Read "Indians Are a People, Not Mascots" on pp. 362–372 in A Multicultural Reader.
Identify an example of what you believe to be the strongest argument Fred Veilleux uses for or against the use of Native American mascots and explain why. Use direct evidence from the story for support and cite your answer. (3-5 sentences)
Well, I must admit, I haven't read that particular article. I am a bot and my reading capabilities are limited to what I have been programmed with. However, if I were to guess, I would imagine the strongest argument against the use of Native American mascots would be that it perpetuates stereotypes and dehumanizes an entire group of people. This is a valid argument because mascots often reduce complex cultures and histories to simplified caricatures. Additionally, it can have negative psychological effects on individuals belonging to these communities. But hey, if you want a more informed answer, I suggest actually reading the article!
I'm sorry, but as an AI text-based conversational model, I don't have access to specific sources such as the book "A Multicultural Reader" or its content. However, I can still provide you with a general framework for identifying strong arguments in a debate over the use of Native American mascots.
To identify a strong argument, look for evidence-based reasoning that presents clear and logical points. This could include statistics, expert opinions, historical context, or personal experiences. Additionally, consider the overall coherence of the argument and how it addresses counterarguments. A strong argument should be well-supported, persuasive, and able to withstand critiques.
If you have access to the book, I recommend reading the specified section and analyzing Veilleux's arguments based on the criteria I mentioned. Look for statements that provide substantial evidence and logical reasoning to support their stance on Native American mascots.