2. “Braves” is not the same as “Indians”
“Indians” is a blanket term for all of the indigenous nations occupying the North American continent prior to European settlement. It did not and does not make a delineation between one people group or another, and is akin to labeling anyone from Eastern Asia as “Oriental” indiscriminately.
That stands apart from the Braves mascot. While Atlanta has taken steps (as noted) to remove caricatures and images of any particular person who might somehow have the “look” of a Native American, the label “Braves” attempted to mark the warrior rank used by some tribes as recognition for special skill or prowess.
Thus if there is an offense to be felt, it would be more about a cultural appropriation of the term — one arguably intended to be honorable. It would be more like honoring the US Army by naming a team the “Majors” or “Captains”. Indeed, multiple sports clubs have been named after the rank “Generals”.
Some would argue that it’s a difference without a distinction. But there is a significant difference — so long as the lines are not blurred. In recent years, fans have not been showing up to the ballpark in some sort of headdress gear or costuming… that’s where those lines would spill over into the category of unacceptable practices.
Thus: no, the Braves name — in and of itself — is not representative of an overtly racist theme, and that should be enough for this team to maintain their hold on it.
At least for those willing to slow down and consider the meaning of the words for a bit.