They were everywhere Saturday and Sunday. Like locust gone wild, they were resting on hats, shirts and jerseys, pants legs - and more than likely a few pairs of underwear. The only place where more of them could have been seen would have been at a University of North Dakota sporting event.

"They" are Fighting Sioux signature and logo clothing - the uniform of the day last weekend for area residents, undoubtedly worn to make a statement just days after the announcement that the nickname and Indian head logo didn't have much of a chance of survival. It was a fitting public protest for those fans who favored retention of the name and logo.

But what wasn't, and still isn't, appropriate is the racist comments many submitted to the Tribune for online publication. As of midweek, there were about 375 published comments - and many more that never saw the light of day because of blatant racism.

The gall that some possess when they can "speak" anonymously is appalling.

None of this bodes well for the community, even acknowledging that no scientific reliability of representative opinion can be drawn from online comments. But the reaction does suggest racism is alive, for an undetermined number of people, and those who truly care about humanity must work harder at education when it comes to ignorance.

If I were king, there would not be a place in society for inappropriate name calling, insensitivity, stereotyping, crude ethnic jokes and the like. We, as individuals and collectively as a society and community, need to learn that differences of opinion can spur healthy dialog, even produce attitudinal change, but nothing is generally gained without a basic respect and consideration of understanding for those with whom we disagree. Anger, righteous or indignant, isn't generally an effective tool. And closed minds allow no opening for growth.

Most will say they are not racist, but they are, even if unconsciously so. Consider this example:

The Associated Press, a respected news organization, ran two photos in 2005 of individuals carrying food through the Hurricane Katrina-flooded streets of New Orleans. The caption under the picture of two white people read: "Two residents wade through chest deep water after finding bread and soda from a grocery store …" The caption under a photo of a black man read: "A young man walks through chest deep water after looting a grocery store …"

Trying to justify the "finding" vs. "looting" descriptions is a waste of time. Maybe it was just an unfortunate set of circumstances, I just don't believe it and neither did millions of readers.

Journalists, citizens writing letters to the editor, or those seeking to post comments can perpetuate stereotyping when they allow a mental picture to form in the reader's mind that is oversimplified, based on raw emotion or on a learned and unchallenged attitude.

We need to be careful that we don't make overly critical judgments, demean or ridicule a person, group or race. That can be difficult, based upon personal perspectives, how we were raised, personal experiences and/or the dominate cultural norms of our environment.

Bias is all around us; it is, in fact, a part of each of us. But the only real way to lessen its grip is to admit our own shortcomings and accept that all we know isn't always fact or based on facts.

Native Americans are not all alike; nor are whites, blacks, Germans, Jews, men, women or one-eyed-purple-people-eaters. The differences in the same race, ethnicity, group, community, etc., can be mind-boggling in terms of eye-ear-nose-mouth-height-weight-skin color combinations, but even more importantly in personalities, characteristics, thinking processes, levels of responsibility, etc.

None of us is superior to any other when it comes to humanity, yet some have had greater opportunities or life situations. And it is best to remember that there are a multitude of problems associated with allowing race to be the predominate determinate in our thoughts, words and actions. Such assumptions aren't fair or wise. In reality, racial grouping doesn't usually describe much of anything except social or cultural assimilation, geography, bloodlines or heritage.

Those who write for publication should remember that their strength - and weakness - lies in individual word choices.

The Fighting Sioux nickname and Indian head logo, in the final analysis, is an insignificant debate. The individuals or groups in favor of retention - or those opposed - should be respected. But let's stop making it an issue fueled by racism and unintelligent remarks and charges, where there can be no winners.

(You can reach Editor John Irby at 250-8266 or john.irby@bismarcktribune.com and go to www.bismarcktribune.com/blog/?wthepaper&e_id2671/ to read his blog.)