Columbus Day

[Miles Teg]

Obviously the Indians weren't peace-loving hippies. That's a downright racist theory that turns the Indians into passive little dolls. I've made the point that they could be downright genocidal in other threads.

That doesn't mean that the event paving the way for the death of upwards of 80% of the indigenous American population is a good thing.

 

[GoodGame]

Actually, we already have Hitler-related holidays: specifically, those days when we celebrate how Hitler got completely pwn3d.

"ha, i start with tanks"
"hitler rushed, need help"
"bye frenchy lol"
"hey, how did united states get an army so fast!?! hax"
"stalin, lets attack hitler together, k?"
"k"
"crap, u 2 quit with ur hax"
"ha, hitler, u got rolled u sux"
<HITLER HAS DISCONNECTED>
"rofl, ragequit"

Strictly speaking VE (Victory in Europe day, May 8 1945) day is specifically dedicated to NAZI erradication, because Veterans and Memorial day isn't focused only on WW2. Memorial day started a few years after the American Civil War. Veterans days started as Armistice day to celebrate the end of WW1, but was renamed Veterans day after the Korean War. Just footnoting.

 

[W|M]

And that's different from any other people how?

The difference is that they got screwed by the Iberians telling everyone in Europe about the ''savages'' in America.

Regular, one-every-ten-minute heart sacrifices is a myth as well.

 

[GoodGame]

By Europeans didn't discover anything, we just took over. Frankly, we should probably just avoid the matter entirely & look forward, there's just no sugar coating it.

I think that is a blanket view. North America wasn't a giant suburb of natives. It was largely empty wilderness, with sparse settlement of natives. Europe did successfully make honest claims, on top of several hostile take-over attempts.

Honoring a "Discovery Day" isn't a sugar coating either. And there are attempt by the Federal government to make reparations for past behaviors of the Federal government and American citizens against the American Indians (money doesn't buy everything of course).

 

[Miles Teg]

I think that is a blanket view. North America wasn't a giant suburb of natives. It was largely empty wilderness, with sparse settlement of natives. Europe did successfully make honest claims, on top of several hostile take-over attempts.

I'm sure it looked like an empty wilderness to the first European explorers, after smallpox has already wiped out most of those "giant suburbs of natives".

Most of the Indian societies that the Europeans encountered were in a damn near post-apocalyptic state.

 

[NBAfan]

That doesn't mean that the event paving the way for the death of upwards of 80% of the indigenous American population is a good thing.

The Spanish knowingly used the powerful weapon of germ theory on the natives!

Columbus was a great sea captain. He was not a good administrator.

 

[GoodGame]

I'm sure it looked like an empty wilderness to the first European explorers, after smallpox has already wiped out most of those "giant suburbs of natives".

Most of the Indian societies that the Europeans encountered were in a damn near post-apocalyptic state.

Um... so your thesis is small pox travelled faster than even the explorers to erradicate peoples?
Archealogical evidence supports your viewpoint????


I'd expect to find sea to sea of native settlements if you were correct.

 

[W|M]

It wasn't just smallpox, and yes, germs can travel over oceans and through the air.

 

[Lone Wolf]

That europeans stole the land of its rightful owners (as if the indians themselves did not "steal" land from their neighbors all the time).

Hey, just because they did it too, it doesn't mean it was right! European land in the New World was certainly gained though military aggression, and then there's the "cultural clash" aspect, and the power disbalance that only increased as time passed.

Your argument works against theories that postulate some kind of inherent Indian superiority - but only against them.

the peace-loving indians, who lived in perfect harmony with Mother Nature.

Sane people realize that this tale is just a "noble savage" type of prejudice anyway. "The superior virtue of the oppressed" garbage, that can often be used to justify oppression - "The oppressed are no more moral then the oppressors. They fail in their moral duty to be more virtuous. Therefore, the oppressed are doing nothing wrong".

Um... so your thesis is small pox travelled faster than even the explorers to erradicate peoples?

Yep. The colonial administrators aren't really to blame for it, of course.

 

[.Shane.]

Um... so your thesis is small pox travelled faster than even the explorers to erradicate peoples?
Archealogical evidence supports your viewpoint????

I'd expect to find sea to sea of native settlements if you were correct.

Not to speak for Miles, but more or less, yes.

I don't understand your last sentence.

Nearly all scholars now believe that widespread epidemic disease, to which the natives had no prior exposure or resistance, was the overwhelming cause of the massive population decline of the Native Americans.
....
Soon after Europeans and Africans began to arrive in the New World, bringing with them the infectious diseases of Europe and Africa, observers noted immense numbers of indigenous Americans began to die from these diseases. One reason this death toll was overlooked (or downplayed) is that once introduced the diseases raced ahead of European immigration in many areas. Disease killed off a sizable portion of the populations before European observations (and thus written records) were made. After the epidemics had already killed massive numbers of natives, many newer European immigrants assumed that there had always been relatively few indigenous peoples. The scope of the epidemics over the years was tremendous, killing millions of people&#8212;possibly in excess of 90% of the population in the hardest hit areas&#8212;and creating one of "the greatest human catastrophe in history, far exceeding even the disaster of the Black Death of medieval Europe",[28] which had killed up to one-third of the people in Europe and Asia between 1347 and 1351. The Black Death occurred to a European population which also had not been exposed and had little or no resistance to a new disease.

Source (bold mine)

 

[Miles Teg]

Um... so your thesis is small pox travelled faster than even the explorers to erradicate peoples?
Archealogical evidence supports your viewpoint????

Yeah, it's kind of been the majority view for the last couple decades. When Europeans first stepped foot in the Incan Empire, they found it already torn apart by small pox, which had killed the last Sapa Inca (and his heir apparent) and started a civil war.

I'd expect to find sea to sea of native settlements if you were correct.

Why? Outside of the Andes and Mesoamerica, most Indians constructed settlements out of wood, animal hides, and other materials that tend to rot if abandoned.

EDIT: Oh, and Shane's on the ball.

 

[luiz]

Hey, just because they did it too, it doesn't mean it was right! European land in the New World was certainly gained though military aggression, and then there's the "cultural clash" aspect, and the power disbalance that only increases as time passes.

Your argument works against theories that postulate some kind of inherent Indian superiority - but only against them.

I am not saying that what happened was good. Obviously, it wasn't. When we meet less advanced isolated people today - and we still meet them in Brazil ever decade or so! - we don't repeat the behavior of the Conquista, because we now find that unaccpetable.

My point was that any talk of "stealing their land" is BS. The indians were living on "stolen land" too.

Sane people realize that this tale is just a "noble savage" type of prejudice anyway. "The superior virtue of the oppressed" garbage, that can often be used to justify oppression - "The oppressed are no more moral then the oppressors. They fail in their moral duty to be more virtuous. Therefore, the oppressed are doing nothing wrong".

It is still very repeated. In fact, it is the official line told in Brazilian schools: the Indians were peaceful and lived in harmony with Mother Nature until their corruption and eventual destruction by the evil and greedy Portuguese. I absolutely agree with Miles Tag that is actually a racist theory that reduced the indians to passive sub-humans. But somehow it is the PC version of history.

 

[Miles Teg]

So yeah, attempting to turn the Indians into hippie heroes is stupid. Trying to turn Columbus into an architect of the modern day Americas is also stupid. Two wrongs famously don't make a right. Can't we just teach unbiased history, stop celebrating either of them, and let people decide the morality of it for themselves?

 

[Lone Wolf]

My point was that any talk of "stealing their land" is BS. The indians were living on "stolen land" too.

OK, "invading and occupying" their land. Invading describes this process much more accurately then "stealing"
Genetic fallacies "All white Americans should feel guilty about colonization" are stupid, sure.

 

[NovaKart]

The whole subject of how populated North America was before the Europeans arrived is very controversial and it's pretty difficult to speak about it with any authority.

 

[luiz]

So yeah, attempting to turn the Indians into hippie heroes is stupid. Trying to turn Columbus into an architect of the modern day Americas is also stupid. Two wrongs famously don't make a right. Can't we just teach unbiased history, stop celebrating either of them, and let people decide the morality of it for themselves?

I see nothing wrong in, as I said, celebrating the courage of men who sailed vast oceans into the uknown on small boats, on a trip that marked the opening stage of one of the most important events in human history. It's a symbolic celebration and does not mean we condone everything done by Columbus and his successors to the natives.

Likewise, I see nothing wrong with say Mexico celebrating the great achievements of the Aztecs or Mayas, which does not mean that they are approving human sacrifice or large scale warfare against weaker neighbors.

I absolutely agree however that we should teach real history and tell the facts as they happened, and let each person draw his owns conclusions on morality.

 

[NovaKart]

It's a bit different. It's difficult to condemn an entire culture or civilization but a lot easier with a person.

 

[Smellincoffee]

I use it to make fun of Christopher Columbus. Catholicism should make him the patron saint of fools, because he's the biggest example I know of for the idea that Fortune Favors the Foolish. He ignores the advice of learned experts on the size of the world, decides to set off on a voyage, and only escapes a forgettable death because there just HAPPENED to be two continents where he guesstimated he'd run into Japan.

I also call it "Take Something and Claimed You Found It" Day.

 

[timtofly]

OK, "invading and occupying" their land. Invading describes this process much more accurately then "stealing"
Genetic fallacies "All white Americans should feel guilty about colonization" are stupid, sure.

Especially since "it" was largely done after throwing off the tyranny of Europe?

Prophecy?

Spoiler :

27God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

 

[aelf]

Saw this.