Much in a name
It took 87 years, but the most racially charged team name in sports — the Washington Redskins — will at last be removed.
In the end, it came down to simple economics rather than a guilty conscience.
Credit for the change goes to two things: the Black Lives Matter and the new equality movement generally and economics. But the driving force behind the name change is the same fuel that powers most decisions in the National Football League — money.
The turning point for Daniel Snyder, owner of the team, came about because sponsors — corporations like FedEx (which holds naming rights to the Washington stadium), Nike, Bank of America and PepsiCo — threatened to withhold their considerable sponsorship dollars if the name stayed. Those corporate leaders understood something that long eluded Mr. Snyder — that clinging to a name that is race specific and in today’s context offends almost everyone is bad for business.
Redskins is not like Braves, or Padres, or even Indians.
As for BLM, and others who lobbied for the change, there is a challenge now before them: Can they make positive change? Can they build as well as tear down? Can they create as well as negate?
Winston Churchill said: “To build may have to be the slow and laborious task of years. To destroy can be the thoughtless act of a single day.”
Mutual respect is the first and most important ingredient in any truly progressive social movement. Martin Luther King Jr. summed it up: “Love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into a friend.”