Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I figured you put the term in quotes because it is no longer an accurate way to refer to your fellow woke fascists who have been indoctrinated by your teachers to hate western culture and your own country in particular.I put liberals in quotes because I don't use the term the same way you might. I'm using the term that way as a courtesy, and employing quotations so as not to completely disregard my own definitions.
I guess Neil Armstrong didnt do anything worth celebrating either.I don't particularly care if you celebrate Columbus day, and I don't think most "liberals" would, but he really didn't do a damn thing worth celebrating.
yumegari is representative of a new faction of ‘American’…one that Democrats manifested while good REAL Americans sat there on their hands, became pussified and quit giving a shit.Nothing good came of Columbus discovering America?
Do tell.
To ignore he goes.No, not particularly. Why would I?
It's a big discovery, alright, but the consequences of that discovery have been categorically negative. I don't celebrate Oppenheimer for his role in the development of nuclear weapons. Sure, it was a massive development, a world-changing development, but depending on your perspective, the consequences of that development (and its future potential) are pretty awful.
Good one! Figured out my party before even I did.
Perspective. I had two uncles (Marines, now deceased) who if they had at that time known who Oppenheimer was and his connection with what he did would have most certainly celebrated him. It saved them from visiting Japan at a bad time.No, not particularly. Why would I?
It's a big discovery, alright, but the consequences of that discovery have been categorically negative. I don't celebrate Oppenheimer for his role in the development of nuclear weapons. Sure, it was a massive development, a world-changing development, but depending on your perspective, the consequences of that development (and its future potential) are pretty awful.
Good one! Figured out my party before even I did.
Nothing good came of Columbus discovering America?
Do tell.
I'll preface this by saying I'm 100% open to corrections. I've just started my major in history not too long ago, and my independent studies have mostly focused on states outside of Europe. I'd love to learn more from this discussion.So. . . did you think that America and cross cultural interaction was never going to occur? Would you have preferred that conquest and subjugation happen later than it did?
You must explain yourself, for clearly your basic understanding of the evolution of human civilization and global societies has been retarded in some way.
IMO? The fact that it happen BEFORE the enlightenment was most opportune, do you have an argument against that?
Do you seriously have a philosophical argument against the very nature of man?
Guns, Germs, and Steel - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Not usually, no.Do you celebrate Christmas or New Year or Easter or Halloween or Arbor Day?
I don't consider myself "woke." Also, when did I say anything about recognizing or not recognizing the achievements of Columbus? We should definitely recognize them, and we should definitely note them. Where did you get that?Whining is part-and-parcel of wokeness. The achievements of people should be recognized, and this watershed discovery and it's discoverer must be noted.
My High School was in the rural area of one of the most republican states in the country. My teachers were very open to having respectful discussions about their ideals, which sort of counteracts the whole idea that they attempted to indoctrinate. I very rarely agreed with either my liberal or conservative (your terms, not mine) teachers.I figured you put the term in quotes because it is no longer an accurate way to refer to your fellow woke fascists who have been indoctrinated by your teachers to hate western culture and your own country in particular.
What grade are you in?
Why not?I guess Neil Armstrong didnt do anything worth celebrating either.
Oh? What'd I do that people haven't been doing for the past hundred years?yumegari is representative of a new faction of ‘American’…one that Democrats manifested while good REAL Americans sat there on their hands, became pussified and quit giving a shit.
They belong in a new age Auschwitz.
Someone's allergic to respectful discussion.To ignore he goes.
That's a really interesting view, and I certainly respect that. It's all a matter of perspective.Perspective. I had two uncles (Marines, now deceased) who if they had at that time known who Oppenheimer was and his connection with what he did would have most certainly celebrated him. It saved them from visiting Japan at a bad time.
I'll preface this by saying I'm 100% open to corrections. I've just started my major in history not too long ago, and my independent studies have mostly focused on states outside of Europe. I'd love to learn more from this discussion.
The discovery of the New World was indeed inevitable, just as the discovery of most things are inevitable. Discoveries are rarely the result of great people, because great people are an aspect of all times; more often than not, they come as a natural consequence of the natural, perpetual curiosity (and greed) of people, paired with the technological capability to make those discoveries.
With that being said, my understanding is that the discovery of New World directly and immediately led to three negative consequences for the natives: disease, slaughter, and the proselytization of the survivors. I understand the disease was the bulk of that, and while it's the "fault" of those conquistadors and the settlers that followed, it wasn't their intention. But I would argue that's irrelevant to this discussion, and will assume it's as such for the remaining portion of my argument, for this reason: I am not judging the quality of people, but the positive or negative consequences of a set of actions.
Though disease killed the bulk of the natives, what followed for many survivors was either literal death at the hands of the new worlders (a slaughter which would last for centuries), or cultural death due to proselytization.
Even if we are to disregard the effects on the natives themselves, I believe it was the discovery of the New World and its colonization that led to the economic necessity that drove the triangular trade, spurring the enslavement of countless Africans.
I'm sure I missed some negative consequences, and I'm sure I'm forgetting some positive consequences. My knowledge is rather surface level.
Also, I'd like to know why you think the New World was better discovered pre-Enlightenment. While the Enlightenment wasn't really a coherent movement, my understanding is that it was a general trend towards more respect for human life (and the reaction to that newfound respect). This manifested as individualism (liberty and tolerance) and the rejection of traditional Christian theology (and in some rare cases, Christianity itself). Wouldn't the former cause more people to challenge the actions in the New World, and the latter discourage some forms of proselytization? Though it could also be said that even mid-Enlightenment they didn't hesitate to take quite abhorrent actions in the New World, so maybe not.
Not usually, no.
I don't consider myself "woke." Also, when did I say anything about recognizing or not recognizing the achievements of Columbus? We should definitely recognize them, and we should definitely note them. Where did you get that?
My High School was in the rural area of one of the most republican states in the country. My teachers were very open to having respectful discussions about their ideals, which sort of counteracts the whole idea that they attempted to indoctrinate. I very rarely agreed with either my liberal or conservative (your terms, not mine) teachers.
Also, I don't really "hate" western culture or even the US. I'm not a big fan of the US or western culture, but I certainly prefer them over any other culture on the planet, and they'll be a good stepping stone to greater improvement in the future.
As for what grade I'm in, I'm in my sophomore year of university.
Why not?
Oh? What'd I do that people haven't been doing for the past hundred years?
Someone's allergic to respectful discussion.
That's a really interesting view, and I certainly respect that. It's all a matter of perspective.
What is quite impressive is that these men set sail in those flimsy ships certain they were sailing to their deaths as they fell off the edge of the world. They did it anyway.Hey, if you think you could have done what Columbus or Leif Eriksson did, with the technology, and the scant seaman's legends about some fabled land laying thousands of miles from civilization. . .
The old Toynbee quote about civilizations dying by suicide, not murder comes to mind.By our standards today? If you read the logs of Columbus' second, who recorded everything that was happening, and you really know the truth? Yeah, what they did, and had been doing? Sounded absolutely horrific, I read them myself in Howard Zinn's book. It would make a good horror movie. It honestly would.
OTH? If you keep perspective about how ALL NATIONS AND CIVILIZATIONS on the planet behaved at that time in history? What Columbus did was what had to be done for Empires to succeed.
Naturally, from a global socialist mindset, folks today can't comprehend competition between civilizations. The strongest survived. If you study anthropology, and found out how the Mongols were successful? It would turn your stomach. The Romans were NOT softies. Nor were the Aztecs.
It takes more than a major in history to understand this, it takes study in political philosophy and study in cutulural anthropology to understand this as well. I would also recommend understanding how Universities get their endowments, how they are politically organized, and their place in culture, so your mind remains independent in it's crtical thinking.
If a civilization wanted to survive, grow and thrive, it had to be blood thirsty and vicious in the past, this is just a fact.
Probably the most benevolent and kind empire to ever exist in the history of humanity is the United State of America. . . it gives folks who are indoctrinated in critical theory today the freedom to slag Columbus, because they are too ignorant to understand any of this.
There seems to be no historical perspective. NONE
Now, the reason I state that it is a good thing the New World was discovered before the Enlightenment, is because, the United States, was created almost by a divine confluence of Grace . . . and luck?
It is the outgrowth of two events. Enlightenment philosophies with the likes of Adam Smith's economic writings on natural law, the Greek and Roman traditions, and the Iroquois experiments in government. Had these two unique traditions, like chocolate and peanut butter, not met, when they did, there never would have been an experiment in self-government the likes of which we have today, known as the United State of America.
The Secret of the U.S. Constitution
The Secret of the U.S. Constitution
The true history of the basis of the U.S. Constitution will surprise most people. And, sadly, it's not taught in schools.mollylarkin.com
The True History of our Constitution
". . .The truth is that the U.S. Constitution is modeled in both principle and form on the Great Law of Peace of the Native American tribe known as the Iroquois.
This is absolutely, unequivocally historical fact. While there may have been other influences, when compared side by side, the influence of the Great Law of Peace is irrefutable.
In 1987, the United States Senate acknowledged that the Great Law of Peace of the Iroquois Nations served as a model for the Constitution of the United States. (U.S. S. Con. Res. 76, 2 Dec. 1987).
And since the U.S. Constitution was a model for the charter of the United Nations, the Iroquois Great Law of Peace is also a basis of international law.
When the Founding Fathers looked for examples of effective government and human liberty upon which to model a Constitution to unite the thirteen colonies, they found it in the government of the Iroquois Nation.
In the 18th Century, the Iroquois League was the oldest, most highly evolved participatory democracy on Earth.. . ."
I'm not making an argument about whether what he did was justified or not. What he did was the natural consequence of his time, just as every other event in the history was the natural consequence of its time. There is no avoiding this, and in my opinion its irrelevant to this particular discussion, since I said nothing about Columbus as a person, or the "morality" of states at the time.By our standards today? If you read the logs of Columbus' second, who recorded everything that was happening, and you really know the truth? Yeah, what they did, and had been doing? Sounded absolutely horrific, I read them myself in Howard Zinn's book. It would make a good horror movie. It honestly would.
OTH? If you keep perspective about how ALL NATIONS AND CIVILIZATIONS on the planet behaved at that time in history? What Columbus did was what had to be done for Empires to succeed.
Naturally, from a global socialist mindset, folks today can't comprehend competition between civilizations. The strongest survived. If you study anthropology, and found out how the Mongols were successful? It would turn your stomach. The Romans were NOT softies. Nor were the Aztecs.
It takes more than a major in history to understand this, it takes study in political philosophy and study in cutulural anthropology to understand this as well. I would also recommend understanding how Universities get their endowments, how they are politically organized, and their place in culture, so your mind remains independent in it's crtical thinking.
If a civilization wanted to survive, grow and thrive, it had to be blood thirsty and vicious in the past, this is just a fact.
Probably the most benevolent and kind empire to ever exist in the history of humanity is the United State of America. . . it gives folks who are indoctrinated in critical theory today the freedom to slag Columbus, because they are too ignorant to understand any of this.
There seems to be no historical perspective. NONE
Now, the reason I state that it is a good thing the New World was discovered before the Enlightenment, is because, the United States, was created almost by a divine confluence of Grace . . . and luck?
It is the outgrowth of two events. Enlightenment philosophies with the likes of Adam Smith's economic writings on natural law, the Greek and Roman traditions, and the Iroquois experiments in government. Had these two unique traditions, like chocolate and peanut butter, not met, when they did, there never would have been an experiment in self-government the likes of which we have today, known as the United State of America.
The Secret of the U.S. Constitution
The Secret of the U.S. Constitution
The true history of the basis of the U.S. Constitution will surprise most people. And, sadly, it's not taught in schools.mollylarkin.com
The True History of our Constitution
". . .The truth is that the U.S. Constitution is modeled in both principle and form on the Great Law of Peace of the Native American tribe known as the Iroquois.
This is absolutely, unequivocally historical fact. While there may have been other influences, when compared side by side, the influence of the Great Law of Peace is irrefutable.
In 1987, the United States Senate acknowledged that the Great Law of Peace of the Iroquois Nations served as a model for the Constitution of the United States. (U.S. S. Con. Res. 76, 2 Dec. 1987).
And since the U.S. Constitution was a model for the charter of the United Nations, the Iroquois Great Law of Peace is also a basis of international law.
When the Founding Fathers looked for examples of effective government and human liberty upon which to model a Constitution to unite the thirteen colonies, they found it in the government of the Iroquois Nation.
In the 18th Century, the Iroquois League was the oldest, most highly evolved participatory democracy on Earth.. . ."
I agree that recognizing the good in a culture is very important, and it seems most are caught between either categorically defending their culture or categorically attacking it. Me, and many of the leftists I know, are very conscious about the fact that any culture is a mixed bag, and it should not only be understood in its context, but it should also be viewed critically, bit-by-bit, recognizing where there is value, and discarding relics of past necessity. We recognize that western culture is the best culture to our end, and that many other cultures are categorically opposed to what we espouse as desirable.The old Toynbee quote about civilizations dying by suicide, not murder comes to mind.
These kids are so caught up in criticizing everything about their own culture that they fail to acknowledge anything good about it. There is something of a celebration of primitivism inherent in this new authoritarian left, in fact, as the desire to atone for past sins has resulted in them embracing just about any culture EXCEPT the Western liberalism that resulted from the enlightenment.
And look what is happening to it today!Probably the most benevolent and kind empire to ever exist in the history of humanity is the United State of America. . . it gives folks who are indoctrinated in critical theory today the freedom to slag Columbus, because they are too ignorant to understand any of this.
I'm not making an argument about whether what he did was justified or not. What he did was the natural consequence of his time, just as every other event in the history was the natural consequence of its time. There is no avoiding this, and in my opinion its irrelevant to this particular discussion, since I said nothing about Columbus as a person, or the "morality" of states at the time.
My claim isn't that Columbus was a bad person, or that the Europeans were the big bad evil, my argument is that the consequences of Columbus's actions have been negative, and they aren't worth being celebrated. They sure as hell should be recognized and taught in full, but I don't understand what is worth being celebrated.
Also, a study of history by itself has been enough to discover exactly what you're saying. This is taught, both at my current university, and where I went for HS. Very liberal, often leftist professors, make it very clear that people should be perceived as part of their context, and I very firmly agree.
And yes, I am very careful when listening to anyone of any political persuasion. Intentional or otherwise, everyone lets bias seep into their worldview.
I agree that recognizing the good in a culture is very important, and it seems most are caught between either categorically defending their culture or categorically attacking it. Me, and many of the leftists I know, are very conscious about the fact that any culture is a mixed bag, and it should not only be understood in its context, but it should also be viewed critically, bit-by-bit, recognizing where there is value, and discarding relics of past necessity. We recognize that western culture is the best culture to our end, and that many other cultures are categorically opposed to what we espouse as desirable.
my argument is that the consequences of Columbus's actions have been negative,
I made an argument for why the consequences of it have been negative.I don't see discovering a country, and creating a settlement 'negative'.
That's a myth perpetrated to school children by the STATE.What is quite impressive is that these men set sail in those flimsy ships certain they were sailing to their deaths as they fell off the edge of the world. They did it anyway.
Wooden ships and iron men.
Of COURSE Columbus knew there was another continent out there. That was the whole point of his voyage.That's a myth perpetrated to school children by the STATE.
Sailors of that era had known, since the Great Library of Alexandria that the world was round. They had even calculated the size. They had known since Galileo that the world was round. It was common knowledge among all sailors that the world was round.
It was a secret that was largely guarded by the Templars in Christendom though, due to their near monopoloy of the sea trade with their ships.
The Vikings had already figured out a way to navigate using the stars.
Columbus knew there was another continent out there.
I mean, yeah, it's a myth, but what would the state gain by intentionally perpetuating it? Besides, it's a myth that goes back a long, long while. My experience has been that some of my teachers had fallen prey to that myth, and others knew a bit about history.That's a myth perpetrated to school children by the STATE.
Sailors of that era had known, since the Great Library of Alexandria that the world was round. They had even calculated the size. They had known since Galileo that the world was round. It was common knowledge among all sailors that the world was round.
It was a secret that was largely guarded by the Templars in Christendom though, due to their near monopoloy of the sea trade with their ships.
The Vikings had already figured out a way to navigate using the stars.
Columbus knew there was another continent out there.
negative compared to what?my argument is that the consequences of Columbus's actions have been negative
I mean, yeah, it's a myth, but what would the state gain by intentionally perpetuating it? Besides, it's a myth that goes back a long, long while. My experience has been that some of my teachers had fallen prey to that myth, and others knew a bit about history.
he didnt discovery north america and didnt even make it to the mainland,,,The greatest discovery in the world?
