Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Most people never bother to read about him. I never even did, until recently. Even my school teachers never taught the full story behind Christopher Columbus. Up until 8th grade, I thought he was the first person to "discover" America. It wasn't until I read about the Vikings that I learned otherwise.
read the link, he made the vikings look like nice guys
http://vimeo.com/92332676]Vikings - blood eagle ritual on Vimeo Video of nice guys - from the show Vikings on History
Okay. Now that you have all gotten to say nice, pious, self-aggrandizing things at Columbus's expense, let's put some teeth behind those sentiments.
1) If you live within the United States and own property, research carefully which Indian tribe owned the land where you call home.
2) Go down to your county courthouse and deed your property to whatever's left of the aforementioned Indian tribe.
3) Pay that tribe monthly rent.
4) If that tribe doesn't want you living on the land deeded over, return to whatever country your forebears came from.
There you go. Take those steps and you can really express all the moral outrage you want. But if you aren't willing to do those things, then you're a serious hypocrite. Because you're all expressing moral outrage over Columbus's expeditions to the New World while simultaneously benefitting from it. Seriously. The fact that you're living in a nice condo or house or farm or lake house somewhere in North America is directly related to the fact that Columbus discovered a handful of islands in the Caribbean half a millennium ago.
And while we're at it, let's tackle a few other points.
Aboriginal Americans were conquering and subjugating one another long before Columbus sighted San Salvador. The Incas and Aztecs were pretty bloodthirsty. I mean, you do know how those guys operated, right? They ruthlessly and brutally subjugated Central and South America. I'm not a disciple of Nietzsche, Carlyle or Gobineau by any means, but peoples have been conquering peoples since the dawn of time. And while I certainly don't endorse slavery or mutilation, that's child's play compared to the Incas and Aztecs. In fact, maybe we should celebrate Cortez's invasion of Mexico and Pizzaro's conquest of Peru, because they put an end to horror shows that made Pol Pot and Kim il Jung look like freaking Winnie the Pooh. I don't care how picturesque Macchu Picchu is. Just remember how many slaves died to build it.
As another example, know those picturesque Anasazi cliff dwellings in North America? They didn't build those because they liked the view. They built them so their settlement wouldn't get wiped out by that tribe up the river. So can we stop with the infantile notion that the pre-Columbian population was peaceful and idyllic? The only difference between the Spanish and the Incas, Aztecs, Comanches, and a host of other warrior tribes is that the Spanish were better at conquests. They had the horse and gunpowder, too. That helped.
Smallpox. Hey, the Spain of Columbus was barely out of the Medieval period. They didn't understand germ theory the way we do today. So spare your vitriol. I mean, according to some recent research, syphilis came to Europe from the New World. And syphilis was deadly stuff before it mutated.
Enough with the sanctimony. Columbus was a product of his time, a sailor who was interested in trade as opposed to conquest. And the outrages paled in comparison to many of the wars fought in Europe at the time, not to mention the people the Spanish would eventually conquer.
There. So get up tomorrow and live up to your convictions. Go down to probate and transfer your deed. That way you can actually have a legitimate reason to complain. Doing anything less is just puffery on your part.
When I was in school, we got the basic story about Columbus, on how he sailed in the Pinta, Nina, and Santa Maria, and how he "discovered" America in 1492. We never got the full story. Never once was anything said about the violence he inflicted. Nothing was ever mentioned that the Vikings got to the North American continent before he did, by over 400 years. Furthermore, nothing gets said about the violence from him when he ruled that area. Next to nothing.
How about the violence of the Vikings? Because they pretty much killed everyone in site wherever they went. Are you seeing a pattern here yet?
Okay. Now that you have all gotten to say nice, pious, self-aggrandizing things at Columbus's expense, let's put some teeth behind those sentiments.
1) If you live within the United States and own property, research carefully which Indian tribe owned the land where you call home.
2) Go down to your county courthouse and deed your property to whatever's left of the aforementioned Indian tribe.
3) Pay that tribe monthly rent.
4) If that tribe doesn't want you living on the land deeded over, return to whatever country your forebears came from.
There you go. Take those steps and you can really express all the moral outrage you want. But if you aren't willing to do those things, then you're a serious hypocrite. Because you're all expressing moral outrage over Columbus's expeditions to the New World while simultaneously benefitting from it. Seriously. The fact that you're living in a nice condo or house or farm or lake house somewhere in North America is directly related to the fact that Columbus discovered a handful of islands in the Caribbean half a millennium ago.
And while we're at it, let's tackle a few other points.
Aboriginal Americans were conquering and subjugating one another long before Columbus sighted San Salvador. The Incas and Aztecs were pretty bloodthirsty. I mean, you do know how those guys operated, right? They ruthlessly and brutally subjugated Central and South America. I'm not a disciple of Nietzsche, Carlyle or Gobineau by any means, but peoples have been conquering peoples since the dawn of time. And while I certainly don't endorse slavery or mutilation, that's child's play compared to the Incas and Aztecs. In fact, maybe we should celebrate Cortez's invasion of Mexico and Pizzaro's conquest of Peru, because they put an end to horror shows that made Pol Pot and Kim il Jung look like freaking Winnie the Pooh. I don't care how picturesque Macchu Picchu is. Just remember how many slaves died to build it.
As another example, know those picturesque Anasazi cliff dwellings in North America? They didn't build those because they liked the view. They built them so their settlement wouldn't get wiped out by that tribe up the river. So can we stop with the infantile notion that the pre-Columbian population was peaceful and idyllic? The only difference between the Spanish and the Incas, Aztecs, Comanches, and a host of other warrior tribes is that the Spanish were better at conquests. They had the horse and gunpowder, too. That helped.
Smallpox. Hey, the Spain of Columbus was barely out of the Medieval period. They didn't understand germ theory the way we do today. So spare your vitriol. I mean, according to some recent research, syphilis came to Europe from the New World. And syphilis was deadly stuff before it mutated.
Enough with the sanctimony. Columbus was a product of his time, a sailor who was interested in trade as opposed to conquest. And the outrages paled in comparison to many of the wars fought in Europe at the time, not to mention the people the Spanish would eventually conquer.
There. So get up tomorrow and live up to your convictions. Go down to probate and transfer your deed. That way you can actually have a legitimate reason to complain. Doing anything less is just puffery on your part.
What I love is the argument that we shouldn't be mad at Columbus because "Other people were just as bad." or "He was a product of his times." Which equates to the toddler sticking his fingers in his ears and screaming at loud as he can. No one here is saying they give support to the Incas or the Aztecs brutal acts either. We are simply saying old Chris shouldn't have a friggin holiday in his honor.
I honestly don't care. So many Americans love their "revisionist history," and that this holiday still exists makes that very clear despite their denial.
What I love is the argument that we shouldn't be mad at Columbus because "Other people were just as bad." or "He was a product of his times." Which equates to the toddler sticking his fingers in his ears and screaming at loud as he can. No one here is saying they give support to the Incas or the Aztecs brutal acts either. We are simply saying old Chris shouldn't have a friggin holiday in his honor.
And what I love is your collective sanctimony and poor grasp of history.
You guys are all screaming at the top of your lungs about how horrible Columbus was. Well, pretty much every body was indeed horrible. Think of Game Of Thrones, and that's pretty how much business was done back then.
In fact, you'd be really hard-pressed to find any historical figure who lived up to our modern day sensibilities, even the ones we revere the most. I mean even a figure such as Gandhi was an admirer of Hitler who encouraged the Jews of Europe to commit mass suicide. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and did and said a lot of things that we would find reprehensible today. So did George Washington. Do either deserve a holiday?
But what are we really doing on Columbus Day? Are we celebrating the man? Or are we observing the machinery set into motion, the gears of history that landed us where we are today?
And what I love is your collective sanctimony and poor grasp of history.
You guys are all screaming at the top of your lungs about how horrible Columbus was. Well, pretty much every body was indeed horrible. Think of Game Of Thrones, and that's pretty how much business was done back then.
In fact, you'd be really hard-pressed to find any historical figure who lived up to our modern day sensibilities, even the ones we revere the most. I mean even a figure such as Gandhi was an admirer of Hitler who encouraged the Jews of Europe to commit mass suicide. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and did and said a lot of things that we would find reprehensible today. So did George Washington. Do either deserve a holiday?
But what are we really doing on Columbus Day? Are we celebrating the man? Or are we observing the machinery set into motion, the gears of history that landed us where we are today?
I have 2 degrees of a historical nature, so I have a fine grasp of history . Lincolns suspension of habeas corpus was a necessity of the times. He was facing a situation that threatened to rip the Country apart at the seams. He did what was required to try to prevent that. I wouldn't judge any President in his shoes, using a tool to ensure stability. The amazing this about him is that in the end he relinquished that power, when many others would have kept it. He was also racist, if we really want to get technical. I don't expect people to be perfect, and can make exceptions. However, sitting around telling everyone that Christopher Columbus was nothing more than an ardet explorer is pretty much bologna. This is a guy who was so brutal that he was demoted as Governor and tossed in jail for some time. He wasn't anybodies sweetheart and doesn't deserve a holiday in his honor. I mean even if he wasn't all those things I wouldn't see the point in honoring him with a holiday. The guy got in a ship and found some land. He didn't split the friggin atom for petes sake.
Yeah, because human society obviously would have never advanced if people didn't live in the western hemisphere . I always love it when people bring out the old chestnut of "Lots of other people were terrible as well." Well, no ****. That doesn't mean you automatically should gloss over the terrible deeds of someone, just because another group was just as awful.
Oh please, Columbus was an awesome guy and I am happy to celebrate Columbus day! What happened to the natives was just inevitable. Had Europeans not reached America, you can bet someone else would and I HIGHLY doubt they'd treat the natives any better.
What happened to the natives was just natures course. As history has shown, those that don't progress get left behind, it's not our problem if others can't catch up.,
Also, the good majority of inventions in use today would have only been invented in the western hemisphere, it's quite telling how in the middle ages, europeans were the only ones that had the foresight and intelligence necessary to create them.
Oh please, Columbus was an awesome guy and I am happy to celebrate Columbus day! What happened to the natives was just inevitable. Had Europeans not reached America, you can bet someone else would and I HIGHLY doubt they'd treat the natives any better.
What happened to the natives was just natures course. As history has shown, those that don't progress get left behind, it's not our problem if others can't catch up.,
Also, the good majority of inventions in use today would have only been invented in the western hemisphere, it's quite telling how in the middle ages, europeans were the only ones that had the foresight and intelligence necessary to create them.
You know I take it back what I said before about the other poster posting the dumbest thing ever on here, because you just took the award from him. It's okay to celebrate Columbus because "Hey, it was inevitable and no one would have treated them better." I guess by your theory we should praise old Uncle Adolph's ingenuity in leading Germany back onto the world stage and ignore his actions in the holocaust. Given your rationalization, his actions should be glossed over because anti semitism was rampant and what happened to them was inevitable. Do you see how troubling an attitude like that is? If Europeans were the only ones with the intelligence and foresight to create them then why did many of their "inventions" come from non european areas? The Europeans were certainly not the only ones with the "foresight and intelligence to create them". Like all ingenuity it's usually a team effort with different members pitching in.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. Lincolns suspension of habeas corpus was a necessity of the times. He was facing a situation that threatened to rip the Country apart at the seams. He did what was required to try to prevent that. I wouldn't judge any President in his shoes, using a tool to ensure stability. The amazing this about him is that in the end he relinquished that power, when many others would have kept it. He was also racist, if we really want to get technical. I don't expect people to be perfect, and can make exceptions. However, sitting around telling everyone that Christopher Columbus was nothing more than an ardet explorer is pretty much bologna. This is a guy who was so brutal that he was demoted as Governor and tossed in jail for some time. He wasn't anybodies sweetheart and doesn't deserve a holiday in his honor. I mean even if he wasn't all those things I wouldn't see the point in honoring him with a holiday. The guy got in a ship and found some land. He didn't split the friggin atom for petes sake.
