CDZ In defense of Columbus

[JLW]

Italian Americans have reacted with anger after two statues of Christopher Columbus in Chicago were removed under cover of darkness in the early hours of Friday morning under the orders of Mayor Lori Lightfoot.

Before dawn, city crews used cranes to remove a monument in Chicago's Little Italy and a massive bronze statue in Grant Park, which were first erected at the city's first and second World's Fairs in 1893 and 1933, respectively.

Italian American community leaders say they were taken aback by Lightfoot's abrupt order to remove the statues, which Lightfoot calls a 'temporary' measure until passions cool. The Grant Park statue was at the center of violent scenes last week, when 49 police officers were injured by a mob hurling rocks and fireworks while attempting to tear the statue down.

Italian Americans slam Chicago's mayor for removing Columbus statues

Before dawn, city crews used cranes to remove a monument in Chicago's Little Italy and a massive bronze statue in Grant Park, which were first erected at the city's first and second World's Fairs.

www.dailymail.co.uk

*************I

I have posted that I understand the anger towards confederate monuments and statues. My view was these people rebelled against the nation so why honor them. The purpose of this thread is not to reargue this point. My only concern is that they should not just be pulled down but go through the legal process before they are removed.

Columbus on the hand is of a different kind. Columbus statues were erected not as a point of “white supremacy” but as a point of pride by recently arrived Italian immigrants who were facing hardships as they assimilated into the American melting pot. If anything these statues were a finger in the eye to those who looked down on them.

Columbus was flawed. There is no doubt about that. However, the statues need to be looked at the historical context in which they were erected.

Mayor Lightfoot says this was a temporary measure. We shall see.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Italian Americans have reacted with anger after two statues of Christopher Columbus in Chicago were removed under cover of darkness in the early hours of Friday morning under the orders of Mayor Lori Lightfoot.

Before dawn, city crews used cranes to remove a monument in Chicago's Little Italy and a massive bronze statue in Grant Park, which were first erected at the city's first and second World's Fairs in 1893 and 1933, respectively.

Italian American community leaders say they were taken aback by Lightfoot's abrupt order to remove the statues, which Lightfoot calls a 'temporary' measure until passions cool. The Grant Park statue was at the center of violent scenes last week, when 49 police officers were injured by a mob hurling rocks and fireworks while attempting to tear the statue down.

Italian Americans slam Chicago's mayor for removing Columbus statues

Before dawn, city crews used cranes to remove a monument in Chicago's Little Italy and a massive bronze statue in Grant Park, which were first erected at the city's first and second World's Fairs.

www.dailymail.co.uk

*************I

I have posted that I understand the anger towards confederate monuments and statues. My view was these people rebelled against the nation so why honor them. The purpose of this thread is not to reargue this point. My only concern is that they should not just be pulled down but go through the legal process before they are removed.

Columbus on the hand is of a different kind. Columbus statues were erected not as a point of “white supremacy” but as a point of pride by recently arrived Italian immigrants who were facing hardships as they assimilated into the American melting pot. If anything these statues were a finger in the eye to those who looked down on them.

Columbus was flawed. There is no doubt about that. However, the statues need to be looked at the historical context in which they were erected.

mayor Lightfoot says this was a temporary measure. We shall see.

Why is there a bridge and museum dedicated to Woodrow Wilson, who not only showed "Birth of a Nation" in the white house, but segregated bathrooms and drinking fountains while kicking blacks out of government? If you must remove confederate statues, then remove one of the most racist presidents of the 20th century...

 

[Polishprince]

The Democrats are kicking the Italian people in the teeth with their attacks on Columbus, true.

But since it has been documented that Columbus is Polish, the libs are also attack the Polish people.

Christopher Columbus was the son of a Polish king, historian says - Medievalists.net

Christopher Columbus was a royal prince, son of a Portuguese noble lady and exiled Polish King Władysław III, according to Columbus’ new biography,…

www.medievalists.net

 

[martybegan]

Italian Americans have reacted with anger after two statues of Christopher Columbus in Chicago were removed under cover of darkness in the early hours of Friday morning under the orders of Mayor Lori Lightfoot.

Before dawn, city crews used cranes to remove a monument in Chicago's Little Italy and a massive bronze statue in Grant Park, which were first erected at the city's first and second World's Fairs in 1893 and 1933, respectively.

Italian American community leaders say they were taken aback by Lightfoot's abrupt order to remove the statues, which Lightfoot calls a 'temporary' measure until passions cool. The Grant Park statue was at the center of violent scenes last week, when 49 police officers were injured by a mob hurling rocks and fireworks while attempting to tear the statue down.

Italian Americans slam Chicago's mayor for removing Columbus statues

Before dawn, city crews used cranes to remove a monument in Chicago's Little Italy and a massive bronze statue in Grant Park, which were first erected at the city's first and second World's Fairs.

www.dailymail.co.uk

*************I

I have posted that I understand the anger towards confederate monuments and statues. My view was these people rebelled against the nation so why honor them. The purpose of this thread is not to reargue this point. My only concern is that they should not just be pulled down but go through the legal process before they are removed.

Columbus on the hand is of a different kind. Columbus statues were erected not as a point of “white supremacy” but as a point of pride by recently arrived Italian immigrants who were facing hardships as they assimilated into the American melting pot. If anything these statues were a finger in the eye to those who looked down on them.

Columbus was flawed. There is no doubt about that. However, the statues need to be looked at the historical context in which they were erected.

Mayor Lightfoot says this was a temporary measure. We shall see.

1. SJW let the mob take down statues they don't like
2. The mob starts taking down Statues SJW don't have an issue with
3. SJW wonders what happened and tries to backtrack.

Those Confederate statues were part of the healing process the country was going through, most went up as the men who fought in the war died. That they were somehow all part of some Jim Crow advertising is comical, because the people doing Jim Crow didn't need symbols, they had the power and the law on their side.

The only clear cut white supremacy monument was the one in New Orleans that was about a riot that got rid of a pro-freeman government. I can see that one going, but ones about confederate war dead, veterans, and the Generals who lost to me are part of our history.

 

[JLW]

The Democrats are kicking the Italian people in the teeth with their attacks on Columbus, true.

But since it has been documented that Columbus is Polish, the libs are also attack the Polish people.

Christopher Columbus was the son of a Polish king, historian says - Medievalists.net

Christopher Columbus was a royal prince, son of a Portuguese noble lady and exiled Polish King Władysław III, according to Columbus’ new biography,…

www.medievalists.net

That is a first I heard of that. I was in Genoa not too long ago and they would take issue with that theory.

 

[Sunni Man]

People make the mistake of looking at Columbus through the the lens of todays morality. He was no different than the other people of his time.
In reality, Columbus was should be honored for his bravery of crossing the Atlantic ocean and the exploration of the new world.
To vilify him is absurd. As one historian said, "Columbus was an agent of the inevitable". if he hadn't made the voyage, another explorer would have. ...

 

[Polishprince]

People make the mistake of looking at Columbus through the the lens of todays morality. He was no different than the other people of his time.
In reality, Columbus was should be honored for his bravery of crossing the Atlantic ocean and the exploration of the new world.
To vilify him is absurd. As one historian said, "Columbus was an agent of the inevitable". if he hadn't made the voyage, another explorer would have. ...

Columbus went against the established science of his day.

It was the scientific consensus that the earth was flat, and the liberals of his time condemned his thought , suggested that Columbus and his 3 ships would fall off the edge of the earth and into oblivion.

Very similar to the Climate Deniers of our time.

 

[PoliticalChic]

People make the mistake of looking at Columbus through the the lens of todays morality. He was no different than the other people of his time.
In reality, Columbus was should be honored for his bravery of crossing the Atlantic ocean and the exploration of the new world.
To vilify him is absurd. As one historian said, "Columbus was an agent of the inevitable". if he hadn't made the voyage, another explorer would have. ...

I have that very same view of judging individuals by their time.

It comes from the Old Testament.

This, from Dennis Prager:
“PEOPLE ARE TO BE JUDGED BY THE STANDARDS OF THEIR TIME, NOT OF OURS

Genesis 6.9 Noah was a righteous man; he was blameless in his age; Noah walked with God.

The phrase “in his age” (literally, “in his generations”) raises one of the most interesting questions in religious and moral thought: Why was that phrase included? The verse could simply have stated, “Noah was a righteous man.” Why did it add “in his age”?



… this phrase is intended to suggest that Noah was good only in comparison to his depraved contemporaries; had he lived in an essentially decent society, he would have been regarded as nothing special. …. Noah was not particularly outstanding. As an example, unlike Abraham, who argued strenuously with God not to destroy Sodom (Genesis 18:16-33), when God told Noah of His intention to destroy the world, Noah did not argue with God but concerned himself solely with building an ark to save himself and his family.


There is a great temptation to judge people who lived before us by the moral standards of our time. This is wrong. By doing this, we end up concluding virtually no one who lived before us was a good person, an obviously absurd proposition.

 

[DGS49]

It is childish and anti-intellectual to view historical figures through the tinted glasses of today's "social justice" mentality. People are a product of their times, and their actions, views, and accomplishments MUST be taken in context. Columbus was one of the most influential persons in human history, regardless of the fact that his initial mission was a geographical farce. Had he not had the idea and the pluck to carry it through, it could have been another hundred years or more before the Western World discovered what and who lay on the American land mass.

And regardless of who the first European was, the way that it played out was inevitable. The European diseases would decimate many indigenous populations, and the European advantages in technology (gunpowder, the wheel, domesticated animals, iron) ensured that the natives would go down to inevitable defeat, one way or another in time. For those disciples of Howard Zinn who weep at the taking of land by conquest, one should only point out that the native occupiers of that land ALSO took it by conquest from previous occupiers; "we" just had better weapons, and the ability to make our occupation permanent.

In sum, the people taking down statues of Columbus are idiots. They should be prosecuted for their civil crimes and forced to take a course in American History - and to PAY ATTENTION this time!

 

[rightwinger]

Columbus was flawed. There is no doubt about that. However, the statues need to be looked at the historical context in which they were erected.

Columbus was flawed, but no worse than anyone else of the 15th century. White Christians were Gods chosen people. Those of Africa or the New World were savages to be tamed.

In today’s society, that is offensive. But in the context of his time, Columbus did what was expected of him

Columbus is honored for finding a new world and leading to the colonizing of the Western Hemisphere. It was like landing on the moon. You can’t hold Columbus responsible for the cultural mentality of his era.

 

[martybegan]

It is childish and anti-intellectual to view historical figures through the tinted glasses of today's "social justice" mentality. People are a product of their times, and their actions, views, and accomplishments MUST be taken in context. Columbus was one of the most influential persons in human history, regardless of the fact that his initial mission was a geographical farce. Had he not had the idea and the pluck to carry it through, it could have been another hundred years or more before the Western World discovered what and who lay on the American land mass.

And regardless of who the first European was, the way that it played out was inevitable. The European diseases would decimate many indigenous populations, and the European advantages in technology (gunpowder, the wheel, domesticated animals, iron) ensured that the natives would go down to inevitable defeat, one way or another in time. For those disciples of Howard Zinn who weep at the taking of land by conquest, one should only point out that the native occupiers of that land ALSO took it by conquest from previous occupiers; "we" just had better weapons, and the ability to make our occupation permanent.

In sum, the people taking down statues of Columbus are idiots. They should be prosecuted for their civil crimes and forced to take a course in American History - and to PAY ATTENTION this time!

One would wonder how colonization would have played out if the Chinese were expansionists instead of xenophobes. Their tech level around that time was similar to Europeans, and their governmental complexity was actually superior.

 

[theHawk]

Here’s an idea: let the voters decide if they want to remove statues, instead of letting a few loud, vocal, and violent decide for everyone.

 

[JLW]

It is childish and anti-intellectual to view historical figures through the tinted glasses of today's "social justice" mentality. People are a product of their times, and their actions, views, and accomplishments MUST be taken in context. Columbus was one of the most influential persons in human history, regardless of the fact that his initial mission was a geographical farce. Had he not had the idea and the pluck to carry it through, it could have been another hundred years or more before the Western World discovered what and who lay on the American land mass.

And regardless of who the first European was, the way that it played out was inevitable. The European diseases would decimate many indigenous populations, and the European advantages in technology (gunpowder, the wheel, domesticated animals, iron) ensured that the natives would go down to inevitable defeat, one way or another in time. For those disciples of Howard Zinn who weep at the taking of land by conquest, one should only point out that the native occupiers of that land ALSO took it by conquest from previous occupiers; "we" just had better weapons, and the ability to make our occupation permanent.

In sum, the people taking down statues of Columbus are idiots. They should be prosecuted for their civil crimes and forced to take a course in American History - and to PAY ATTENTION this time!

One would wonder how colonization would have played out if the Chinese were expansionists instead of xenophobes. Their tech level around that time was similar to Europeans, and their governmental complexity was actually superior.

I often thought the same. If the Mongol Empire is any indication, it would not have been much different.

 

[rightwinger]

Columbus went against the established science of his day.

It was the scientific consensus that the earth was flat, and the liberals of his time condemned his thought , suggested that Columbus and his 3 ships would fall off the edge of the earth and into oblivion.

Actually, most scientists of the time agreed the earth was round. Only the uneducated or devoutly religious believed it was flat.

The question was not whether the earth was round, but how far around was it? Columbus believed the earth was around 20,000 miles in circumference. That would have made it a short distance to India if you travelled west.
Instead, the earth is 24,000 miles around and that extra 4,000 miles contained the new world.

 

[JLW]

Columbus was flawed. There is no doubt about that. However, the statues need to be looked at the historical context in which they were erected.

Columbus was flawed, but no worse than anyone else of the 15th century. White Christians were Gods chosen people. Those of Africa or the New World were savages to be tamed.

In today’s society, that is offensive. But in the context of his time, Columbus did what was expected of him

Columbus is honored for finding a new world and leading to the colonizing of the Western Hemisphere. It was like landing on the moon. You can’t hold Columbus responsible for the cultural mentality of his era.

All these explorers and people from the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries were all products of their times. You Could not find a single famous individual from that time and say they complied with 21st century values...whatever the those are.

 

[Moonglow]

Italian Americans have reacted with anger after two statues of Christopher Columbus in Chicago were removed under cover of darkness in the early hours of Friday morning under the orders of Mayor Lori Lightfoot.

Before dawn, city crews used cranes to remove a monument in Chicago's Little Italy and a massive bronze statue in Grant Park, which were first erected at the city's first and second World's Fairs in 1893 and 1933, respectively.

Italian American community leaders say they were taken aback by Lightfoot's abrupt order to remove the statues, which Lightfoot calls a 'temporary' measure until passions cool. The Grant Park statue was at the center of violent scenes last week, when 49 police officers were injured by a mob hurling rocks and fireworks while attempting to tear the statue down.

Italian Americans slam Chicago's mayor for removing Columbus statues

Before dawn, city crews used cranes to remove a monument in Chicago's Little Italy and a massive bronze statue in Grant Park, which were first erected at the city's first and second World's Fairs.

www.dailymail.co.uk

*************I

I have posted that I understand the anger towards confederate monuments and statues. My view was these people rebelled against the nation so why honor them. The purpose of this thread is not to reargue this point. My only concern is that they should not just be pulled down but go through the legal process before they are removed.

Columbus on the hand is of a different kind. Columbus statues were erected not as a point of “white supremacy” but as a point of pride by recently arrived Italian immigrants who were facing hardships as they assimilated into the American melting pot. If anything these statues were a finger in the eye to those who looked down on them.

Columbus was flawed. There is no doubt about that. However, the statues need to be looked at the historical context in which they were erected.

mayor Lightfoot says this was a temporary measure. We shall see.

Why is there a bridge and museum dedicated to Woodrow Wilson, who not only showed "Birth of a Nation" in the white house, but segregated bathrooms and drinking fountains while kicking blacks out of government? If you must remove confederate statues, then remove one of the most racist presidents of the 20th century...

Movies shown at the White House a crime!

 

[Sunni Man]

A little known fact is the captains of Columbus's other two ships on the voyage were muslims. ...

"Martin Alonso Pinzon the captain of the Pinta and his brother Vicente Yanex Pinzon the captain of the Nina helped organize Columbus’ voyages which introduced Europeans to the New World. The Pinzon brothers were in fact Muslims related to Abuzayan Muhammad III, a Moroccan Sultan."

Why We Must Learn America's Islamic History

The presence of Muslims in what would become the United States of America dates back to the earliest arrivals of Europeans in the Americas.

www.huffpost.com

 

[martybegan]

It is childish and anti-intellectual to view historical figures through the tinted glasses of today's "social justice" mentality. People are a product of their times, and their actions, views, and accomplishments MUST be taken in context. Columbus was one of the most influential persons in human history, regardless of the fact that his initial mission was a geographical farce. Had he not had the idea and the pluck to carry it through, it could have been another hundred years or more before the Western World discovered what and who lay on the American land mass.

And regardless of who the first European was, the way that it played out was inevitable. The European diseases would decimate many indigenous populations, and the European advantages in technology (gunpowder, the wheel, domesticated animals, iron) ensured that the natives would go down to inevitable defeat, one way or another in time. For those disciples of Howard Zinn who weep at the taking of land by conquest, one should only point out that the native occupiers of that land ALSO took it by conquest from previous occupiers; "we" just had better weapons, and the ability to make our occupation permanent.

In sum, the people taking down statues of Columbus are idiots. They should be prosecuted for their civil crimes and forced to take a course in American History - and to PAY ATTENTION this time!

One would wonder how colonization would have played out if the Chinese were expansionists instead of xenophobes. Their tech level around that time was similar to Europeans, and their governmental complexity was actually superior.

I often thought the same. If the Mongol Empire is any indication, it would not have been much different.

The Mongols of the earlier periods were better at conquering than ruling. They mostly absorbed and got absorbed by the Chinese to be a part of the later Dynasties.

 

[martybegan]

Italian Americans have reacted with anger after two statues of Christopher Columbus in Chicago were removed under cover of darkness in the early hours of Friday morning under the orders of Mayor Lori Lightfoot.

Before dawn, city crews used cranes to remove a monument in Chicago's Little Italy and a massive bronze statue in Grant Park, which were first erected at the city's first and second World's Fairs in 1893 and 1933, respectively.

Italian American community leaders say they were taken aback by Lightfoot's abrupt order to remove the statues, which Lightfoot calls a 'temporary' measure until passions cool. The Grant Park statue was at the center of violent scenes last week, when 49 police officers were injured by a mob hurling rocks and fireworks while attempting to tear the statue down.

Italian Americans slam Chicago's mayor for removing Columbus statues

Before dawn, city crews used cranes to remove a monument in Chicago's Little Italy and a massive bronze statue in Grant Park, which were first erected at the city's first and second World's Fairs.

www.dailymail.co.uk

*************I

I have posted that I understand the anger towards confederate monuments and statues. My view was these people rebelled against the nation so why honor them. The purpose of this thread is not to reargue this point. My only concern is that they should not just be pulled down but go through the legal process before they are removed.

Columbus on the hand is of a different kind. Columbus statues were erected not as a point of “white supremacy” but as a point of pride by recently arrived Italian immigrants who were facing hardships as they assimilated into the American melting pot. If anything these statues were a finger in the eye to those who looked down on them.

Columbus was flawed. There is no doubt about that. However, the statues need to be looked at the historical context in which they were erected.

mayor Lightfoot says this was a temporary measure. We shall see.

Why is there a bridge and museum dedicated to Woodrow Wilson, who not only showed "Birth of a Nation" in the white house, but segregated bathrooms and drinking fountains while kicking blacks out of government? If you must remove confederate statues, then remove one of the most racist presidents of the 20th century...

Movies shown at the White House a crime!

Try showing the old Birth of a Nation in a Movie Theater today and see what happens.

 

[rightwinger]

Here’s an idea: let the voters decide if they want to remove statues, instead of letting a few loud, vocal, and violent decide for everyone.

That is what is happening. Cities in the south used to prohibit black people from voting and were not concerned with the black residents when they erected monuments to the Confederacy.

Now, many of these major cities are run by blacks and they question why their cities prominently display theses monuments. It is the white legislatures in their states that pass laws to stop them.