From the WSJ Opinion Archives
SCENE & HEARD

Indian Takers
It's USDA vs. 4-H in a clash over political correctness.

by COLLIN LEVEY
Thursday, June 27, 2002 12:01 A.M. EDT

One little, two little, three little lawsuits. And now one has come to the nation's capital. On Tuesday the Washington Times reported that the Department of Agriculture is investigating the West Virginia 4-H Club for its use of Indian themes and activities at summer camp. Wess Harris, the Caucasian sociologist who is bringing the case on his nine-year-old daughter's behalf, says he was offended by the way the club has been allowing its kids to play in culturally inaccurate teepees.

The totem poles were also wrong for the Indian tribes specified. "It's about racism," Mr. Harris said. The 4-H chapter, which was already considering revising its Indian syllabus has decided to suspend all face-painting immediately.

How many other depraved activities will also be cancelled remains to be seen, but the clock is ticking. The USDA is hunting for violations of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which bans "discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." If it finds them and the 4-H doesn't capitulate, the Justice Department will take over, to castigate, litigate and defund.

But if Washington is new to the warpath, controversy over American Indian heritage, from mascots to expressions like "Indian giver," has been around for decades. Since 1969, when Indian students at Dartmouth began a campaign to change the school's Indian nickname to Big Green, the argument has become a homecoming perennial.

In the '90s heyday of political correctness, Indian activists groups took shots at teams like the Washington Redskins, Cleveland Indians and Atlanta Braves. The Redskins are appealing a 1999 ruling by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board that found the name offensive and thus not entitled to federal protection against infringement. Schools across the country--from Eaton High, near Denver (Fighting Reds) to Southwestern College (Apaches)--began morphing into Grizzlies and Jaguars. Tomahawk chops were out. Ditto war whooping.

But more recently, the campus protests have been taking the fight up a notch. At Oregon University, students are asking athletes going pro not to don jerseys for teams with Indian names. At the University of Northern Colorado, some culturally sensitive wise guys, led by a student named Solomon Little Owl, made news a few months ago when they decided to call attention to the perils of mascot stereotyping by naming their intramural basketball team the Fightin' Whites. Slogan: "Every thang's going to be all white."

California, typically, isn't as clever. There, the Alliance Against Racial Mascots, which goes by the charming acronym Allarm, is shepherding a drive in the Legislature for a statewide ban on Indian mascots. According to the group's Web site, "Attitudes toward the use of 'Indian' related mascots are inculcated at an early age when the individual is highly susceptible to influence and social pressure. This phenomenon was successfully exploited by World War II Nazi propaganda which paid particular attention to conditioning youth."

Want more? "Nazi spectacle events included cheering crowds, martial music, marching, and lights (such as are used in night games) which are also regular parts of high school football." Of course, half the kids are cheering for the Indians, but then who's splitting hairs? California's bill, which the Legislature voted down, would have been the first of its kind.

Most of the hollering is about nothing. As Sports Illustrated found out in a recent poll, 83% of American Indians reported that they were not offended by the use of Indian names. The Utah Utes got official tribal permission for their continued use of the name, as did the Florida Seminoles. And for most Americans, Indian team names bear little connection to anything historical.

Bringing a civil rights lawsuit for cultural insensitivity profoundly misses the point. For the kids at the 4-H club, as with campers through the decades, the point of making totem poles, sitting in teepees or donning war paint for a contest between the Cherokees and the Comanche is camaraderie, competition and friendship. What kind of spoilsport wants politics to dictate a nine-year-old's play?

As for the mascots, while finding a new one with good T-shirt potential isn't always easy, there may be a good solution. Fierce creatures like vipers, rams and grizzlies are fine, of course, but so done-a-million-times. Maybe the new civil rights brigade could rename some of the new teams in honor of their heroes in Washington.

The only question is, in a match-up between the Barristers and the Bureaucrats, who will we root for?

Ms. Levey is an assistant features editor of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page. Her column appears on alternate Thursdays.