There have always been questions asked about Columbus... Was he Italian? Was he Spanish? Was he Jewish?
One question that has not been asked too often is... Was he a racist???? The answer to that particular question is now coming to light with a resounding YES!!!
Sorry to 'rain on your parade' America.... but here are some disturbing facts...
Monday is a holiday in the US called Columbus Day held in honor of the man who supposedly "discovered" America.
In fact, Columbus' real role was as the initiator of a campaign of genocide against Native Americans that continued for nearly 400 years.
Nothing to celebrate.
In a country not buried so deeply in propaganda, this holiday would be removed from the calendar.
How the myth is carefully protected by the TV news mafia:
Columbus Day Sanitized
Excerpt from "The Canary Effect"
During the 1970s Bush Sr. masterminded a covert program that sterilized over 40% of Native American women against their will and without their consent...Click HERE to watch about this.
What utter bullshit. All Europeans were racists, they were also illiterate and lacked basic hygiene. And since when was there any doubt about CHRISTopher Columbus' ethnicity and religion?
What utter bullshit. All Europeans were racists, they were also illiterate and lacked basic hygiene. And since when was there any doubt about CHRISTopher Columbus' ethnicity and religion?
Granted I didn't watch the clips, but where do they claim all Europeans were illiterate dirty racists? I thought this was about Columbus and crew.
And I don't think the Christ in Christopher provides proof of his ethnicity any more than a guy with the name of Moses is proof of Jewishness.
Oh that was my claim. I was just pointing out that Columbus was hardly unique. I don't know any Jews named Christopher, but I do know Christians named Abraham.
All Europeans were racists, they were also illiterate and lacked basic hygiene.
So were the tribes in the Americas as are most Asians, Arabs, Africans, and East Indians to this day. This is no revelation. Human nature is tribal - everywhere. There are few to no exceptions.
Being a racist has never been limited to Europeans. Look at the tribal warfare in Africa that continues to this day for a modern example or the caste system in India that, despite efforts by their Government to eliminate it, still persists.
How about Japan, the most homogenous country on the planet, which really doesn't want any non-Japanese - or the "Hispanic movements" in the United States? "La Raza" anyone?
Limiting comments to "Europeans are racists" is, in itself, racist - and hypocritical.
America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall and the Congress is out to lunch.
What utter bullshit. All Europeans were racists, they were also illiterate and lacked basic hygiene....
Thats a very broad statement...Europeans who settled in Africa taught the locals about hygiene and increased life expectancy about 30 years first of many mistakes ....as for CC no one said he was a saint however if he caused "a campaign of genocide" by introducing chicken pox to the locals they returned the favor by giving us gonorrhea and tobacco still to this day killing millions!...the fact he introduced the tomato to the Italians makes him OK in my book
Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 1492, and I think the Great Unwashed and illiterate were by far the majority at that time. Yes, I posted that to make the point that mirage made much better. It was the norm, and therefore the premise of this article, that Columbus and his crew were these monsters who intended only to commit racial genocide is absurd.
I mean, he called them Indians, because he wasn't aware he did not make it to India.
The accounts of babies having their heads smashed against rocks is similar to the claims I have read of what the indian "savages" did to settlers on the mainland. I wonder if one report or the other was falsely claimed against the true instigators.
But I agree that probably everyone in that era was racist by todays standards. Being in Ecuador, it's been a bit "enlightening" in that regard as there are most certainly differences between various groups.
For example, it's apparent that Ecuadorians in general have poor business skills. Generally, the big corporate success stories like the big shopping enterprises are created by foreigners who come here and build an empire. The idea of synergistic teamwork to create a successful business where the whole exceeds the sum of the parts is generally unappreciated by Ecuadorians. A huge percentage of people here are self employed, in the form of a small corner conveniences store, or even small tables on the sidewalk, and even selling candy on buses. The unspoken ethic here of being expected to take advantage of those around you proves detrimental to all in the form of a poorer economy. It's an Ecuadorian thing, or perhaps a latin thing.
Columbians, on the other hand, have a reputation for being smooth talkers and being able to take advantage of the (generally) more simplistic Ecuadorians.
Some indians here have been hired for paper money to pan gold at a rate very advantageous to a profiteer (Though others, I'm told, sell what they pan at a much fairer market rate).
There are differences between various peoples, and they are more than just musical preferences, and bone, hair and skin differences. It's the very way of thinking and living. Values are different. I think it's inevitable that when differing people come in contact there will be some kind of conflict, not necessarily violent mind you, but something that is best recognized and resolved, rather than just ignored and paved over in PC fashion.
Having been taught all my life about how racism is evil, unjustified and the product of an ignorant minde, it's been enlightening here in seeing how it may actually have some legitimate substance.
Thats a very broad statement...Europeans who settled in Africa taught the locals about hygiene and increased life expectancy about 30 years first of many mistakes
It was the Europeans also who created new territorial boundaries as they colonized, and I understand forced a bit of migration of tribes to new locations to which they were not accustomed, resulting in increased mortality and disease, in addition to conflicts with neighboring tribes they otherwise would have largely been at peace with.
No, I think Africans would have been better off as a whole had Europeans never come ashore there. Sure, maybe they would have remained in the stone age, but they might have been much happier anyway.
There is no question about colonial powers carving up Africa.. The Berlin West African Conference of 1884/5....however if you have ever lived in Africa you would know that the local tribes have no concept of hygiene ergo the current AIDS problem and many more preventable diseases....currently the biggest killer in Africa was caused Americans fear of DDT