I would prefer the original native name, and I'm sure a lot of the people who actually live in the area call it that anyway.

The war is over. Neo-colonialism ended after WW2. Denali is a better name than McKinley. It was changed. Dealwithit.

Yeah, really not seeing it. o_o I mean, the name Mount McKinley is pretty clearly a byproduct of self-interest and grand shows of purely political support all on its own, and lacks even the cultural significance that other monuments possess. It was renamed for a dumb reason, its name has endured for ultimately sleazy reasons, and so I'm not sure why THIS is the horrible, villifying thing. o_o

To go through the list;

-The officially sanctioned Mount McKinley name is only a bit more than a century old, when it was passed making it, while certainly on the old side, hardly a deep-rooted part of American history. Heck, the RUSSIAN name for the mountain, Boyshaya Gora, (literally 'Big Mountain') was actually around longer, as the Russians owned Alaska between 1733 and 1867. Only difference possibly being that they never passed an official act about it, they just called it 'That Big Mountain.'

-The original 1896 naming, by the way, was actually just a gold prospector showing some political support for a man who, at the time, wasn't even president yet, but rather a presidential canditate. That brings us to the pandering aspect of things, because this wasn't recognition for the great deeds a man had done for Alaska- or even the U.S. at this point in time, but rather because the prospector decided; 'I like this canditate! ...Imma name that mountain after him!'

-McKinley never, from what I've seen, done anything specific regarding Alaska, he never even got a chance to visit the place; the fact that the government chose to officially rename the mountain some 21 years later seems to stem purely from the fact that some gold prospector did it a long while ago, so why not?

-Alaska actually ALREADY changed the name in their own state back in 1975, making Mount McKinley, essentially, 'the name those foreigners on the mainland call it,' with Mount Denali being recognized as the proper name in Alaska itself for about forty years now.

-Attempts to widen it to the rest of the U.S. that same year were blocked by an Ohio congressman whose distrinct actually included McKinley's hometown, which brings us to self-interest. I mean, do you want to be the Congressman who managed to LOSE a big monument to a famous figure in your riding? That'd be a political black eye if ever there was one and lead to some admittedly hilarious opposing campaign ads. ("My opponent, Ralph Regula. You know. THE GUY WHO LOST A MOUNTAIN.")

-Again, attempts since then to change the name country-wide by Alaskan representatives have inevitably been blocked, often by Ohio politicians who stand the most to lose if they let that shit happen.




Which brings me back to my original point. There's plenty of signs that the guy was a good president, and certainly deserves all the memorials and other things that go with it, but Mount McKinley just ISN'T in any way connected to the man. Not his work, not his legacy, and not his character beyond some crafty political campaigning. The only reason it was done in the first place was a grassroots political marketing stunt, the only reason it was cemented because, eh, heck with it, dude should get a mountain and that one has precedence, and the only reason it was MAINTAINED was to keep a bunch of Ohio political figures from losing their heads. -_-


I mean, is the argument that no name should be changed EVER? Under any circumstances? No matter how unnecessary or bizarre the circumstances behind it were?

niallyb said: RolStoppable said: Are you seriously insinuating that spurge might be making a giant molehill out of a mountain? Unbelievable. Spurge needs real problems to get upset about rather than this stupidity.  He has enough time to get outraged but not enough to learn the facts.  The word for that is prejudice.

This is the closest thing to a real problem spurge has ever whined about in a fashion that could be insinuated in some small way as coherent, so at least he's getting a little better at it.

spurgeonryan said: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/31/us/mount-mckinley-will-be-renamed-denali.html?_r=0   So...if he hates the name United States should  he just up and change back to its original name of New world or West indies? Crazy!

The United States didn't have an original name. It had many original names. Hundreds of years ago, the US was divided up into many smaller Native American nations. In fact, you could say what happened in North America was the exact opposite of what happened in Europe. After the fall of Rome, Europe had split into smaller countries that continued to get smaller as time went on whereas North America was already made up of smaller nations that eventually became a few really large countires.

I personally don't see the problem as long as the name change has local support, which it apparently does going by the fact the official name in Alaska has been Denali for the past 40 years.

Machiavellian said: spurgeonryan said: The past is the past. Sorry we had slaves, but reparations are over. Sorry we bombed Japan twice, but shit happens and their government was craxy back then, sorry Mexico lost half of America to us, but it is ours now. Yep, its good to be the king.  Next time do not put a minority in the higest office and you will not have to worry about the President using his executive ability and do stuff for those losy people we crushed.  Put Jeb or Trump on that seat and you will never have to worry about bleeding heart pandering from those guys.  Hell, I am sure they would totally ignore pretty much every minority in the US so no need to worry about those losers for at least 4 years.

You say this like it's universally understood that oppressing minorities is a bad thing. I tell you, some people think it is not only an OK thing to do but it is the good and right thing.

So reading up a quick history of the situation. The mountain was (unofficially) named McKinley in support for his bid for presidency and then officially a number of years after his assassination. However the native name has always existed beforehand.

The Alaskan legislature requested the federal change back to Denali back in the 70s. While Alaska have already been using and encouraging the name. So what exactly is the issue here? The people of Alaska know it as Denali. It's on their land, not Ohio's. It has been known as Denali for as long as anyone can remember.

This is a non-issue.

Machiavellian said: thismeintiel said: What a slippery slope. Seriously, though, this is just ridiculous. It's been called Mount McKinley for over 115 years by those outside of Alaska. And those who knew it as Denali, still called it that, so the change is just to pander to a minority of a minority who just wanted it known as Denali to the rest of the US. Basically, it's just to prove he can unilaterally do something. I think it would funny as hell if the next president just changes it back. That would definitely piss Obama off. It’s interesting how people feel when it’s not their culture.  It’s pandering, insignificant or just useless to you but if it was the same for the people of Alaska why would they make it an issue to change the name.  It's not my heritage but who knows how the actual people who lived there for hundreds of years feel about something you consider as pandering.  Anyway it’s pretty standard for the minority to have their ideals, culture and heritage dismissed like this by the majority who cannot understand or in some ways care.  Such small things seem very insignificant to you but for the native Indians in Alaska this might feel like change.  It might feel like a little more respect.   Actually if he next president changed it back, it would not piss Obama off but I am sure there are a hell of a lot of native Alaskan Indians who sure would feel very disrespected.  Then again, I am sure the majority would not care.

I bet the majority of native Alaskans don't give a shit if it is or isn't called Mount McKinley by the rest of the US.  Know why?  Cause they still call it Denali themselves.  Just like the majority of Native Americans don't give a shit about the name Redskins, but the left just has something in there heads that makes them need to have the name changed.  This pandering, PC BS has got to stop.  The majority of the US is now being beholden to less than 1% of the population.

And I'm sure it would piss Obama off.  He's extremely thin-skinned.  He always gets annoyed/pissed when he is actually challenged on something. I also think it's quite funny that if a Rep president did come around and change the name back, the same people in here who are saying "who cares, it's a mountain" would change their tune real quick. 

It's a good thing. It honours the Alaskan Natives. It's a Koyukon word for "high" or "tall", which is fitting considering it's the highest peak in North America.