Trump slammed by two Native American groups for supporting 'Redskins' name revival
Synopsis President Trump's call to reinstate the 'Redskins' name for Washington's NFL team has sparked strong condemnation from two Native American organisations. They denounce the name as a racist caricature, emphasizing the need for respect and self-determination. While the team aims for a new stadium in DC by 2030, Trump's stance could influence congressional approvals. Two Native American organisations strongly condemned President Donald Trump on Monday after he threatened to block a proposed new NFL stadium in Washington, DC, unless the local team reinstates its former 'Redskins' name.
ADVERTISEMENT Trump, posting Sunday on Truth Social, claimed there was 'a big clamoring' for the Commanders - who adopted their current name in 2022 - to revert to their previous moniker, adding that 'our great Indian people' want it restored. He also called on MLB's Cleveland Guardians, formerly the Indians, to change their name back.
In response, the Association on American Indian Affairs denounced Trump's push, saying such names and mascots 'do not honor Native Peoples - they reduce us to caricatures'. The organisation emphasised that Native nations are 'sovereign, contemporary cultures who deserve respect and self-determination, not misrepresentation'.
The National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) also rejected Trump's comments, labeling racist mascots as 'an affront to Tribal sovereignty'. NCAI President Mark Macarro stated that the organisation has opposed such imagery for 75 years, asserting that mascots mocking and dehumanising Native people have no place in modern society."We unequivocally oppose President Trump's call for the Washington Commanders and Cleveland Guardians to reinstate their former, racist names. Tribal Nations have been unambiguous on this issue for generations. We are not your mascot. We are not your distraction," NCAI said in a statement.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Washington NFL team retired the Redskins name and logo in 2020 after decades of criticism. Trump's comments come as the team prepares to return to DC with a new stadium expected in 2030. While Trump cannot directly block the project, Congress - which oversees DC governance - could influence funding and approvals.
ADVERTISEMENT The Commanders, a storied NFL franchise with three Super Bowl titles, were ranked by Forbes last year as the league's 10th most valuable team, with an estimated worth of $6.3 billion.Despite the criticism, the Native American Guardians Association voiced support for Trump's stance, accusing cancel culture of erasing tradition and identity.
ADVERTISEMENT Other major sports franchises with Native American-themed names - such as the Atlanta Braves, Chicago Blackhawks, and Kansas City Chiefs - have said they do not plan to change their names, keeping the debate over sports mascots alive.
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel)
(Catch all the US News, UK News, Canada News, International Breaking News Events, and Latest News Updates on The Economic Times.)
Download The Economic Times News App to get Daily International News Updates.
NEXT STORY
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
19 minutes ago
- Hans India
India must transform into a 'Lion', not just remain a 'Golden Bird': Mohan Bhagwat
RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat on Sunday called for India to become a strong and economically self-reliant nation, asserting that the world recognises and respects power. Speaking at the 'Gyan Sabha', a national education conference organised by the Shiksha Sanskriti Utthan Nyas — an RSS-affiliated body — Bhagwat said that India must move beyond the symbolism of being the 'golden bird' and instead become a 'lion'. 'The world understands power. Therefore, Bharat must become strong. It must also grow rich in economic terms,' Bhagwat said, stressing that strength and prosperity are essential for India to find its rightful place in the global order. Touching on the theme of national identity, Bhagwat made a strong case for preserving the name 'Bharat' without translation. 'Bharat is a proper noun. It should not be translated. 'India is Bharat' — that's true. But Bharat is Bharat. In every context — whether personal or public, while speaking or writing — we should say Bharat,' he emphasised. He added that Bharat's identity must be upheld and respected for what it stands for. 'If you lose your identity, then regardless of your other merits, the world will neither respect nor protect you. That's the fundamental rule,' Bhagwat noted. The RSS chief also spoke at length about the purpose and values of education, stating that true education empowers an individual to live independently while inculcating a spirit of sacrifice and selflessness. 'Education that teaches selfishness is not real education,' he declared. He further said that education is not confined to schools alone but extends to the home and society. 'The environment in which children grow up plays a crucial role. Society must reflect on what kind of atmosphere is needed to raise a confident and responsible generation,' Bhagwat said. The conference was attended by Kerala Governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar, along with several senior academicians and vice-chancellors from across India. President of Shiksha Sanskriti Utthan Nyas, Dr Pankaj Mittal, Secretary Dr Atul Kothari, Coordinator A Vinod, Chairman of Cochin Shipyard Madhu Nair were also present. The event focused on reshaping the country's educational framework in alignment with Indian cultural values and preparing the youth to face future challenges with clarity and confidence.
Hindustan Times
24 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Trump's prosecution demand for Beyonce, Oprah Winfrey trolled by netizens: 'Deflecting from Epstein files'
President Donald Trump has accused Oprah Winfrey and Beyoncé of taking millions from the Democratic Party in exchange for endorsing candidates during the 2024 election. Trump claimed the two celebrities received a combined $14 million from Democrats, while TV personality Al Sharpton was paid a smaller amount, according to a Newsweek report. President Donald Trump claimed the two celebrities received a combined $14 million from Democrats and Al Sharpton was paid a smaller amount.(AP) Earlier, Trump alleged that Beyoncé got $11 million to briefly appear at a campaign event and endorse Kamala Harris without performing. On Saturday evening, he posted on Truth Social that he plans to investigate the payments. Also Read: Trump blasts California wildfire aid, questions missing $100 million FireAid money Donald Trump slams endorsement decision In his post, Trump wrote, 'I'm looking at the large amount of money owed by the Democrats, after the Presidential Election, and the fact that they admit to paying, probably illegally, Eleven Million Dollars to singer Beyoncé for an ENDORSEMENT (she never sang, not one note, and left the stage to a booing and angry audience!), Three Million Dollars for 'expenses,' to Oprah, Six Hundred Thousand Dollars to a very low-rated TV 'anchor,' Al Sharpton (a total lightweight!), and others to be named for doing, absolutely NOTHING!' He added, 'These ridiculous fees were incorrectly stated in the books and records. YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO PAY FOR AN ENDORSEMENT. IT IS TOTALLY ILLEGAL TO DO SO. Can you imagine what would happen if politicians started paying for people to endorse them.' Trump concluded the post with "All hell would break out! Kamala, and all of those that received Endorsement money, BROKE THE LAW. They should all be prosecuted!" Also Read: Trump to prosecute Beyonce, Oprah and Kamala Harris? POTUS warns 'All hell would break out!' Netizens react to Trump's claim Netizens on X shared their reactions, where one of the users asked, "What crime are you gonna charge Beyonce/Oprah for? Harris, sure. But what "crime" did the two H'wood demons commit?" Another user wrote, 'He is trying to distract from child rape." A user quipped, 'The contents of the Epstein files must really be damaging." Another user chimed, 'Trump falsely claimed Beyoncé and Oprah were 'illegally' paid to endorse Biden and said Kamala Harris should be prosecuted. No proof. Just distraction.' One user wrote, 'e paid the Chick-fil-A lady, he paid the original crowd when he came down the escalator, he also filled the black church with MAGAets. And let's not forget he paid Stormy Daniels, to name a few. So GTFOH with those accusations and stop deflecting from the Epstein files.' How much campaign pay Beyoncé? Federal Election Commission records do not show an $11 million payment from the Harris campaign to Beyoncé. However, the campaign did make a $165,000 payment to Parkwood Entertainment, Beyoncé's company, on November 19. That was a few weeks after she endorsed Harris at a rally in Houston. At that rally, Beyoncé said, "I'm not here as a celebrity. I'm not here as a politician. I'm here as a mother—a mother who cares deeply about the world my children and all of our children live in, a world where we have the freedom to control our bodies, a world where we're not divided." So far, the White House has not said whether any legal action will be taken.
Hindustan Times
24 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
UK FTA is a turning point in how India engages with West
The signing of the free trade agreement (FTA) between India and the UK last week was no ordinary moment — not just because 99% of Indian exports to the UK will now enter tariff-free, or because British luxury cars and Scotch whisky are about to get cheaper. The real story is India's evolving place in global trade — more assertive, more selective and no longer willing to play by someone else's rulebook. The immediate economic benefits are eye-catching. For British exporters, tariff cuts on whisky (down from 150% to 75% right away, and to 40% in a decade), high-end vehicles, cosmetics and dairy offer new access to India's swelling consumer base. For Indian exporters — particularly in textiles, jewellery, EVs, marine products and generics — the UK market is now wide open, with tariff advantages over rivals like China and Vietnam. The UK's access to Indian public procurement markets and its offer to exempt Indian professionals from social security payments sweeten the deal further. Also, Indian yoga teachers, chefs and tech workers will find short-term visas easier to secure— a meaningful breakthrough on the politically sensitive issue of mobility and immigration India's MSMEs are expected to be among the biggest winners. Industry analysts estimate a 30-40% rise in Indian exports to Britain in the next five years. That's not just numbers on paper — that's jobs on the ground, especially in states like Gujarat, Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra. But perhaps the most significant thing about this deal is what isn't in it — agriculture. India drew a red line, clearly flagging at the outset that it's non-negotiable, which the UK respected. Our government is fully aware of our responsibility to protect the rights of our farmers. Opening up Indian farming to global agribusiness is politically radioactive. The UK agreement avoids that minefield. This signals something larger: India is happy to do trade, but only on terms that don't destabilise our broader economic progress. This new pragmatism — open on industry, cautious on food — could now become the blueprint for other negotiations, particularly with the ongoing one with the US. Hours after the India-UK deal was inked, eyes turned to the US. Trade talks with the US have been ongoing for some months. On Thursday, India's ministry of external affairs confirmed that both sides are working on the 'first tranche' of a multi-sector Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA). Behind the scenes, pressure is mounting. After reimposing 10% reciprocal tariffs on global exports in April 2025, the US specifically slapped a 26% tariff on Indian goods, though a pause was granted till August 1. That ticking clock now adds urgency to the ongoing BTA talks. Here's the sticking point: The US wants access to India's agriculture and digital markets. India, meanwhile, wants tariff rollbacks, supply chain integration and protection for its strategic sectors. The Union government is clear: India will negotiate hard and the US should not mistake flexibility for submission. The UK deal becomes a silent message to the US: We're open to trade but we won't be bullied. The UK FTA also shifts the geopolitical axis slightly. Post-Brexit, Britain badly needed a big trade deal. India, flush with economic confidence and global attention, was in no rush. That power asymmetry is visible in the final text of the agreement— cautious, layered, incremental. This is not a one-shot silver bullet. It's a living document, built to expand, revise tariffs and add new sectors over time if required. For India, the pact also sends signals elsewhere, to the EU, Japan and Asean. In July alone, the US concluded trade deals with Vietnam, Japan and Indonesia — all part of its Indo-Pacific economic strategy. India, however, is forging its own path. It's building a trade perimeter that keeps sovereignty intact while enabling access and investment. There is, of course, no escaping the historical undertones. Two centuries ago, Britain came to India in the name of trade and stayed to conquer and rule. Today, Britain is back, but on an even keel. That reversal is more than symbolic. Indian policymakers, once wary of the term free trade because of its colonial baggage, are now redefining it. The FTA is not about deference, it's about mutual interest. India is opening doors, but it's also setting terms. This is more than a trade agreement. It is a shift in posture. It is a turning point in how India engages with the West. Gone is the tentative, aid-seeking India of old. This is a country that brings its own terms to the table, and expects others to adapt. The British see this deal as a lifeline in a post-EU economy. India sees it as leverage, a card it can play while negotiating with bigger economies like the US and EU. Undoubtedly, this trade deal is historic. Not just for what it delivers, but for what it represents — the arrival of a more assertive, strategic, and self-confident India on the global trade stage. As for the Americans, they would be wise to study the UK deal not as a template to copy, but perhaps as a warning. Push too hard, especially on food and data, and India will simply say no. Syed Zafar Islam is a national spokesperson of the BJP and former member of Parliament. The views expressed are personal
