Now the alt-left is going after Columbus ...

[Derec]

Christopher Columbus monument vandalized in Baltimore

Columbus, for all his faults, did discover America. Of course, that alone puts him in radical left-wing crosshairs, because discovery of America meant spread of Western culture, and modern-day leftitsts just love to hate Western culture.
And since this monument was >200 years old, there is also no excuse that it is not historic enough.

The alt-left is the true American Taliban - destroying all monuments that go against their world view. They also have in common that they both just love Islam.

 

[skepticalbip]

The left should be praising the fact that Columbus was able to start the flood of European emigrants into the Americas since the natives hadn't built a wall to keep them out and didn't limit legal or illegal emigration.

 

[Derec]

The left should be praising the fact that Columbus was able to start the flood of European emigrants into the Americas since the natives hadn't built a wall to keep them out and didn't limit legal or illegal emigration.

The Indian societies were basically on the stone age level. That doesn't mean just low technological (and therefore also military) level of development, but also low population carrying capacity. Compared to population density even in the 18th century, North America was nearly empty pre-Columbus.

Any contact between advanced European or other Old World societies and the Americas would have gone badly.
- the sheer difference in technological level puts the stone age society at a disadvantage
- as technology percolates, it causes rapid and irreversible changes in society and culture. Imagine us getting our hands at some cool alien tech.
- the fact that Europeans had many domesticated animals (and lived in close proximity to) and Indians few, meant that a contact wiped out many Indians through inadvertent introduction of diseases that Indians had no immunity to.

You can't blame one man (Columbus) for all this. And he didn't even set out to discover a new continent!

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Columbus was scum. He introduced slavery and oppression into the Americas. He was a cruel, greedy and callous bastard.

 

[Cobalt]

You can't blame one man (Columbus) for all this. And he didn't even set out to discover a new continent!

Are you saying that since he doesn't bear all the blame, he should be venerated? If not, why do you have a problem with people not venerating him?

 

[Angry Floof]

All that just to say "might is right."

 

[Juma]

Christopher Columbus monument vandalized in Baltimore

Columbus, for all his faults, did discover America. Of course, that alone puts him in radical left-wing crosshairs, because discovery of America meant spread of Western culture, and modern-day leftitsts just love to hate Western culture.
And since this monument was >200 years old, there is also no excuse that it is not historic enough.

The alt-left is the true American Taliban - destroying all monuments that go against their world view. They also have in common that they both just love Islam.

America was already discovered... since thousands of years.. by the people already living there.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Fake news. Columbus did not discover America. Also resistance to making Columbus as a hero isn't new.

This thread is like saying, "Oh noes, now the alt-left is going after pedo Catholic priests who discovered religion. What will those tricksters do next?!"

 

[bilby]

Christopher Columbus monument vandalized in Baltimore

Columbus, for all his faults, did discover America.

No, He didn't.

The first European to arrive in the Americas was likely Eric the Red, in around 985CE; although some evidence suggests Europeans may have reached Labrador as early as 3500BCE, using dugout canoes, and there are reportedly Roman shipwrecks in North America, although there is no evidence that they were crewed when they arrived there.

And of course there were already people in the Americas at the time, whose ancestors walked across the Bering Land Bridge.

Of course, that alone puts him in radical left-wing crosshairs, because discovery of America meant spread of Western culture, and modern-day leftitsts just love to hate Western culture.

This is nonsense. The reasons for people to dislike Columbus are numerous, and mere discovery of America is irrelevant to his well known crimes.

And since this monument was >200 years old, there is also no excuse that it is not historic enough.

LOL Only an American would suggest that >200 years old is 'historic'. I grew up in a house that's older than that, and it was a perfectly ordinary house, not some 'historic' structure.

The alt-left is the true American Taliban - destroying all monuments that go against their world view. They also have in common that they both just love Islam.

Oh do fuck off.

This OP is symptomatic of the deep problem the American Right has with reality - not one thing here is actually true in any sense, but the poster genuinely believes it, despite having made no attempt to check any of it; And he views any attempt to correct his gross errors of fact as being ploitically motivated and unworthy of his consideration.

Facts exist. Reality is qualitatively different from opinion. You are NOT entitled to believe any old shit; This OP is deeply and worryingly WRONG, and this shit needs to stop before it fucks everything up any more than it already has.

Columbus has been widely condemned by those people who give a shit about reality, and choose not to believe in myth and legend, for (at least) many decades. He was a scumbag slaver piece of shit; The only reason for an American not to know this is to be deliberately averse to factual information.

There is no such thing as the 'alt-left'; and the people who are 'going after' Columbus remain, as they have always been, those who know the actual facts about who Columbus was. Like this guy: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/columbus_day, who drew this strip in 2013, LONG (about three years) before anyone had ever coined the term 'alt-left' (the first use of which I can find reference to was in August 2016 on the WorldNetDaily conspiracist website). And who even provided citations for his claims at the end of the strip - almost as though it was important not to just believe any old crap that someone decides to present on the Internet.

Misinformation is being used to advance the local, short-term agendas of people who don't give a shit about the long-term global results. It needs to stop. Opinions are not all worthy, nor are they all equal. Expertise is valuable; Facts are real and objective. Reality is NOT subject to our demands, wishes, desires, or wants, and cannot be shaped by what we believe.

Fucking STOP IT.

 

[repoman]

In a practical sense Columbus discovered the Americas for Europe in the late 15th century when it had the wherewithal to go on a massive exploration binge. This Viking stuff was too fringe and too early to make a difference. Whatever, this is a tangent.

Columbus seems to almost be the reverse image of Robert E Lee. Whereas Lee seemed to comport himself up to the moral level and beyond of his day, but fought for a flawed cause, Columbus while famous for a good thing (exploration) was a true scumbag when there was no need to be. It seems like even his comtemporaries were shocked by how much of a sicko he was.

As an aside, what would it take for Mongolia to remove Genghis Khan statues? Immigration of people fucked up by the mongols seems a good way for that to happen. That is why they should not be allowed in Mongolia in the first place itf uou a Genghis Khan fanboy. "Genghis Khan was a Mongol Supremacist and this Mongolians need to learn how to be multicultural."

 

[whichphilosophy]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...icans-think-confederate-statues-should-remain
A majority of Americans think Confederate monuments should be preserved in public spaces, according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll, a view that is at odds with efforts in many cities to remove them.

The 18-21 August poll found that 54% of adults said Confederate monuments “should remain in all public spaces”, while 27% said they “should be removed from all public spaces”. Another 19% said they “don’t know”.


Charlottesville mayor opposes Robert E Lee statue: 'A lightning rod' for terrorism
Read more
Responses to the poll were sharply split along racial and party lines, however, with whites and Republicans largely supportive of preservation. Democrats and minorities were more likely to support removal.

Cities across the United States are debating what to do with hundreds of statues, plaques and other monuments to the slave-holding Confederacy. Some monuments already have been removed this year in cities like New Orleans and Baltimore.

Having quoted the above from the left wing Guardian, consultation should be carried out without Ultra-left wing revolutionaries and Anarchists finding an excuse for destructive behaviour.

The extremes on the right and left are splinter groups lacking public support but they seek to attract attention by pulling off various stunts. If they fielded presidential candidates, they would not even reach 1%

Columbus did as many others regard humans as cattle. At the same time Washington, Jefferson and many others were slave owners.

Political correctness from the left is not the answer.

What's next. Should we now purge the descendants of African Americans who also owned slaves?

http://www.theroot.com/did-black-people-own-slaves-1790895436

How Many Slaves Did Blacks Own?

So what do the actual numbers of black slave owners and their slaves tell us? In 1830, the year most carefully studied by Carter G. Woodson, about 13.7 percent (319,599) of the black population was free. Of these, 3,776 free Negroes owned 12,907 slaves, out of a total of 2,009,043 slaves owned in the entire United States, so the numbers of slaves owned by black people over all was quite small by comparison with the number owned by white people. In his essay, " 'The Known World' of Free Black Slaveholders," Thomas J. Pressly, using Woodson's statistics, calculated that 54 (or about 1 percent) of these black slave owners in 1830 owned between 20 and 84 slaves; 172 (about 4 percent) owned between 10 to 19 slaves; and 3,550 (about 94 percent) each owned between 1 and 9 slaves. Crucially, 42 percent owned just one slave

 

[barbos]

No, He didn't.

The first European to arrive in the Americas was likely Eric the Red, in around 985CE

Don't worry, Leif Erikson is next

 

[RavenSky]

Christopher Columbus monument vandalized in Baltimore

Columbus, for all his faults, did discover America...

No he didn't.

Not even counting the indigenous populations in the Americas, Leif Eriksson and other Vikings were here establishing settlements 500+ years before Columbus.

Columbus was a homicidal scum-bag that never deserved our recognition.

 

[RavenSky]

You can't blame one man (Columbus) for all this. And he didn't even set out to discover a new continent!

Are you saying that since he doesn't bear all the blame, he should be venerated? If not, why do you have a problem with people not venerating him?

Exactly this! If Columbus doesn't get any of the blame for the deaths he left in his wake, then he sure as shit doesn't get credit for a "discovery" he didn't actually make.

 

[Derec]

Are you saying that since he doesn't bear all the blame, he should be venerated?

I do not think he should be venerated, but certainly recognized.

If not, why do you have a problem with people not venerating him?

I have no problem with people not venerating him. I have problem with people who feel entitled to vandalize historic monuments.

- - - Updated - - -

America was already discovered... since thousands of years.. by the people already living there.

No shit Sherlock. But Columbus discovered Americas for Europe. His discovery marked the point when the societies of the Old World became aware of the New. Hence, he did discover America.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I just disovered Sawyerville. The native population used to call it Toronto, but I found it yesterday and decided that I was the first one there.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I just disovered Sawyerville. The native population used to call it Toronto, but I found it yesterday and decided that I was the first one there.

Well, the first Sawyeranian, opening up Sawyerville for exploitation by Sawyerans...

 

[ZiprHead]

I just disovered Sawyerville. The native population used to call it Toronto, but I found it yesterday and decided that I was the first one there.

Can I move to your new discovery? The country I'm living in presently has been taken over by stupidity.

 

[Derec]

No, He didn't.

Yes, he did.

The first European to arrive in the Americas was likely Eric the Red, in around 985CE; although some evidence suggests Europeans may have reached Labrador as early as 3500BCE, using dugout canoes, and there are reportedly Roman shipwrecks in North America, although there is no evidence that they were crewed when they arrived there.

I am aware of all that. None of it constitutes a proper discovery, since the existence of the new continent did not become known. Noridc colonies in NE Canada collapsed and were eventually forgotten, and remains of shipwrecked ships washing up is nobody's definition of discovery.
Imagine how different our world would be had Leif Ericsson (his father established a settlement on Greenland, he did on Canadian mainland) publicized the existence of Americas and triggered further exploration and settlement in the 11th century instead of 15th? It is because Columbus' discovery had such far-reaching consequences that he is properly credited here.

And of course there were already people in the Americas at the time, whose ancestors walked across the Bering Land Bridge.

I.e. Siberian-Americans.

This is nonsense. The reasons for people to dislike Columbus are numerous, and mere discovery of America is irrelevant to his well known crimes.

No, it is not nonsense, given the alt-left's deep seated hatred of US, western world and capitalism.

LOL Only an American would suggest that >200 years old is 'historic'. I grew up in a house that's older than that, and it was a perfectly ordinary house, not some 'historic' structure.

By American standards 200 years is indeed historic.

This OP is symptomatic of the deep problem the American Right has with reality - not one thing here is actually true in any sense, but the poster genuinely believes it, despite having made no attempt to check any of it; And he views any attempt to correct his gross errors of fact as being ploitically motivated and unworthy of his consideration.

What is not true in any sense? Are you denying that the Columbus monument was vandalized?

Facts exist. Reality is qualitatively different from opinion. You are NOT entitled to believe any old shit; This OP is deeply and worryingly WRONG, and this shit needs to stop before it fucks everything up any more than it already has.

Yes. Facts exist. But you have not shown that the OP was in any way wrong.

Columbus has been widely condemned by those people who give a shit about reality, and choose not to believe in myth and legend, for (at least) many decades. He was a scumbag slaver piece of shit; The only reason for an American not to know this is to be deliberately averse to factual information.

You are entitled to think Christopher Columbus was a scumbag. You are not entitled to go and vandalize monuments to him.

There is no such thing as the 'alt-left';

But of course there is. Occupy Wall Street, #BLM, Antifa etc., i.e. leftist groups outside or on the fringes of the Democratic Party power structure are alt-left. It is the Left that is the alternative to the mainstream Left in the US.

and the people who are 'going after' Columbus remain, as they have always been, those who know the actual facts about who Columbus was. Like this guy: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/columbus_day, who drew this strip in 2013, LONG (about three years) before anyone had ever coined the term 'alt-left' (the first use of which I can find reference to was in August 2016 on the WorldNetDaily conspiracist website). And who even provided citations for his claims at the end of the strip - almost as though it was important not to just believe any old crap that someone decides to present on the Internet.

I am not saying that everybody who dislikes Columbus is alt-left. But using vandalism (what alt-leftists like to call "direct action") is. And I am not a follower of WND. But just because they wrote something, does not invalidate the entire concept of alt-left. How else would you describe the radicals who vandalize monuments and torch QTs to make a political point?

Fucking STOP IT.

You stop it. This thread is about people feeling entitled to vandalize monuments if they disagree with them.

 

[Derec]

Not even counting the indigenous populations in the Americas, Leif Eriksson and other Vikings were here establishing settlements 500+ years before Columbus.

And those were quickly forgotten. That's the qualitative difference between Columbuses discovery and that of Ericsson.

Columbus was a homicidal scum-bag that never deserved our recognition.

And therefore it is ok for people to take it upon themselves to vandalize monuments?

Historical figures are rarely perfect by our standards. 15th century was a much more brutish time, and Columbus was a man of his age.
You might as well vilify Washington and Jefferson for owning slaves. Oh wait, the Left already does.