Famed explorer unfairly maligned

Waterbury-Republican American ^ | October 7, 2007 | Editorial

[Graybeard58]

Few men are more revered by Italian-Americans than Christopher Columbus. But as the Order of the Sons of Italy notes, the politically correct have transformed him from "a skilled sea captain and deeply religious man" to a "bloodthirsty, gold-hungry slave trader who destroyed the Garden of Eden civilizations." They also claim he was complicit in "the genocide" of Indians through the introduction of infectious diseases.

Balderdash. As author/columnist Michael Medved writes, Indians and Europeans were guilty of savagery but "none of the warfare (including an Indian attack in 1675 that succeeded in butchering a full one-fourth of the white population of Connecticut, and claimed additional thousands of casualties throughout New England) on either side amounted to genocide" because neither endorsed or practiced policies of extermination.

The Garden of Eden argument goes nowhere because copious scientific evidence proves syphilis, tuberculosis and arthritis were rampant in pre-Columbian America and Indians were lucky to live past 40. The notion that white settlers deliberately infected the Indians was based on discredited letters written by two obscure British soldiers in 1763, Mr. Medved notes. "By that time, Indian populations ... had already been terribly impacted by smallpox, and there's no evidence of a particularly devastating outbreak."

Jared Diamond, author of "Guns, Germs, and Steel," goes further, blaming itinerate Indians for spreading the European diseases "from tribe to tribe far in advance of the Europeans themselves, killing an estimated 95 percent of the pre-Columbian Native American population."

World history is replete with episodes of replacement of native populations. The Indians in fact came to dominate the Americas by exterminating an inferior paleo-Indian civilization. The Europeans supplanted the Indians simply because the latter never evolved beyond a Stone Age existence. But the idea that "unique viciousness to Native Americans represents our 'original sin,'" Mr. Medved writes, "... only serves the purposes of those who want to foster inappropriate guilt, uncertainty and shame in young Americans." It's long past time to reject the anti-Americanism of political correctness and restore Columbus to his rightful place in history.

[litehaus]

"The Europeans supplanted the Indians simply because the latter never evolved beyond a Stone Age existence."

Well, Australia, the North America under discussion, and sub-Saharan Africa were all three places where the "Evil Europeans" visited their evil-doings.......Also three places where there existed very, pardon the expression, not very forward progressing residents......as in the three R's? for example....Yeh, I know....I'm just another old white bigot for that observation

[Sword_Svalbardt]

Note: Lief Erikson day is before Columbus day. The Norse - due to lack of technology were required to fight a running retreat until they reboarded their ships.

[Constantine XIII]

In this thread: Armcharl anthropologists.

I’m LOL’ing.

[Graybeard58]

In this thread: Armcharl anthropologists.

I have read every reply and found them, for the most part, to be interesting. I'd also be interested in your opinion on the article.

[Constantine XIII]

The article is right except for the last two paragraphs. The end of the article is silly in that: 1) It talks like there was one monolithic American Native culture 2) It states that Native Americans never evolved beyond "stone age" technology 3) It goes out of its way to claim that it is somehow the Native's fault that smallpox got spread around when just got done making an excellent case that there was no fault to pin on anyone because no one understood how disease was transmitted back then. The article is right on that Columbus gets the shaft these days, and I share in the author's hope that CC bashing will fall out of style and that he will be restored to his rightful place in the history of the Western Hemisphere. Finally, my first post was aimed at all the old farts on here who think they are clever when they post "Moar proof white people are the best, LOL" then proceed to make jackasses of themselves by demonstrating how much they sort of know (but not really). I was trying to predict a tide of such posts, but it turns out the thread died before too many accumulated. Aw well. :p

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

I don’t go so far as to think that the only good Indians are dead Indians, but I believe nine out of ten are, and I shouldn’t inquire too closely into the case of the tenth.
The most vicious cowboy has more moral principle than the average Indian.”
Theodore Roosevelt (1858 - 1919)

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

I said there was nothing so convincing to an Indian as a general massacre.
If he could not approve of the massacre, I said the next surest thing for an Indian was soap and education.
Soap and education are not as sudden as a massacre, but they are more deadly in the long run; because a half-massacred Indian may recover, but if you educate him and wash him, it is bound to finish him some time or other.
- “Facts Concerning the Recent Resignation”

...knowledge of Indians, & humanity are seldom found in the same individual.
- Letter to W. D. Howells, February 22, 1877

Years ago, I was accused of loading an Indian up with beans lubricated with nitro-glycerine & sending him in an ox wagon over a stumpy road.
This was impossible, on its face, for no one would risk oxen in that way.
But it shows how far malice will deflect an aborigine from the equator of truth.
- Letter to Charles H. Clark, March 6, 1880

MARK TWAIN
Note: I am part Choctaw!

[redpoll]

Well, the editorial is right and wrong. They’re right by saying there was no genocide against Native Americans by Columbus, or, for that matter, most settlers from the Old World. The editorial is wrong about the Stone Age existence of Native people, however. The book “1491” and many other well-researched publications outline precontact Native people living in organized villages with agriculture, manipulating the environment, and in some places gathering together in empires (as bloodthirsty as any on Earth). If the writer read “Guns, Germs, and Steel,” he or she would realize that the fatal accident of Native people was lack of domesticated animals in the New World, which meant a lack of diseases transmitted from those animals to the humans tending them. Diamond makes the argument that most of the highly infectious diseases of the Old World, such as measles, influenza, and smallpox, started in the animals domesticated by Old World people. When those diseases reached the New World, the Natives had no immunity, and their death rate was grotesquely high. (The “1491” author says perhaps up to 95 percent of the New World’s population died off.)

Having said all that - an accident of history isn’t genocide.

Smearing Columbus is no accident, either. For more on that, look up “The Frankfurt School” and “Antonio Gramsci.”

[Constantine XIII]