Posted on 08/30/2015 3:19:19 PM PDT by Zakeet
“What do Alaskans who are not indigent call it? How much money do you have to have to call it something else?”
Absolutely no Alaskan resident will refer to this mountain as McKinley. It’s always been Denali regardless of race.
There’s already Denali National Park, Denali State Park, Denali State Highway, all in the Denali Borough.
Beautiful day up here today. My wife and I drove an hour up the road to Talkeetna to have lunch and enjoy the view of Denali. As has been pointed out in many comments, no one up here calls the mountain McKinley except tourists, and all this does is bring the feds in line with what the state has been doing for decades. This thread sure brought out the jackholes though.
It was renamed in 1917. If the weenies in Alaska didn’t like that name they should have had it named back to Denali in 1959 before becoming a state.
I guess now it’s time to rename Washington D.C. back to its original name: Nacotchtank. Or roughly translated... “sewer gas”. Hell, let’s just rename everything so that we erase all the evil whiteys from American history.
A lot of state names come from native words, tribal names.
It’s not like we’ve neglected Indian culture.
You’re right.
I’m going to start demanding people start calling Pikes Peak “Heey-otoyoo’” though. Rolls right off the tongue, don’t it???
let’s see how well that plays out.
"....Whatever the current object of adulation— the wisdom of the East, tribal Africa, Aboriginal Australia, pre-Columbian America —the message is the same: the absolute superiority of Otherness. The Third Worldist looks to the orient, to the tribal, to the primitive not for what they really are but for their evocative distance from the reality of modern European society and values...."
"..... Since the folly of locking up native peoples in their old-time cultures is obvious, but it is tactless to say so, governments have everywhere resorted to the rhetoric of “reconciliation.” This pretends that the problem is psychological and moral: rejig the public mind, ask leading political figures to adopt a contrite demeanor and apologize for the sins of history, and all will be well. Underlying this is the assumption that we are all on the same plain of social development, divided only by misunderstanding.
But this assumption, Sandall emphasizes, “is false.” And it was recognized as false by governments everywhere until quite recently. Around 1970, the big change set in. Then, instead of attempting to help primitives enter the modern world, we were enjoined to admire them and their (suitably idealized) way of life. As Sandall observes, “the effect on indigenes of romanticizing their past has been devastating.”
If your traditonal way of life has no alphabet, no writing, no books, and no libraries, and yet you are continually told that you have a culture which is “rich,” “complex,” and “sophisticated,” how can you realistically see your place in the scheme of things? If all such hyperbole were true, who would need books or writing? Why not hang up a “Gone Fishing” sign and head for the beach? I might do that myself. In Australia, policies inspired by the Culture Cult have brought the illiterization of thousands of Aborigines whose grandparents could read and write.
The statistics are grim. Between 1965 and 1975, Sandall reports, Aborigines arrived at one college with sixth-grade reading levels; in 1990, after primary education had been handed over to local Aboriginal communities, that had fallen to third grade. Today most Aborigines arrive at the college in question almost completely illiterate.
This social disaster was the result of specific political policies. But the policies themselves were the result of a moral attitude, one that many anthropologists have actively nurtured. In part, the attitude is a reflection of the Lévi-Straussian “non-hierarchical” view of culture: the view which denies that there are important distinctions to be made between la pensée sauvage and the mind, for example, of Claude Lévi-Strauss.
In part, what we might call the “anthropological attitude” is a coefficient of the idea—also fostered by Lévi-Strauss, among many others—that culture is at bottom a “narrative,” a product of “social construction.” And the results of that development—corrosive skepticism, blasé nihilism, irresponsible relativism—have helped to place anthropology in the intellectual slum wherein it now molders. “For more than twenty years,” Sandall writes, “anthropologists have written about constructing reality as if the world and everything in it were mere artifact, about building identity as if any old self-glamourizing fiction will do, about creating the past as an enterprise more exciting than history, about inventing tradition as if traditions were as changeable as store windows.”..............
Good read. Thank you!
It does appear that due process was followed here with the Secretary of the Interior getting the final call.
There’s quite a few variant spellings there.
Also some clearly not related to Denali:
Doleika, Doleyka, Tenada, Tenda, To-lah-gah, Traleika
Traleyka
It does appear that due process was followed here with the Secretary of the Interior getting the final call.
There’s quite a few variant spellings there.
Also some clearly not related to Denali:
Doleika, Doleyka, Tenada, Tenda, To-lah-gah, Traleika
Traleyka
Hmm....how often, though, does a name change go into effect on a Sunday??
I always called it Denali and it’s on ny list of to doos...
Even the state government has passed bills to call it Denali. Only the tourists and the outsiders, (Those living in the lower 48) called it after the man from Ohio.
After being there, it just smacks of yankee imperialism to accept the Fed. Govt. name when an existing Name was better.
Best to let it go back then fight the war.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.