• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Columbus Is Gone

You are trying to inject sanity into people maddened by woke hysteria. They wont grasp what you are saying until the mob comes for them.

It's insane to argue that but for Columbus the new world isn't discovered, and populated. And slippery slope arguments are fun and stupid. If the mob comes for a genocidal slaver who had little kids whacked to death by his soldiers for fun and games, so be it. I'm not going to cry in my pillow tonight for all the poor genocidal slavers who are next up on the block.
 
Great. So they took down a statue of the man but the city named for the man, kept the name. Another meaningless liberal 'accomplishment'

So you moved the goal posts. I'm SHOCKED you're unwilling to engage in a civil discussion on the merits!! Here's my shocked face :roll:
 
If I remember right, the Aztecs werent such great people either. They had slaves and engaged in human sacrifice so not sure they were better than those who came and wiped them out.

The people wiped out by Columbus were peaceful, welcomed him with open arms, didn't engage in human sacrifice, so your BUTWHATABOUTTHEAZTECS is your typical BS argument.
 
It's insane to argue that but for Columbus the new world isn't discovered, and populated. And slippery slope arguments are fun and stupid. If the mob comes for a genocidal slaver who had little kids whacked to death by his soldiers for fun and games, so be it. I'm not going to cry in my pillow tonight for all the poor genocidal slavers who are next up on the block.

So you moved the goal posts. I'm SHOCKED you're unwilling to engage in a civil discussion on the merits!! Here's my shocked face :roll:

The people wiped out by Columbus were peaceful, welcomed him with open arms, didn't engage in human sacrifice, so your BUTWHATABOUTTHEAZTECS is your typical BS argument.

Wow. You are angrier than normal today.
 
Next up: Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, John Wayne, and even Jesus himself. I also played the game of Clue the other day. They've got a rope that is used as one of the weapons. Guess the game of Clue has to go too.


Christopher Columbus statue removed from Columbus City Hall

Guess the city will be changing its name next. In fact, we have thousands of cities that will need to be brought into line with the new orthodoxy. Heck, pretty soon we could be welcoming people to our capital city, Obama, DC.:lamo
 
The people wiped out by Columbus were peaceful, welcomed him with open arms, didn't engage in human sacrifice, so your BUTWHATABOUTTHEAZTECS is your typical BS argument.

The people wiped out by Columbus were largely wiped out by the diseases he and other Europeans carried.
 
The people wiped out by Columbus were largely wiped out by the diseases he and other Europeans carried.

"Largely" isn't a distinction worth making in this case. It's like pointing out the Jews in concentration camps "largely" died of disease and starvation versus being killed in gas chambers. WGAF?

1. Columbus ignored the King and Queen’s order that he “abstain from doing … (the inhabitants) any injury.” For example, he created in 1495 the “tribute system” requiring every person over 14 to provide him with a “hawk’s bell” of gold every three months. Those who complied were given a “token” to wear around their neck. Those who didn’t comply, as Columbus’ son Fernando reported, were “punished by having their hands cut off” and “left to bleed to death.” About 10,000 in Haiti and the Dominican Republic were victimized. Many of the indigenous people were — while alive — “roasted on spits (i.e., slender pointed rods) … and burn(ed) … at the stake” ... and the invaders “hack(ed) the … children into pieces.” Also, Columbus’ men “tore the babes from their mother’s breast by their feet and dashed their heads against the rocks … They ‘splitted’ the bodies of other babes, together with their mothers … on their swords.” As noted by Spanish historian and Catholic priest Bartolome de las Casas, who witnessed much of the carnage, Columbus, in order “to test the sharpness of their blades,” directed his men “to cut off the legs of children who ran from them.” His crew would “pour … people full of boiling soap” and cause others to be “eaten (alive by) … hunting dogs.” And if Columbus’ brigade ran out of meat for their vicious dogs, “Arawak babies were killed for dog food.”

That bolded part about the gold was especially cruel because the area largely didn't have any gold, which meant no amount of effort could save the population from having their arms cut off and left to die.

But, hey, the population "largely" died of disease, so you know.... something!
 
Nah, just having fun poking at your dumb arguments.

I didnt make any dumb arguments. So you are confused and angry. Perhaps the former explains the latter.
 
I didnt make any dumb arguments. So you are confused and angry. Perhaps the former explains the latter.

In other words, "NUH UHH!!"

Good argument Fletch. About what we've come to expect. :thumbs:
 
"Largely" isn't a distinction worth making in this case. It's like pointing out the Jews in concentration camps "largely" died of disease and starvation versus being killed in gas chambers. WGAF?



That bolded part about the gold was especially cruel because the area largely didn't have any gold, which meant no amount of effort could save the population from having their arms cut off and left to die.

But, hey, the population "largely" died of disease, so you know.... something!

So you liberals are just learning that medieval explorers went all medieval on people. Could be thats just how people behaved back then. History has always focused on the good they did for the Western World. America hating leftists and Western Civilization deniers like you focus on the negative.
 
In other words, "NUH UHH!!"

Good argument Fletch. About what we've come to expect. :thumbs:

Whos we? You speak for all the mindless liberal Borg now? Congrats on your promotion.
 
I certainly think it is unfortunate that the explorer who discovered the North American for European colonization which led us to the present day is being subject to damnatio memoriae.

As our societal values shift and what we consider laudable versus despicable changes, who will be able to withstand the scrutiny of the generations who follow us? Perhaps a century from now, memorials dedicated to President Obama will be destroyed because he was not a vegan.

If you're a Native American I doubt you're happy that the Europeans discovered your home, broke in, and murdered your family.

The problem with Columbus was that even in his own time people were appalled by him. He was imprisoned in Spain for barbarous acts while governing Hispaniola. You really have to cross some line of evil for anyone to care what you did to natives.

So, why does he deserve to be honored?

If it was later discovered that Obama had secret torture chambers where he personally tortured prisoners, surely removing his statues would be justified, right?
 
If you're a Native American I doubt you're happy that the Europeans discovered your home, broke in, and murdered your family.

Well, naturally,

The problem with Columbus was that even in his own time people were appalled by him. He was imprisoned in Spain for barbarous acts while governing Hispaniola. You really have to cross some line of evil for anyone to care what you did to natives.

So, why does he deserve to be honored?


Because he discovered this nation that opened the door to European colonization that led to the creation of independent Republics which have stood as beacons of freedom and prosperity that people the world over immigrated to. Your family as well as mine. He deserves credit for that discovery. He does not deserve unfaltering praise and adulation for everything that he did.

If it was later discovered that Obama had secret torture chambers where he personally tortured prisoners, surely removing his statues would be justified, right?

Perhaps not. But if he managed incredible accomplishments that bettered the lives of his countrymen and perhaps humanity as a whole, I would not be in favor of tearing down statues or monuments in his honor. I argue that the monument or statue is more to remember the achievement, not the man.
 
Well, naturally,




Because he discovered this nation that opened the door to European colonization that led to the creation of independent Republics which have stood as beacons of freedom and prosperity that people the world over immigrated to. Your family as well as mine. He deserves credit for that discovery. He does not deserve unfaltering praise and adulation for everything that he did.



Perhaps not. But if he managed incredible accomplishments that bettered the lives of his countrymen and perhaps humanity as a whole, I would not be in favor of tearing down statues or monuments in his honor. I argue that the monument or statue is more to remember the achievement, not the man.

The Taíno beg to differ.
 
I certainly think it is unfortunate that the explorer who discovered the North American for European colonization which led us to the present day is being subject to damnatio memoriae.

As our societal values shift and what we consider laudable versus despicable changes, who will be able to withstand the scrutiny of the generations who follow us? Perhaps a century from now, memorials dedicated to President Obama will be destroyed because he was not a vegan.
Did Obama enslave others? Torture and murder thousands? Force little girls into sexual slavery? Commit near complete genocide of any land?

Hell, Columbus couldn’t even find what is now the United States.
 
Did Obama enslave others? Torture and murder thousands? Force little girls into sexual slavery? Commit near complete genocide of any land?

Hell, Columbus couldn’t even find what is now the United States.

Again, whether Columbus was an anodyne explorer (which he was not) or a ruthless, cruel mass-murdering exploiter, none of this changes the fact that Columbus opened the door to European exploration and colonization which eventually led to the creation of the United States. Without him, the United States would not exist, and very likely none of us would be here.

Perhaps you would say the world would have been better off without the discovery of the New World. Perhaps you would assert that even if Columbus had not found the New World, some other better person would have and we would have a better nation. I do not believe in historical inevitability. I think the discovery of the New World and its settlement by Europeans and later immigration was an immense net good for the world.
 
Last edited:
I certainly think it is unfortunate that the explorer who discovered the North American for European colonization which led us to the present day is being subject to damnatio memoriae.

As our societal values shift and what we consider laudable versus despicable changes, who will be able to withstand the scrutiny of the generations who follow us? Perhaps a century from now, memorials dedicated to President Obama will be destroyed because he was not a vegan.

Did Obama commit genocide and trade 9 year old girl sex slaves as a form of currency? Columbus did.

A genocidal pedophile is definitely the guy the Right should throw their support behind.
 
Again, whether Columbus was an anodyne explorer (which he was not) or a ruthless, cruel mass-murdering exploiter, none of this changes the fact that Columbus opened the door to European exploration and colonization which eventually led to the creation of the United States. Without him, the United States would not exist, and very likely none of us would be here.

Perhaps you would say the world would have been better off without the discovery of the New World. Perhaps you would assert that even if Columbus had not found the New World, some other better person would have and we would have a better nation. I do not believe in historical inevitability. I think the discovery of the New World and its settlement by Europeans and later immigration was an immense net good for the world.

Modern Germany would not exist without the actions of Adolf Hitler. Should there be Hitler statues all over Germany? Should he be honored?
 
Again, whether Columbus was an anodyne explorer (which he was not) or a ruthless, cruel mass-murdering exploiter, none of this changes the fact that Columbus opened the door to European exploration and colonization which eventually led to the creation of the United States. Without him, the United States would not exist, and very likely none of us would be here.

Perhaps you would say the world would have been better off without the discovery of the New World. Perhaps you would assert that even if Columbus had not found the New World, some other better person would have and we would have a better nation. I do not believe in historical inevitability. I think the discovery of the New World and its settlement by Europeans and later immigration was an immense net good for the world.
Contradicting yourself.

Thinking he had reached the Indies, it was nothing more than dumb luck when Columbus landed in the Bahamas.

Although Columbus’ “discoveries” were significant to the colonization of the what would later become the United States, the whole story of his travels makes very clear that Columbus was not a noble man and does not deserve the hero’s recognition that has been given him.
 
I certainly think it is unfortunate that the explorer who discovered the North American for European colonization which led us to the present day is being subject to damnatio memoriae.

As our societal values shift and what we consider laudable versus despicable changes, who will be able to withstand the scrutiny of the generations who follow us? Perhaps a century from now, memorials dedicated to President Obama will be destroyed because he was not a vegan.

This will only happen if the omnivores get together and elect horrible people in a last ditch effort to enforce their meat eating agenda, all while global warming has wrought its ugly wrath but the omnivores refuse to accept the evidence that raising a farm animal releases a lot of greenhouse gasses. (and its obvious the meat eaters were wrong, but they just refuse to grow up). This fight will need to be brewing in the background for decades as well.

There is more to this than people just deciding on a whim to have this or that social value... there needs to be significant pushback against the obviously right thing to do as well.
 
I certainly think it is unfortunate that the explorer who discovered the North American for European colonization which led us to the present day is being subject to damnatio memoriae.

As our societal values shift and what we consider laudable versus despicable changes, who will be able to withstand the scrutiny of the generations who follow us? Perhaps a century from now, memorials dedicated to President Obama will be destroyed because he was not a vegan.

Felis, I will start by admitting I was wrong here. My original belief was that we would be talking about confederates being paraded around public halls and finally putting to bed the awful ramification of the 1876 presidential election. But now I see the slippery slope happening. History isn't always pretty and it's important to remember the good and bad. Columbus without a doubt contributed to the building of our country, but at the same time, he wasn't really a nice guy. No human is perfect, and has their good and bad side, and tend to fall victim to the time period. Regardless of their generation, we all should be reminded of the grey nature of human kind.
 
Contradicting yourself.

Thinking he had reached the Indies, it was nothing more than dumb luck when Columbus landed in the Bahamas.

Although Columbus’ “discoveries” were significant to the colonization of the what would later become the United States, the whole story of his travels makes very clear that Columbus was not a noble man and does not deserve the hero’s recognition that has been given him.

I do not think I made myself clear. When I say "historical inevitability" I mean that there is no guarantee that history would have turned out the way it did and we would be in the same place we are now without catalyzing figures and events.

There is a certain strain of thought that basically goes like this: "If Columbus did not discover the New World, someone else would have." or "If the slave owning white supremacist founding fathers had not created a democratic law-governed constitutional federal republic, someone else would have."
 
Back
Top Bottom