Should we Erase Columbus or others from the History Books?

[rightwinger]

In the 16th century they were not considered human. They were looked at as savages with no real rights.

Where did you get that idea? The people of Africa as well as the Indians of America were considered savages, but definitely were known to be human. In fact, missionaries were among the first Europeans sent to the New World to convert them away from their paganistic human sacrificing ways. Considering the fact that human sacrifices are quite rare in Mexico or America nowadays, I think they did a tremendous job.

Death Penalty is only used in one nation in the Western Hemisphere

The Death Penalty isn't "human sacrifice".

BTW, most of the civilized world has no problem with punishing murderer appropriately. China, Japan, India, Africa. Countries like the Great Nation of Singapore with give you a singapore style caning first.

All of Europe, Russia, South America, Mexico, Canada, Australia.....all ban executions

So does most of the civilized US

Are you saying that China, India, Singapore, Africa are uncivilized?

Obama had no problem making a deal with Iran that executes people for homosexuality by chucking them off tall buildings

Yup

So are conservatives

 

[justoffal]

Christopher Columbus was a great explorer and entrepreneur. His bravery, foresight, and perseverance can be a model for all. The others who are mentioned as having come to the New World earlier deserve nothing more than a footnote in history. Columbus got the ball rolling, and the world is much better for it.

The indigenous population of the Americas at the time of Columbus was culturally and technologically "retarded," having no real metallurgy, no domesticated animals, and had not even invented the wheel. Many still practiced human sacrifice, none had what could reasonably be described as a written language. The native "Americans" adhered to the same rules of conquest and domination as the rest of the world, they practiced slavery and polygamy, and their leaders were generally the best fighters.

The vast majority of the deaths of natives after the advent of the Europeans were the result of the inadvertent, innocent, and unknowing passing of diseases, and not any plan or program of "genocide." The Europeans ultimately prevailed in battle against the Americans not because they were "evil" and the Americans "good," but simply because the Europeans had vastly superior weapons, domesticated animals - mainly horses - and technology.

Most of the natives of North America were near-stone-age hunter-gatherers whose culture, religions, and collective "wisdom" had essentially no value when compared to what was brought by the Europeans - analogous to someone today knowing how to make a birch bark canoe.

European Christians fervently believed that the natives were condemned to eternal suffering and torment because of their primitive pagan religions, and tens of thousands of Europeans literally risked and gave their lives to the mission of modernizing, converting, and saving the natives. Revisionists who now claim that the natives were being "exploited" are idiots.

As is anyone who looks at a major historical figure in the "light" of today's cultural values, which one might note, change by the week.

I'm still a bit shocked at some of the things attributed to Columbus's encounter with the Caribbean Indians .... However the idea that they lived in a mutually blessed Nirvana prior to contact with Europeans is just Crazy. Good post!

Jo

 

[boedicca]

No. Just plain no.

Burning history doesn't end well.

Nobody is saying to burn history. Just put it in it's proper context.

The problem is, most of what we teach about Columbus is a lie. He wasn't trying to prove the world was round. But that's what kids are taught in school.

The colonization of the America by Europe was a humanitarian disaster for the people of the Americas, as well as the millions of Africans who were brought over as slaves. time to own it.

So much misinformation. Here's reality:

1. Columbus wasn't trying to prove the earth was round. He was hired to find alternate trade route to Asia. He miscalculated the distance and ended up finding America instead.

2. Without Africans enslaving other Africans, there would have been no slaves for the Europeans to buy. Blaming Europeans for the slavery that was practiced for millennia before their arrival is a tired canard. England and the U.S. abolished slavery in the 19th century. Their are 40 million slaves living today. Why is that?

2. The Americas were already filled with humanitarian disasters including slavery and human sacrifice performed by indigenous peoples. The Aztecs were a death cult. Their population was declining before Cortez showed up due to their own brutality. The Chimus of Peru sacrificed children.

Brutal mass sacrifice saw 140 children have hearts ripped out to appease gods

 

[OldLady]

By 1250, Cahokia’s population rivaled Paris and London; at its peak in 1300, Cahokia numbered an estimated 40,000 people. It wasn’t until 1800 that a modern U.S. city would finally surpass that number

Classic Maya civilization grew to some 40 cities, including Tikal, Uaxactún, Copán, Bonampak, Dos Pilas, Calakmul, Palenque and Río Bec; each city held a population of between 5,000 and 50,000 people. At its peak, the Maya population may have reached 2,000,000
That's two million. The Maya had begun using written language centuries prior.
https://www.history.com/topics/ancient-americas/maya

There were many large, well organized civilizations with thriving cultures in North and South America prior to the Europeans' arrival. They knew about the wheel--they didn't have suitable animals to domesticate to pull carts, so why make wheeled carts, unless you wanted people to pull them. Easier to just have them carry the stuff.


Why didn’t the peoples of ancient Mesoamerica have wheeled transport? They had a vibrant commercial economy, with lots of long-distance trade, periodic marketplaces, and professional merchants. They had two types of money. But they didn’t use wheeled carts.

The surprising thing is that the Mesoamericans DID invent the wheel. They made wheeled toys – mostly small clay animals with holes in the legs for an axle and wheels. These were most abundant in sites of the Toltec period (AD 900-1100), including Tula in central Mexico.

When the Spanish arrived from Europe in the sixteenth century they were astounded at the remarkable skills exhibited by the architects, builders and craftsmen of the ‘New World’. The calendar developed by the ancient Maya was more accurate than the calendar in use throughout Europe and the medical system in place among the residents of Mesoamerica was superior to that of the Spanish.

Yet, for all the advanced thinking, there was no utilitarian wheel; no carts, no wagons, no potter’s wheel. Still the concept of the wheel was known throughout Mesoamerica.

Archeologists have recovered numerous wheeled toys, very much like those still made today for children. These toys were what we would call “pull toys” and they were generally made of fired clay in the form of an animal (real or imagined) standing on a platform supported by four ceramic wheels. A loop for the pull string was usually made around the neck or head of the creature.

And yet, while the idea of the wheel was in place there were no wheeled vehicles.

Oddly enough, the Maya built roads, or more correctly, causeways. These roads, called sacbeob meaning white roadswere constructed of limestone and paved with natural lime cement called sascab. Often as wide as ten to twelve feet and raised between a foot or so to as much as seven or eight feet above the ground, the sacbeob connected various areas of settlement. The sacbeob at one Maya site (Coba) in the Yucatan of Mexico connects several major architectural groups, the longest running in an almost perfect straight line for over sixty miles! Archaeologists have found what may have been stone rollers used to compact the road bed during construction.

But no wheels.

While it is certainly true that the Maya did not possess the potter’s wheel, they did make use of a device called the k’abal. This was a wooden disk that rested on a smooth board between the potter’s feet. Spun by feet, the k’abal was not unlike the potter’s wheel that had been in use in the Old World for over five thousand years.

Still, there was no conventional wheel.

Perhaps the closest the Maya came to a utilitarian wheel was the spindle whorl.

In ancient times the Maya wove cotton garments in much the same way as they do today. Cotton was spun into thread, using as a spindle a narrow pointed stick about a foot long, weighted near the lower end with a ceramic disk called a spindle whorl. Acting as a fly-wheel, it gave balance to the stick which was twirled with one hand while the cotton was fed by the other to the top of the stick. The twisting motion produced the thread which was then sent to the loon for weaving. Cotton material is still being produced in this way by Maya groups in several parts of today Mexico and Guatemala. Some scholars believe the first wheeled toys were made with spindle whorls and spindle sticks as wheels and axles.

Why, then, were the Maya and other native populations without carts or wagons? Certainly they had the concept, so why did they transported everything on someone’s back?

The answer probably lies in the fact that there were no animals around suitable to pull a wagon or cart, no beast of burden. Horses and burros were unknown in Mesoamerica. Without draft animals a cart is not particularly useful. Then too. the area in which the Maya lived, for example, did not lend itself to road construction and that fact lives on until this very day. Rural areas are more easily accessed by foot or along narrow trails than by car or truck. Streams and rivers were the highways of the Maya, with extensive trade and commerce carried out by fleets of canoes.
Real smart folks, but no wheel? - Pre-Columbian Americas

Not every Native American lived in a civilized "city" like Chichen Itza or Cahokia, but the Native Americans had developed thriving civilizations over the ages, and they had survived here successfully for thousands and thousands of years. I just wish you would have more respect for them. Having a different culture and way of life does not automatically mean a people is ignorant or uncivilized.

 

[Polishprince]

2. Without Africans enslaving other Africans, their would have been no slaves for the Europeans to buy. Blaming Europeans for the slavery that was practiced for millennia before their arrival is a tired canard. England and the U.S. abolished slavery in the 19th century. Their are 40 million slaves living today. Why is that?

Exactly right. Europeans didn't go into the African interior until the late 19th Century, only coastal outposts were established before then during the African slave trade. Slaves had to be brought to port to be sold to slaveship owners.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2014/11/23/247-wall-st-countries-most-slaves/70033422/
Instead of fixating on America's past problems with slavery perhaps that energy would be better spent ending the slavery that still plagues millions today, though I admit you couldn't get the partisan thrill leftists feel when lecturing others from that.

 

[OldLady]

Countries with the most enslaved people
Instead of fixating on America's past problems with slavery perhaps that energy would be better spent ending the slavery that still plagues millions today, though I admit you couldn't get the partisan thrill leftists feel when lecturing others from that.

Better yet, perhaps a thread on Columbus and the European discovery of America could not turn into yet another quibble over slavery.

 

[rightwinger]

2. Without Africans enslaving other Africans, their would have been no slaves for the Europeans to buy. Blaming Europeans for the slavery that was practiced for millennia before their arrival is a tired canard. England and the U.S. abolished slavery in the 19th century. Their are 40 million slaves living today. Why is that?

Exactly right. Europeans didn't go into the African interior until the late 19th Century, only coastal outposts were established before then during the African slave trade. Slaves had to be brought to port to be sold to slaveship owners.

Europeans were afraid to go into the African interior to capture slaves. So they set up slave ports where they could just sit and dangle money so others could bring captives to them

Does not absolve them from responsibility for the slave trade.
They were the market

 

[rightwinger]

Countries with the most enslaved people
Instead of fixating on America's past problems with slavery perhaps that energy would be better spent ending the slavery that still plagues millions today, though I admit you couldn't get the partisan thrill leftists feel when lecturing others from that.

We can do both

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

We can do both

Yes, but people generally do not expend energy pointlessly. If people do not recognize slavery by now as an evil institution blathering on about it does little to change those minds.

Time is much better spent ending the slavery we see in the modern world in China, Russia, India, etc.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

2. Without Africans enslaving other Africans, their would have been no slaves for the Europeans to buy. Blaming Europeans for the slavery that was practiced for millennia before their arrival is a tired canard. England and the U.S. abolished slavery in the 19th century. Their are 40 million slaves living today. Why is that?

Exactly right. Europeans didn't go into the African interior until the late 19th Century, only coastal outposts were established before then during the African slave trade. Slaves had to be brought to port to be sold to slaveship owners.

Europeans were afraid to go into the African interior to capture slaves. So they set up slave ports where they could just sit and dangle money so others could bring captives to them

Does not absolve them from responsibility for the slave trade.
They were the market

Actually the Muslims ran the Africa slave markets.
BTW the Muslims also kidnapped and enslaved Europeans.
Libya still has a slave market.

 

[Polishprince]

2. Without Africans enslaving other Africans, their would have been no slaves for the Europeans to buy. Blaming Europeans for the slavery that was practiced for millennia before their arrival is a tired canard. England and the U.S. abolished slavery in the 19th century. Their are 40 million slaves living today. Why is that?

Exactly right. Europeans didn't go into the African interior until the late 19th Century, only coastal outposts were established before then during the African slave trade. Slaves had to be brought to port to be sold to slaveship owners.

Europeans were afraid to go into the African interior to capture slaves. So they set up slave ports where they could just sit and dangle money so others could bring captives to them

Does not absolve them from responsibility for the slave trade.
They were the market

Of course. you do know that a lot of Europeans like the Poles abolished slavery a pretty long time ago.

We got rid of slavery in 1347, should we have to pay reparations?

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

There were many large, well organized civilizations with thriving cultures in North and South America prior to the Europeans' arrival. They knew about the wheel--they didn't have suitable animals to domesticate to pull carts, so why make wheeled carts, unless you wanted people to pull them. Easier to just have them carry the stuff.

You know the wheel makes it easier to put things in a cart and roll them along (through the miracle of physics) rather than carrying them...right?

Rolling. From Physclips: Mechanics with animations and film.

 

[rightwinger]

2. Without Africans enslaving other Africans, their would have been no slaves for the Europeans to buy. Blaming Europeans for the slavery that was practiced for millennia before their arrival is a tired canard. England and the U.S. abolished slavery in the 19th century. Their are 40 million slaves living today. Why is that?

Exactly right. Europeans didn't go into the African interior until the late 19th Century, only coastal outposts were established before then during the African slave trade. Slaves had to be brought to port to be sold to slaveship owners.

Europeans were afraid to go into the African interior to capture slaves. So they set up slave ports where they could just sit and dangle money so others could bring captives to them

Does not absolve them from responsibility for the slave trade.
They were the market

Of course. you do know that a lot of Europeans like the Poles abolished slavery a pretty long time ago.

We got rid of slavery in 1347, should we have to pay reparations?

They should be proud
The other european countries were involved in Colonialism and used slave labor to perform the hard tasks

Most of Europe abandoned slavery by 1800

Took the US til 1865 and the death of 600,000 fighting over it

 

[OldLady]

There were many large, well organized civilizations with thriving cultures in North and South America prior to the Europeans' arrival. They knew about the wheel--they didn't have suitable animals to domesticate to pull carts, so why make wheeled carts, unless you wanted people to pull them. Easier to just have them carry the stuff.

You know the wheel makes it easier to put things in a cart and roll them along (through the miracle of physics) rather than carrying them...right?

Rolling. From Physclips: Mechanics with animations and film.

These people built massive pyramids. I'm sure they knew about physics.

 

[Polishprince]

2. Without Africans enslaving other Africans, their would have been no slaves for the Europeans to buy. Blaming Europeans for the slavery that was practiced for millennia before their arrival is a tired canard. England and the U.S. abolished slavery in the 19th century. Their are 40 million slaves living today. Why is that?

Exactly right. Europeans didn't go into the African interior until the late 19th Century, only coastal outposts were established before then during the African slave trade. Slaves had to be brought to port to be sold to slaveship owners.

Europeans were afraid to go into the African interior to capture slaves. So they set up slave ports where they could just sit and dangle money so others could bring captives to them

Does not absolve them from responsibility for the slave trade.
They were the market

Of course. you do know that a lot of Europeans like the Poles abolished slavery a pretty long time ago.

We got rid of slavery in 1347, should we have to pay reparations?

They should be proud
The other european countries were involved in Colonialism and used slave labor to perform the hard tasks

Most of Europe abandoned slavery by 1800

Took the US til 1865 and the death of 600,000 fighting over it

The real question I'm trying to get to is whether or not Poles should be required to pay reparations for slavery?

 

[rightwinger]

2. Without Africans enslaving other Africans, their would have been no slaves for the Europeans to buy. Blaming Europeans for the slavery that was practiced for millennia before their arrival is a tired canard. England and the U.S. abolished slavery in the 19th century. Their are 40 million slaves living today. Why is that?

Exactly right. Europeans didn't go into the African interior until the late 19th Century, only coastal outposts were established before then during the African slave trade. Slaves had to be brought to port to be sold to slaveship owners.

Europeans were afraid to go into the African interior to capture slaves. So they set up slave ports where they could just sit and dangle money so others could bring captives to them

Does not absolve them from responsibility for the slave trade.
They were the market

Of course. you do know that a lot of Europeans like the Poles abolished slavery a pretty long time ago.

We got rid of slavery in 1347, should we have to pay reparations?

They should be proud
The other european countries were involved in Colonialism and used slave labor to perform the hard tasks

Most of Europe abandoned slavery by 1800

Took the US til 1865 and the death of 600,000 fighting over it

The real question I'm trying to get to is whether or not Poles should be required to pay reparations for slavery?

Who the fuck cares?

 

[Polishprince]

There were many large, well organized civilizations with thriving cultures in North and South America prior to the Europeans' arrival. They knew about the wheel--they didn't have suitable animals to domesticate to pull carts, so why make wheeled carts, unless you wanted people to pull them. Easier to just have them carry the stuff.

You know the wheel makes it easier to put things in a cart and roll them along (through the miracle of physics) rather than carrying them...right?

Rolling. From Physclips: Mechanics with animations and film.

These people built massive pyramids. I'm sure they knew about physics.

We really don't know who built the pyramids in Central America. I've heard it may have been extraterrestrials who erected them, or perhaps immigrants for Egypt where the art of pyramid building was well known.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Another handful of years and Columbus Day will be completely gone, but that's ok.
What's important, is European came to this hemisphere and put in motion what would come to be the greatest technological progress in human history.

It doesn't matter whether Columbus was first, or not even close. We simply use him as a figurehead for the beginning of the most glorious time in human history.

That could be, but in 50 years America will be erased from history and we will be in a new dark age with a global dictatorship that will fall into ruin in short order leading to a thousand years of human suffering.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

These people built massive pyramids. I'm sure they knew about physics.

I'm sure they did. It makes me wonder why they refused to do something as simple and effective as affixing wheels to a cart. Surely they knew about friction and the advantages of rolling over dragging?