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.
Nope. Just the dominant, more advanced civilization wins. The native Americans that Columbus met were living in the stone age, and it was inevitable that they would be conquered by someone. Would everyone feel better if it was someone else from a different nation? Perhaps Obama?
The only deep down hatred I have of anything/anyone, with the possible exception of Richard Nixon, exists only in your imagination and self-delusion. I learned a long time ago hate only saps energy and eats away at the hater and has NO affect on the hated, IF you're lucky you may learn the same someday.
But I do think people are wrong when they teach children a sugar-coated view of life as if there exists only US and THEM in the world.
Yeah...Burdell... your right...I can see that from the following comment posted from Mr leftwing himself... rlchurch..
Quote:
The typical white male was no more necessary than a donkey. Just a dumb beast of burden to do the manual labor.
Nope. Just the dominant, more advanced civilization wins. The native Americans that Columbus met were living in the stone age, and it was inevitable that they would be conquered by someone. Would everyone feel better if it was someone else from a different nation? Perhaps Obama?
i'm not sure what your point is.
the thread was started to say that the less savory facts about columbus are not true and shouldn't be taught in schools.
it has nothing to do with right or wrong or inevitability, or what would make people "feel better" - it's about teaching kids the reality of history versus teaching them fairy tales that make historical figures look perfect when they weren't.
Nope. Just the dominant, more advanced civilization wins. The native Americans that Columbus met were living in the stone age, and it was inevitable that they would be conquered by someone. Would everyone feel better if it was someone else from a different nation? Perhaps Obama?
Let's see...uuuhhhmmm the Native Americans has their own language , customs, plant and herbal medications, religion, only used what was needed, respected the land and environement, traded with other tribes, but they lived in the stone age.
According to whom?
Yeah, that's right the same Europeans that felt a God given right to do the things they did. You seem to have that same mind set.
So this is your excuse for the willful attrocities committed against indegenous populations?
The more "advanced" culture ushered in genocide, slavery, rape, looting, and pillaging!
Let's see...uuuhhhmmm the Native Americans has their own language , customs, plant and herbal medications, religion, only used what was needed, respected the land and environement, traded with other tribes, but they lived in the stone age.
According to whom?
Yeah, that's right the same Europeans that felt a God given right to do the things they did. You seem to have that same mind set.
So this is your excuse for the willful attrocities committed against indegenous populations?
The more "advanced" culture ushered in genocide, slavery, rape, looting, and pillaging!
Obama has what to do with this discussion?
Don't forget how those native americans tribes went to to war with other tribes and made them slaves , that some praticed cannibalism and human sacrafices.
Let's see...uuuhhhmmm the Native Americans has their own language , customs, plant and herbal medications, religion, only used what was needed, respected the land and environement, traded with other tribes, but they lived in the stone age.
According to whom?
Yeah, that's right the same Europeans that felt a God given right to do the things they did. You seem to have that same mind set.
So this is your excuse for the willful attrocities committed against indegenous populations?
The more "advanced" culture ushered in genocide, slavery, rape, looting, and pillaging!
Obama has what to do with this discussion?
What you are saying reminds me of the very typical view of the time, Jacques Rousseau's, "The Nobel savage". In which it was seen by many westerners as a duty to civilize the primitives which is clearly seen later in the 17th century by Hobbes.
in 1651 of Hobbes's Leviathan (or Commonwealth), a justification of absolute monarchy. Hobbes, a "hard Primitivist", flatly asserted that life in a State of Nature was "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short"-- a "war of all against all". Reacting to the wars of religion of his own time and the previous century, he maintained that the absolute rule of a king was the only possible alternative to the otherwise inevitable violence and anarchy of civil war. Hobbes' hard Primitivism may have been as venerable as the tradition of soft Primitivism, but his use of it was new. He used it to argue that the state was founded on a Social Contract in which men voluntarily gave up their liberty in return for the peace and security provided by total surrender to an absolute ruler, whose legitimacy stemmed from the Social Contract and not from God.
We also see this kind of sentiment from an earlier time but with far less of a notion of the "Nobel Savage", from "The Requirement".
I implore you to recognize the Church as a lady and in the name of the Pope take the King as lord of this land and obey his mandates. If you do not do it, I tell you that with the help of God I will enter powerfully against you all. I will make war everywhere and every way that I can. I will take your women and children and make them slaves....The deaths and injuries you will receive from here on will be your own fault and not that of his majesty nor of the gentlemen that accompany me -"The Requirement", read by Spaniards (in Latin) to native tribes they encountered in the New World
So when we look at Columbus and his times, an argument can certainly be made that he was a mere product of the thoughts of the day.
Burdell...your absolutely right...however...the deep down hatred from you and the left of the european settlers who made this nation great... is just so obvious...whether you want to admit it or not...
I can't believe someone could be so bitterly partisan that they could come to this conclusion.
In many ways, as we have discovered, Indigenous peoples were vastly superior to European pioneers. To finally understand and acknowledge the value of their cultures as far more than ignorant savages whose focus on growth had nothing to do with our model of invention and business, is NOT a hatred of any group.
It is a valuing of another and seeking to give them their due as equal human beings.
Enough with the partisan politics when simply trying to understand and teach truth.
the thread was started to say that the less savory facts about columbus are not true and shouldn't be taught in schools.
it has nothing to do with right or wrong or inevitability, or what would make people "feel better" - it's about teaching kids the reality of history versus teaching them fairy tales that make historical figures look perfect when they weren't.
Making kids stand and watch others eat is not education, but is more indoctrinization of hate against a tradionally recognized hero, i.e.- traditional western heros are evil. It is just another PC effort through the public schools to debase the traditions of the country and deride the accomplishments of eurocentric cultures. Take home message-
America and it's heros- bad
Other cultures- good
A more fair dramatic comparison would have been to have one group watch the other kids eating, then have them trade places and have the other group cut off the fingers of those enjoyed the meal. That would be a fair comparison.
Making kids stand and watch others eat is not education, but is more indoctrinization of hate against a tradionally recognized hero, i.e.- traditional western heros are evil. It is just another PC effort through the public schools to debase the traditions of the country and deride the accomplishments of eurocentric cultures. Take home message-
America and it's heros- bad
Other cultures- good
A more fair dramatic comparison would have been to have one group watch the other kids eating, then have them trade places and have the other group cut off the fingers of those enjoyed the meal. That would be a fair comparison.
But the traditional "hero" did horrible things.
You're saying simply because he is a "hero", we shouldn't teach the truth?
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.
