http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/10/08/happy-columbus-day-or-not Comments On: Happy Columbus Day! Or not. by Goldy en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Tue, 21 May 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Tue, 21 May 2013 17:00:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss
the motivation and effects of the Catholic colonizers differed markedly from that of the Protestant nations.

the settlement of the United States sprang from a great yearning and seeking for liberty; religious and economic- the North American tribes just were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

the experience of Latin America was very different, tragically for them.
Posted by American Exceptionalism]]> Tue, 09 Oct 2012 06:51:48 -0700 The Stranger I don't feel any particular shame about my heritage either. Nevertheless, I do realize that the domination of western culture was due more to the luck of the draw than anything else (the cradle of civilization didn't produce superior genes/intellect/ability... it simply provided superior resources). The renaissance et al. that you mention occurred in the 15th century and later. Sure, it was a long time ago, still, it took place in countries that were already dominant. To say those were the seeds of prosperity seems... inappropriate? Likewise, saying that civilization stopped in Africa and the Mideast seems inappropriate. Some of the world's greatest art, architecture, mathemathics, and philosophy arose from countries in those areas. Perhaps civilization would have prospered more there if they hadn't been constantly invaded, pillaged, and overthrown?

I don't know, I just think it's much more than simple "western values" that have made the U.S., Europe, and their associated colonies the powerhouses they are today.
Posted by Urgutha Forka]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 19:29:30 -0700 The Stranger
I read Diamond a couple of years ago. As I recall, he talked a great deal about the absence of "beasts of burden" (cows and horses) in the Americas. Certainly that was the case with the Inca, who didn't invent the wheel because they didn't have animals that could pull a cart or a plow, or even be ridden. All they had were llamas -- too small, too ornery.

Would it have been possible to domesticate the bison? Diamond doesn't think so, but maybe he is wrong. I believe it's been attempted, without success. Apparently, there's an uncrossable genetic barrier between the European and Asian genera/species of bovines and the North American ones, a barrier between those which can be domesticated and those that can't.

Posted by N in Seattle]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 17:53:29 -0700 The Stranger
Well, next time you get the clap, go get an African witch doctor or Chinese herbalist to cure you. Clearly, science, freedom and penicillin are wasted on you.
Posted by Christopher Columbus]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 17:46:44 -0700 The Stranger
*There were many of CC's contemporaries who were quite shocked of his...

* ...than those of their contemporaries.
Posted by Some Old Nobodaddy Logged In]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 17:46:31 -0700 The Stranger
Um, no. He wasn't. If you want to argue that he was *no better* than the average schmuck, I'm with ya there. But to say he was "pretty enlightened" by 15th C. standards is patently absurd. There were many people who were quite shocked at CC's greed & rapacity.

Of course moral standards shift throughout history. This discussion is on whether CC deserves a holiday or not. We tend to honor people whose moral outlook was much higher than those of his fellow humans. People like MLK, Washington. This isn't about setting some absolute standard & judging historical people against it.

Your arrogant vulgarity is duly noted, although it says a lot more about your own small mindedness than anything else.
Posted by Some Old Nobodaddy Logged In]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 17:41:31 -0700 The Stranger
Thanks for proving you're still just as much of a dick today as you were 500 years ago...
Posted by COMTE]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 17:04:05 -0700 The Stranger Posted by Christopher Columbus]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 15:23:57 -0700 The Stranger Yes, western civilization has produced the most prosperous nations on the planet, but how did you come up with "regulated, but relatively free market capitalism" as the cause?

Many of those "westernized" nations were essentially monarchies (or plutarchies or military dictatorships) and didn't truly become free market, capitalist societies until around WWI, long after those countries had already established their dominant place in the world.
Posted by Urgutha Forka]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 15:06:09 -0700 The Stranger Posted by Christopher Columbus]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 14:44:07 -0700 The Stranger
Imminent collapse? How cute. Say hi to Alex Jones.
Posted by Christopher Columbus]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 14:20:55 -0700 The Stranger Posted by Weekilter]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 14:19:18 -0700 The Stranger
Yeah, like it's total imminent collapse. Yep, minor bumps in the road. Or "headwinds."


Posted by dirac]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 14:08:29 -0700 The Stranger
But yes European values like socialism do add to life expectancy, so you're all in favor of that correct?
Posted by Merchant Seaman]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 14:00:57 -0700 The Stranger
Anybody who's skippered a boat to go anywhere can tell you that it takes a lot of bravery, knowledge, and skill to navigate someplace new. No charts, no radios, no GPS, and their boats could barely sail to weather.
Posted by ScruffyBallardMan]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 14:00:08 -0700 The Stranger
Where did I mention the US? It didn't exist in 1492. Nice red herring though.

@29 Besides, I believe you should be comparing life expectancy in the US with people living in the jungles of the Congo, Amazon and Papua New Guinea, not other nations that have followed western patterns of development and achieved amazing levels of wealth, freedom and prosperity, never seen in human history. You're statistical talking differences of a few years, I'm talking decades. I'm talking all of Western civilization. and those nations, like Japan and South Korea, that have followed our model of regulated, but relatively free market capitalism.

Thanks for playing, you just confirmed my argument, that western civilization has delivered the most prosperous nations on the planet (excluding that basket case ruled by dictators, Cuba, where you get to live in poverty to 75 or flee).
Posted by Christopher Columbus]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:53:45 -0700 The Stranger
Might have to leave a few blankets to clear out the undesirables first, mind you.
Posted by Will in Seattle]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:41:17 -0700 The Stranger
Posted by Merchant Seaman]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:16:43 -0700 The Stranger No argument there. I'm also glad to be living at the level of civilization we have today.

I am saying, though, that it's not a matter of Europeans being "superior" and Native Americans being "inferior." Europeans simply had the fortune to stumble upon a better basket of goods (e.g., food, animals, climate, etc.) to draw from to help them conquer the world.

But since you're referencing Diamond, I'm guessing none of this is new information to you. Also, I'm fairly certain Diamond DID conclude that Native Americans would have arrived at the same levels of technology and civilization, if given roughly the same amount of time, as Europeans did if they had been left alone to do so.
Posted by Urgutha Forka]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:11:57 -0700 The Stranger
Indigenous tribes in the America's did engage in these practices just as you say; as has essentially EVERY tribal grouping since the beginning of tribalism. We're still doing it today (and by "we" I also mean "us"). So, we're all pretty much even on that score.

But, mid-Second Millennium Europeans like Columbus and Cortez didn't attempt to exterminate the natives here out of any sense of imminent threat to their culture or social group; why, the very idea itself would have been ludicrous to them.

No, they did it for a much more civilized purpose: they did it for the money.

Basically, Europeans came over, saw a large population of potential new slave laborers, who in addition possessed a few shiny trinkets, decided the place was awash not just with human labor, but also with gold and silver, and systematically set out to take all of it for themselves.

Furthermore, Columbus wasn't beneath cheating his own people if he thought it would keep a little more coin in his pocket. The story of his reneging on a promise to pay a lifetime pension to the first sailor who sighted land is just one well-documented example, as is his treatment of his fellow Spanish immigrants during his tenure as Governor of Santo Domingo.

The point being: Columbus was a greedy, vain, conniving asshole long before he set foot in the Bahamas...
Posted by COMTE]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 12:55:37 -0700 The Stranger
I'm still for making this Joe Hill Day.

Posted by Merchant Seaman]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 12:45:29 -0700 The Stranger Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 12:44:52 -0700 The Stranger
Or not. Jared Diamond never made that conclusion.

Personally I'm proud of Western civilization and all the wealth and longevity it has given us. Some hiccups along the way? Sure, but mistakes are common to all civilizations, success to but a few.

A life expectancy of 30, scavenging for food, livinv in tents/huts/caves and living in constant fear of death isn't, quite frankly, my cup of tea.
Posted by Christopher Columbus]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 12:43:29 -0700 The Stranger Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 12:41:17 -0700 The Stranger Posted by Goldy]]> Mon, 08 Oct 2012 12:30:46 -0700 The Stranger