Posted on 10/07/2004 10:45:40 AM PDT by aynrandy
Give me a break.
The best thing that ever happened to them was European rule.
Few people have any idea how nasty and brutal life in these tribes was until they were civilized.
What did Columbus find when he got here? Appalling atrocities of human sacrifice, cannibalism, child killing, rape, torture, tribal war, mass murder, rivers of blood and mountains of skulls! All caused by those pristine and pure "Indians". Let's at least get the facts straight!
People are so ignorant about what Columbus actually did. Read a book, people. These folks are simply spewing stereotypes exactly as they accuse others of doing. Like so much history, the reality is complex, full of tragedy, triumph, & mistakes. The problem is that its not even possible to have a discussion with the brainwashed.
Sadly, there are books being read - revisionist history taught to all public school children...
I feel real bad for the Native Americans.... apparently they are the only people in history to be murdered, tortured, raped, pillaged, robbed, enslaved, or kidnapped!
Don't forget 'conquered'.
Reminds me of a Salvadoran war widow who came to Arlington, VA in 1992. Her teenage daughter was enrolled in the public high school and later begged her mother to be allowed to return to El Salvador to go to school.
Her impression of high school in America was that black thugs assault girls in the hallway and in class one is taught bad things about Columbus instead of good things. In El Salvador, Columbus is a hero, his image was on the paper money of every denomination, and the currency was named after him (Colones before the dollar took over). The teen was allowed to return to El Salvador to complete high school.
Within just a few years of 1492, there was an explosion of permanent settlements in the Americas and yet this writer descibes the discovery as "sort of".
The best sailors admire Columbus as both a methodical and instinctive sailor who deserved the title "Admiral of the Ocean Sea".
Why Columbus? He wasn't the first European to see America. As far as we know (ignoring unverified stories about St. Brendan and the like) the first European to see any of North America was a Norseman in 986--Bjarni Herjolfsson. He has the added merit of never having actually landed, so he didn't cause any harm to indigenous peoples, plants, or animals.
Of course, if Greenland is counted as part of North America (as it is geographically) then the Norse who colonized Greenland are the first Europeans in America.
How many people know John Cabot was Columbus' counterpart, but Cabot actually set foot in what is today the USA! Shall we have Cabot's name removed from all towns and streets. IMO, Cabot was a much greater influence in the establishment of Europeans in the West.
Vikings are, you know, the source of all things superior!
Yes but the English colonies here started over 100 years after the Spanish colonies so we were Johnny-Come-Lately types.
The 1588 battle defeating the Spanish Armada had a lot to do with English confidence in establishing colonies during the following generation just as the fall of Moslem Grenada in 1492 had giiven the Spanish confidence.
Yankess always have to be reminded that Jamestown, Virginia predates the colony at Plymouth,
I didn't forget that, I just didn't want to rub it in and hurt their feelings.
Wouldn't want them to feel bad while they are hanging out, tax-free, in their casinos. /sarcasm
I think reparations are in order.(not)
On Cape Breton Island (province of Nova Scotia) they have a "Cabot trail" and they claim he reached their island.
Whether he actually made it to New England (named by Capt. John Smith of Jamestown fame) is uncertain.
This is true.
Some observers consider the Civil War to have been the Second War of Independence. It was also the Second English Revolution, fought by descendants of the Cavaliers and Roundheads.
You're thinking of the wrong natives, that was over in Mexico and Peru. Columbus landed on Hispaniola, which had fairly primitive agricultural and hunter tribes. He then proceded to murder thousands (especially if they didn't bring him the gold he thought was there) and ship untold many more off to be slaves although admitting they didn't do well as slaves (not able to do the hard field work like Africans) and most were dying during the trip anyway -- but he sent more.
It was so bad that the local priest sent with Columbus complained about the injustices, but he was ignored.
The saving grace for Columbus was that what he did was pretty standard fare for the time and generally considered to be moral and just, and his actions were supported by the crown. The Dutch explorers wiped out thriving kingdoms in East Africa for their gold too, but I don't hear anyone complaining about that.
To protest against Columbus' failings and not recognize his daring and important achievements is pure PC BS. Are we also to dismiss the achievements of the Founding Fathers because many owned slaves?
Standard Leftie "multiculturalism."
Sadly, this is a case of the initial story being imcomplete (he's a great hero, period), with an attempt at correction to show the whole picture (he's a hero, but some bad things did happen) that just went way too far in the opposite direction (he's a pure villain), and ending up as intellectually dishonest as the original was.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.