufacturers extend 'Most Favored Nation' pricing, the lowest price paid for a drug in a peer country, to all drugs provided to Medicaid enrollees. The US president gave the companies 60 days to comply. The directive stems from an executive order Trump signed in May, when he demanded drugmakers start offering US patients lower prices or face consequences. Meanwhile the US President continued to bat for the tariff policy saying that it would bring down debt. 'We're going to pay down debt. We have a lot of money coming in, much more money than the country's ever seen, by hundreds of billions of dollars... we should've done this many years ago,' he said. (ANI)
Canada News.Net
10 minutes ago
- Canada News.Net
EU surrendered to Trumps demands out of fear Sunday Times
The European Commission president was allegedly worried the US could stop military aid to Ukraine or even pull out troops from Europe European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen agreed to a lopsided US trade deal without resistance out of fear that Washington might reduce military support for Ukraine or even withdraw American forces from Europe, the Sunday Times reported this weekend. The paper described von der Leyen's recent visit to President Donald Trump's golf course in Scotland - where she accepted a 15% tariff on most EU exports - as a "surrender." According to the report, officials inside the Commission initially prepared a strong countermeasure package in response to Trump's proposed 20% tariffs announced in April. But when Trump threatened to raise the tariffs to 30%, von der Leyen pulled back. Behind her reversal was "the fear that Trump might use a dispute as a pretext to cut US military support for Ukraine or otherwise damage European security," the Sunday Times wrote. Brussels was reportedly particularly concerned about the outcome of a pending American "posture review" that may result in the withdrawal of some of the roughly 80,000 US troops stationed across Europe. READ MORE: US could slash troop presence in Europe Politico The trade agreement finalized last week includes not only the 15% tariff on EU goods, but also commitments by Brussels to invest $600 billion in the US economy and purchase $750 billion worth of American energy over the next three years. In contrast, the UK - negotiating independently - secured a lower 10% tariff on its exports. Amid mounting internal backlash in Brussels, French President Emmanuel Macron reportedly criticized the outcome, saying the EU is "not feared enough." Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban remarked that Trump "ate her for breakfast," and accused von der Leyen ofexceeding her authorityby allegedly pledging to purchase large quantities of US arms. Von der Leyen has also faced growing political resistance at home, as she pushes to redirect a significant portion of the EU's next €1.8 trillion seven-year budget from traditional areas such as agriculture and regional development toward militarization. She narrowly survived avote of confidencein the European Parliament last month amid criticism of her leadership style and controversies over her Covid-19 vaccine procurement deals. Some MEPs now view her current term as her "last chance," according to lawmakers quoted by the Times.
