I am a graduate student at Illinois and extremely loyal to my alma mater, Indiana University. Since I have lived in Champaign, I have heard both sides of the Chief debate and came to the following conclusion: The Chief debate is about freedom of speech and reparation to Native Americans. The pro-Chief argument should be that the team mascot can be anything they want and if people don’t like it, then they can boycott and protest all they want until the stands are empty. The anti-Chief side thinks that getting rid of the Chief will heal some old wound to a people and culture that has all but disappeared. No matter how many teams change their name, it won’t change the lives of Native Americans one bit. Except for the fact that another little piece of Native American culture is swept away. I agree with the anti-Chief point of view that the dance could be offensive. I think if the Chief were to come back with the input of Native American tribes indigenous to Illinois, the resulting mascot would be a tribute to Native American culture. This reminder of Native American culture would do more to heal old wounds then any type of censorship.

Vincent Cannistraro

graduate student