The American Pastime goes PC
0 comment Monday, July 21, 2014 |
An acute case of Political Correctness has afflicted the Great American Pastime.
Moonbats After Chief Wahoo's Scalp
Major League Baseball will precede the 2007 season by pandering to political correctness with the inaugural Civil Rights Game in Memphis, home of the National Civil Rights Museum. Jackie Robinson will be obsessed upon in an effort to prove what racists we are for having grandparents who watched him play for the Brooklyn Dodgers back in 1947. Also honored will be the race-baiting lunatic Spike Lee, who has been screaming at anyone who will listen that George Bush blew up the levees to be mean to New Orleans' black people.
But a politically incorrect cloud will hang above the guilt fest. The St. Louis Cardinals are playing the Cleveland Indians, whose logo features Chief Wahoo, hated by moonbats for reasons only a moonbat could explain...
Here, the PC scolds' religious wing, denounce the outrage of Chief Wahoo:
The scheduled participation of the Cleveland Indians baseball team in Memphis� annual Civil Rights Game on March 31 is drawing criticism from the UCC�s General Minister and President John H. Thomas.
Thomas is speaking out against a decision by Major League Baseball to pit the Cleveland�s baseball franchise � with its racially-charged "Indians" nickname and "Chief Wahoo" logo � against the St. Louis Cardinals in the annual exhibition game that honors the nation�s Civil Rights Movement.
"America�s pastime ought to reflect America�s noblest values," Thomas told United Church News. "Logos and mascots that demean anyone fall far short of that vision."
The use of the "Indians" name in sports is widely offensive to American Indians and the team�s "Chief Wahoo" is regarded by many to be a racist caricature of Native Americans. Its use is often spoken in parallel to the "Little Black Sambo" caricature of African Americans, which dates to the early 1900s. ''
And here, Preston Wilson says racial issues remain in baseball
MEMPHIS, TENN. � When it announced the first annual Civil Rights Game between the Cardinals and Cleveland Indians less than four months ago, Major League Baseball envisioned this weekend as a commemoration of the civil rights movement and baseball's role in enacting social change.
Cardinals outfielder Preston Wilson, meanwhile, notices that he is part of another change: the game's ever-diminishing minority of African-American players.
The veteran Wilson is the only African-American player on the Cardinals' projected opening day roster. He has witnessed the steady ebb of black athletes from the game for two decades.
"I think the perception is if there's a dark-skinned Latin guy out there, then he's black," Wilson said before Friday's game against the Memphis Redbirds. "A lot of people don't differentiate. But it's not the case. There are a lot of issues involved."
Wilson doesn't explain why the many Spanish-speaking players of African descent don't count; that whole thing is a mystery to me. Many of the Latin American players are of African descent, but apparently not 'black.'
Now, I read another piece recently deploring the scarcity of blacks in baseball, especially in pitching. I've often wondered why it is that black pitchers are a relative rarity, especially considering that complaints notwithstanding, blacks are not underrepresented in baseball as a whole. But of course any speculation on just why blacks are underrepresented in pitching would likely involve some speculation about physiological differences between the races, and that subject is taboo. Anybody in public life who dares to discuss that topic is subject to censure and possible loss of employment. In any case I will leave it there; blacks are underrepresented in pitching for unknown and mysterious reasons but are not underrepresented in baseball.
And not only blacks are fretted over; the above-linked article laments and moans that there aren't enough women:
Baseball got its worst grade � an F � for low numbers of women in leadership positions. Forty percent of employees at a given level of administration had to be women to receive an A.''
I love the game of baseball; I have since I was a kid. To me, it is still the quintessential American game, though it's been supplanted in popularity by football. I was told by a European that baseball is 'boring', unlike football which is 'exciting'. To each his own. Maybe baseball appeals to a slightly different temperament than does football or other sports. Maybe it is a relic of a slower-paced time, in which a more leisurely game was preferred; maybe it does not belong in our short-attention-span, action-oriented, sensation-seeking era. And for those who are attuned to it, baseball has the element of strategy, and the mental duel between the managers. There is a subtlety to the game that is lost on many people, who are looking for slam-bang action all the time.
Nevertheless, maybe baseball is deserving of some of the loss of popularity; the game now, scandal-ridden in the wake of the steroid usage revelations, and what with the obscene salaries for the players and the climbing ticket prices, has become less the wholesome American game of times past, and just another ruthless business. And I, believe it or not, still haven't gotten over the newfangled innovations like the Designated Hitter.
And as far as I am concerned, Roger Maris' home run record still stands.
Despite the tarnished image of baseball, it infuriates me to see the game turned into another pulpit for the PC preachers. Just leave it alone; don't sully it with sermonizing about 'racism' and 'hate' and all the rest of it. The game has been integrated for a long time; what on earth is the point of dredging up past 'crimes' and pummeling innocent fans who were not alive during the bad old days with guilt trips? Enough. When will people simply say they've had enough?
As for the endless whining about 'Chief Wahoo', why are these white liberals taking offense in the name of Indians, or 'Native Americans' in their parlance? There have been surveys taken of Indians, (Native Americans, if you insist) who said they were not offended by the team names or mascots. The majority were not offended, so why are these imbecilic white liberals offended for somebody who is not offended? What is that more-PC-than-thou nonsense about?
Were the old Soviet bloc countries ever as politically-obsessed as our liberal society is today? It's true they made sports political too, but as far as I know, this applied only in international competitions like the Olympics, where every event was a big showdown between People's Socialism and Decadent Capitalism. To be fair, our side entered into that ideological spirit; whenever we outperformed the Russians in the Olympics, it was touted as a victory for our Free Enterprise system and individuality, whereas for the Soviets it was always about the collective.
When I was in school, we were taught that in the old Eastern bloc countries, Communism dominated everything; movies, music, TV programs, the message had to be reinforced; everything had to promote Soviet values. Now it seems we are outdoing them with the ideology injected into every corner of American life. Even a game, a sport, has to be obsessed with political messages. And this 'civil rights game' business in baseball is just the latest manifestation; we have had NASCAR under assault, with Jesse Jackson pushing for more minorities in the sport, and the NAACP agitating to ban all display of Confederate symbols at NASCAR events. This is a very intentional slap in the face to the South, considering that the sport is quintessentially of the South, having started there, and having been dominated by Southerners. The Confederate Battle flag has long been associated with the sport, and now, thanks to the meddling of the NAACP, the sport is becoming politically corrected.
Recently, we've been treated to a spate of articles complaining about 'racism' in winter sports like skiing and snowboarding, and other articles describing consternation about the lack of minority participation in outdoor activities like hiking, climbing, and camping. So now there is talk of minorities being subsidized to take part in these activities, because God forbid they are 'underrepresented' in any area of life, even by their own choice.
As it strives for greater diversity, the [Washington State Parks and Recreation] commission also wants to hire black rangers. It currently has none.
"If there are no black rangers, [black] people going to the park will think there's nothing there for them," Galloway said. "The goal is to reflect society's demographics in our agency."
I don't for one minute believe that there is 'racism' or 'discrimination' behind the scarcity of minorities on the pitcher's mound, or on the ski slopes or in our national parks and campgrounds, or at NASCAR races. Don't the leftist ideologues comprehend the idea that people exercise choices? That they take part in things that interest them, things that they find satisfying, and leave other activities alone by choice? And that if people congregate together on the basis of common interests, they have a right to freedom of association?
The social engineers want to eliminate that freedom of association in favor of forced 'diversity.' Where does it stop?
Nobody is keeping blacks out of baseball now, and we don't need guilt trips, lectures, and sermons about it from those who imagine they are our keepers and our moral betters. Whatever happened to freedom of choice, especially in the innocent matters of games, sports, and recreation? Leave people alone to follow their interests and pleasures. Leave the Great American Pastime alone. Leave politics and ideology out of it.

Labels: , , ,