star2city Posted June 25, 2008 Posted June 25, 2008 Hadn't seen this posted, but the Sioux people, at least at Standing Rock, do not object to the name Sioux. The tribal council would support spending money for voting on this issue, but wouldn't support a vote on "Sioux" as a UND nickname, when it apparently wouldn't have cost anything with the existing referendum. Standing Rock rejects changing name from Sioux to Oyate in Tribal Vote Comment on the Bismarck Tribune page: " I guess that settles that question, "WE ARE SIOUX".... Now lets see what the anti-everything group comes with next. Bet those anti's are feeling really stupid bout now. Going around to all the districts acting like victims, giving power point presentation on why the SIOUX name is degrading, after all that. Quote
redwing77 Posted June 25, 2008 Posted June 25, 2008 Really, if they changed their name to Oyate, then they'd lose all of their leverage in the UND nickname issue. It would also destroy, or at least harm severely, the victim status attributed to being a "Sioux." Changing one's name is a sure representation of freedom, something that isn't allowed when you are not free. Quote
Chief Illiniwek Supporter Posted June 26, 2008 Posted June 26, 2008 It would also destroy, or at least harm severely, the victim status attributed to being a "SiouxYep; when all of the textbooks, websites, etc. talk about this tribe or that tribe being "victims" of smallpox blankets and cavalry charges you need to keep that name if you want to keep on claiming problems 150 years later. The tribal council would support spending money for voting on this issue, but wouldn't support a vote on "Sioux" as a UND nickname, when it apparently wouldn't have cost anything with the existing referendum. I wonder why this referendum wasn't linked to a party given by young women in their late teens or early twenties. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.