BS: Columbus Day Fiasco

Subject: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 06 Oct 00 - 11:14 PM

Tomorrow is Columbus Day,and a large parade is scheduled in Denver.Denver's North End was once populated by a large Italian community.In the late 1800s,Italian immigrants were at the bottom of the social ladder,but they clung to one icon as a measure of Italian importance to America...Christopher Columbus,the famous explorer responsible for discovery of the continent.The Columbus Day Parade became the focus of Italian Pride in Denver,just as it was in many other cities across the country.The tradition continued until the early 1990s,when confrontation and controversy generated by AIM(The American Indian Movement) and other Native American groups resulted in the termination of the parade.

This year,a group of Italian-Americans obtained a permit to hold the parade.Immediately,negotiations were held with AIM to avoid protests and confrontation.The meetings initially seemed to result in the retreat of the Italian-American sponsors,who agreed to rename it the Italian Pride Parade.And then,days ago, the Italian Americans withdrew from the compromise,saying that their agreement had been co-erced by AIM and the City of Denver.Now the rhetoric has escalated,with neither side backing down.A heavy police presence will be in evidence at the parade tomorrow,but the stage seems set for a powder-keg situation at Denver's Columbus Day Parade.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Haruo
Date: 06 Oct 00 - 11:29 PM

How did tomorrow get to be Columbus Day? (It's still Friday in Denver as I write this.) I thought CC discovered this place on the second Monday in October, anno Domini 1492. (Actually, it was October 12, but that was Old Style, as not even the papists had started messing with the calendar yet at that point.) The calendar my employer supplied me shows Monday as "Columbus Day (observed)", "Thanksgiving Day (Canada)", and "Yom Kippur" (the latter ending, of course, at sundown).

I have no idea what to suggest to AIM and the parade organizers. I would like to see everybody get a little less touchy and a little more willing to overlook those features of other ethnicities that their ethnic sensitivity makes offensive. But then I don't really belong to any ethnic group...

Liland

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 06 Oct 00 - 11:37 PM

Hey, LeeJ, let's not call it a fiasco just yet, eh? And, I am curious, too, like Liland, how did the 7th get to be Columbus Day? And, I wish they would get over the erroneous claim that Columbus "discovered" the "new world."

Anyway, here is the latest news I could find on it. It's a couple of hours old. I hope it still holds true:

Denver Meets On Columbus Day Parade
By P. Solomon Banda
Associated Press Writer
Friday, Oct. 6, 2000; 9:00 p.m. EDT

DENVER –– Italian-Americans and American Indian and Hispanic activists met to try to ensure a peaceful Columbus Day parade – the city's first in nearly a decade – as police made contingency plans for possible violence.

Denver clergy brought the sides together in a series of meetings Thursday and Friday but won only vague pledges of nonviolence.

Members of the American Indian Movement were still vowing civil disobedience at Saturday's parade. Italian sponsors of the parade were going forward.

"We're having a parade and they are going to have a protest," said Joe Vendegnia, founder of the Denver chapter of the Sons of Italy/New Generation. "And it's going to be peaceful."

The city hasn't held the parade since 1991 because of concerns that marchers would clash with groups who believe Christopher Columbus was a killer and slave trader.

Russell Means of AIM did not rule out the possibility of protesters blocking the parade route.

"I learned from an elder that you cannot hate, you can only pity, and I pity those who think a loser like Columbus should be celebrated," Means said.

The groups did agree to meet next week to avoid similar controversy next year.

"It's hard to undo betrayal in a couple of days," said Leroy Lemos, executive director of the Hispanic activist group Poder Project. "We feel the honor of our signature has been betrayed."

Lemos was referring to a federally mediated pact, by which Denver's Italian community had agreed to call Saturday's celebration an Italian Pride parade and make no mention of Columbus. But that pact collapsed.

Some communities have withdrawn fire trucks from the parade, fearing damage and injuries. Mayor Wellington Webb has pleaded for calm, and the governor pledged state help to maintain the peace.

Denver's Columbus parades have been tumultuous. In 1989, Means and three others were arrested after throwing fake blood on a Columbus statue. The next year, protesters shouted anti-Columbus slogans as the parade went by.

The 1992 parade was canceled moments before it was to start because of concerns about violence.

Vendegnia said city officials discouraged his group from seeking parade permits after that, but the organization decided to apply this year after new people took over top city jobs.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 06 Oct 00 - 11:39 PM

If the friggin' schools would teach REAL history, we wouldn't have this kind of crap to deal with.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Peter Kasin
Date: 06 Oct 00 - 11:47 PM

At least it's not a Barry Manilow day parade.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Haruo
Date: 06 Oct 00 - 11:53 PM

REAL history? ;-)

Umm
Liland

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 12:01 AM

Why do the Hispanics have a problem with Colombus? If it wasn't for him they wouldn't be here....

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Haruo
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 12:16 AM

Carlin: Why do the Hispanics have a problem with Colombus? If it wasn't for him they wouldn't be here....

A lot of them might still be here, they just might not be Hispanics. In one of Vine Deloria's books (I think it was) I read an account of a Hispanic politician in New Mexico saying (in an effort to be "inclusive") "We have a Spanish father and an Indian mother" to which a Native American retorted, "Yeah, and in a situation like that you know who gets screwed" or words to that effect.

At first I thought maybe they had a problem with Italian Pride Day not because it was about Columbus, but because it excluded them (after all, he was sailing for Spain, not Italy — indeed in that era there was no Italy as a political unit.

Still hoping to find out what real history is. History that eats no quiche?

Liland
Real Live Esperantist

Subject: LYR ADD: 1492 by Nancy Schimmel
From: katlaughing
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 12:33 AM

1492
A song
by Nancy Schimmel (Sister's Choice)

In fourteen hundred and ninety two
Columbus sailed the ocean blue.
It was a courageous thing to do,
But someone was already here.

Chorus:

The Innuit and Cherokee,
the Aztec and Menominee,
Onondaga and the Cree (clap, clap)
Columbus sailed across the sea,
But someone was already here.

Columbus knew the world was round,
So he looked for the East
while westward bound,
But he didn't find
what he thought he found,
And someone was already here.
Chorus

It isn't like it was empty space,
Caribs met him face to face.
Could anyone discover the place,
When someone was already here?
Chorus

So tell me who discovered what?
He thought he was in a different spot.
Columbus was lost,
the Caribs were not.
They were already here/
Chorus

Recorded by Sally Rogers on the CD, Rainbow Sign,(Rounder, 1992).

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 01:30 AM

If they taught REAL history, Columbus would be a footnote. He came along 500 years AFTER the Vikings, and 40,000 years after the native Americans. The thing is,,Vikings dont vote,in large numbers, nor do native Americans

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Haruo
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 01:40 AM

Ah, that kind of real history... Thanks, kendall

Liland

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 02:03 AM

A valid argument might be made that Columbus,in a historic sense,did discover America. The North American Indians attached no importance to a continuous factual history,and kept none outside of a collection of tribal myths and memories. Lief Ericsson likely did establish a colony at "vinland",but it had little or no impact on written history,nor did it influence it.Columbus' discovery,whether you like it or not,changed history and opened the flood gates of European exploration,colonization,and exploitation.In that sense he can safely be said to have discovered America.

It was the age of exploration,and it is certain that if Columbus had failed,someone else would have soon fetched up on the shores of America.But it was him.And his life deserves examination,for his courage,his determination,his ambition,his ruthlessness,his incompetence,and all the other factors that make him a complex and enigmatic figure.I don't think he is a particularly admirable figure,but I sometimes believe he receives the lion's share of abuse from Native Americans because he did open the door to what they perceive as an invasion and occupation.

LEJ (shields up)

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 02:23 AM

kendall, here in MN, we've got a statue of Leif Eriksson next to the State Capitol... >;)

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 07:08 AM

A lot of them might still be here, they just might not be Hispanics.

Well it seems to me that if somehow one could go back and see to it that your great grandfather didn't show up.....you ain't gonna be you.....there will certainly be some required dna that makes you you missing, eh?

As to their being of partial indian stock....if the conquitadores hadn't showed up, how do they know their ancestors wouldn't have gotten themselves eaten by the Aztecs or the Incas? Or the Carib for that matter?

I think Clombus catches a lot of flak for things he had no control over. It wasn't his fault that the indians were still living in the stone age in 1492. It wasn't his fault that they had no resistance to European diseases. It wasn't Colombus that handed out royal commissions to people like Cortez.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: paddymac
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 07:47 AM

Another fine example of the peversity, or perhaps stupidity, of ethno-centrism. One group wants to celebrate an aspect of their ethnic heritage and another wants to do the same by preventing the first group from also doing it. There's a fascinating circularity to the logic.

A better approach might be for each faction to have their own parade, back to back along the same route, and draw straws to determine the order. Or perhaps the city could have a parade and give every body the opportunity to enter a float or marching unit, etc. Then after the parade, sell tickets to a giant "mud-wrasslin" pit in which the belligerants could make fools of themselves until the spectators died from laughing too much.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Midchuck
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 08:11 AM

I am a native American. I was born here. My ancestry is mostly British Isles, maybe 1/64th or 1/128 aboriginal.

What is this "native American" thing anyway? "Indian" makes no sense, but at least it's what we're used to. "Native American" neither makes sense or is what we're used to.

Peter.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Wavestar
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 09:02 AM

Actually, Midchuck, I'm quite used to native American, and I use it frequently. Just think of it as a term - I realise it's also nonsensical, but can you think of a better thing to call them? Aborigine is accurate, but I doubt it will catch on...

Technically, I'm also a "native" American - I was born here, and so were five or six generations of my ancestors. But I still know what they mean, and I'll say "Native American" in reference to those people also known as Indians, American Indians, American Aboriginals, and probably sadly still, "Those damn Reds." They all have tribal names, but there is such a broad selection...

-J

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: catspaw49
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 09:10 AM

Wonder if we'll ever get to the point that we have the same pride in being human as we do currently in ethnic heritage? The rest of the species on the planet will REALLY be in for it then.................

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 09:18 AM

Columbus did break new ground. He proved that Copernicus was right about the shape of the earth. He was an oustanding explorer and all, however, he also knew that he and his gang were killing the natives with disease and overwork, not to mention outright butchery. Of course his clergymen saved their souls first. The French, however, in North America, had a different approach. They traded with the natives, gave them their religion, and generally treated them like humans. The English, gave them blankets infested with small pox. We never did figure out who gave who syphillis.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: catspaw49
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 09:26 AM

No offense to your post Kendall, but why are we always saying what a nice thing it was to give an abo/tribal/native culture some bogus "religion?" All of these people had some kind of spiritual beliefs which in most cases, for me, made a helluva' lot more sense than the "gift" we gave them. Not to mention sending missionaries to China......talk about egotistical................

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 09:46 AM

The North American Indians attached no importance to a continuous factual history,and kept none outside of a collection of tribal myths and memories.

This is not strictly true, and sounds a bit self-serving.

But even if true, ya mean, 'Just like us White folks'?? - Pick up the books America Revised and Lies My Teacher Told Me some time;you may get a whole new perspective on "tribal myths" and who uses them for what.

Best, Greg

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 09:55 AM

"Native American" is a reference of respect. If someone I know who is NA refers to themselves as "Indian" or "Amerindian" then I feel comfortable doing the same, but otherwise I use NA out of respect. To me, American, in this instance, also refers to those indigenous people who do not necessarily live in the United States, but on the continent of North and South America.

Good point, Spaw. That book I quoted from has a lot about the sometimes heinous manner in which they were "given" the religion of the oppressors who had totally ignored and negated any NA spiritual practises.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Allan C.
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 10:22 AM

"People are people, no matter how small." - Dr. Seuss

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 10:40 AM

I don't know anyone who still says 'native american' (in real life, that is). Usually American Indian, Indian, or a tribe name. That's sort of 80s-90s, 'native american.' 'Indian' isn't insulting in any way. And it's just as stupid a term as 'native american.' So I say go with the name we've been using all this time. At least it's got some history, and doesn't reek of excessive political correctness.

How is 'NA' more respectful, anyways? It's still taking the name of a non-American Indian (Amerigo Vespucci)...

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 10:58 AM

You miss my point spaw. The Frenceh gave the Induans their relegion, the English gave them smallpox. Which would YOU choose? They both sucked, its just a matter of degree.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: catspaw49
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 11:01 AM

I dunno' Kendall........Is smallpox really all that bad?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 11:14 AM

Lepus Rex, whereabouts are you? Out here in the West, we still write and say NA. IMO, it is respectful by designating them as indigneous. I suppose one might be more correct and call them Indigenous Americans. Using NA also makes sure people understand one is not refering to someone from India.

Have you asked any NA friends what they think about it? I see in the book I quoted from above, that they use both terms, NA and Indian, but they usually use Indian when pointing out the stereotypes which children have been taught in textbooks, movies, and television, etc.

NA is a personal preference. One I will continue to use. There is nothing wrong with being ethically conscious and striving to do no harm with our words.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 11:25 AM

Kat, I'm in Minnesota. And sorry if I sounded like I was attacking your use of NA... I didn't mean it like that, just trying to throw my views out there:)

Most NA/Indians/whatever I've met here say American Indian, or more usually their tribe name. When my ex-gf rattles off her ancestry, she says 'Ojibwe,' for instance. Our newspapers dropped NA years ago, too. But now that you mention it, I DID meet a NA guy from out West who liked to use 'Native American...' Maybe it's just a regional thing?

Actually, I do prefer tribal names over 'American Indian.' But I still can't stand 'Native American.' ;)

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 12:04 PM

Thanks for explaining that. I, too, prefer tribal names, but one cannot always be sure without asking and in a general way NA seems to work. It may be regional.

Thanks, again,

katwhosegreatX's3grandmawasfull-bloodfromupyourway

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Ely
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 05:50 PM

I don't really think it's fair to say the indigenous people were living in the stone age in 1492. They didn't look very sophisticated to the Europeans but they had a lot of agricultural and medicinal knowledge that the Europeans a) did not have [I think they were still bleeding to get rid of "bad humours" or something] and b) had to reinvent much later because they had ignored it and destroyed the people who knew it. Not high-profile stuff, but it was certainly not haphazard chance, either.

Isn't the Bible a collection of myths and memories, too? (We've just had it written down longer). And the Greek and Roman material that forms the basis of so much of European literature? We may not believe in Pyramus and Thisbe but we sure love their story (aka "Romeo and Juliet").

I still use "Native American" if I don't know someone's tribal affiliations (I think of it as being at least less inaccurate than "Indian", since they never had anything to do with India).

I'd be willing to call "America" something else, too. It kind of doesn't have its own name, anyway, since the continents are already North and South America. Kind of silly.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 06:03 PM

In 1492 Europeans were being killed out of hand just for being left handed, warty faced or knowing a bit too much about medicine without using leeches.... Native Americans were living in relative security, had reasonably contemporaneous farming techniques and were the ultimate in recyling - used everything but the moo - to paraphrase a quote about pigs for buffalo. At least they never killed anyone for saying Jesus made jokes....

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Susan from California
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 06:24 PM

Ely,

I'm impressed that you know how to spell indigenous :-) it is the term that I prefer to use when speaking, but since I am a horrible speller...I had to go back up to your post *three* times to check the spelling, so when I write, I almost always use NA, since I know how to spell those to words!

I hope things are going well at the parade, there is far to much violence in the world these days.

Sue

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 07:41 PM

Here's the latest:

Denver Parade Goes On Amid Protests
By P. Solomon Banda
Associated Press Writer
Saturday, Oct. 7, 2000; 5:42 p.m. EDT

DENVER –– Police arrested more than 140 American Indian and Hispanic activists protesting Saturday's Columbus parade, the city's first since 1991.

The activists, saying Christopher Columbus was a slave trader who committed genocide against their ancestors, poured a line of red liquid across the route to represent their ancestors' blood.

Police arrested 147 people on misdemeanor charges, including loitering and failure to obey lawful orders, but there was no violence and no one resisted arrest, police spokeswoman Mary Thomas said.

Clashes among protesters and Italian-Americans during the city's 1991 parade had forced the annual parade's cancelation until this year. Italian-Americans and the activists had reached an agreement that there would be no protests if the parade was limited to an Italian pride parade, but several representatives of the Italian community later disavowed the deal.

"It was a total success," said parade organizer George Vendegnia. "We had our parade and they had their protest and nobody got hurt. We got our heritage back after nine years."

Police had cut down a section of a fence that had been erected to block protesters, and permitted demonstrators to take up spots on the street used for the parade. But after a brief demonstration, police moved back in, giving the Indians the choice of leaving or being arrested.

Among the 147 people arrested was American Indian Movement activist Russell Means, who said the protesters would ask for individual jury trials. The charges can bring penalties of up to a year in jail.

"We broke no law today," said fellow AIM activist Glenn Morris.

In 1989, Means and three others were arrested after throwing fake blood on a Columbus statue. The next year, protesters shouted anti-Columbus slogans during the parade.

The 1992 parade was canceled moments before it was to start because of concerns about violence.

Each October, about two dozen Columbus parades take place across the country, though none has had the intense protests of Denver, city manager of public safety Ari Zavaras said. Italian-American groups in New York and in San Francisco have removed references to Columbus and instead march for Italian pride.

The Denver parade organizers and protest leaders have agreed to meet next week to avoid similar controversy next year.

"It will remain a Columbus parade forever, unless they change it on the federal level," Vendegnia said.

Columbus Day is a federal holiday celebrated the second Monday in October.

–––

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 08:48 PM

If I was decended from the original inhabitants of what is now called the United States of America I don't think I'd be so upset about Columbus Day. Columbus never made it up to that end of the continent.

It'd be Thanksgiving Day that I'd be kicking up hell about.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 07 Oct 00 - 11:30 PM

>>>>>I don't really think it's fair to say the indigenous people were living in the stone age in 1492. <<<<<<<

Stone age is a very accurate description. There was some gold and silver smithing going on in Mexico and South America, but most tools (virtually all of them in fact) were made from bone, stone, wood, or antlers.

>>>>>>Native Americans were living in relative security, had reasonably contemporaneous farming techniques and were the ultimate in recyling - used everything but the moo - to paraphrase a quote about pigs for buffalo. At least they never killed anyone for saying Jesus made jokes....<<<<<<<

My my, don't we have a rosy view of the noble savage. They fought wars and killed each other and raped each other, just like every other society in the history of mankind. Your right about them not killing people for Jesus, but they would certainly bend you over an altar and cut your heart out for the sun-god idol to feast upon(at least the Aztecs would anyway).

And it wasn't so much that they were environmentally friendly as they simply did not have the technology to make a major impact.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 08 Oct 00 - 07:53 PM

Nobel savage? Get all of your info from Hollywood, huh?

Ever studied the Iroquois Constitution? Something the founding fathers of the U.S. used as an example to follow when writing the US Constitution.

Ever think that one person's stone age may be another's deliberatly chosen way of life?

Some other suggested reading: Killing the White Man's Indian - Reinventing Native Americans;
Forgotten Founders;
and, one more

It's hard to believe anyone would still buy into the old Euro-centrist teachings about indigenous peoples. I would strongly recommend the book mentioned above, as well as "Lies My Teacher Told Me" if you are at all open to learning about the past from many other perspectives.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: rabbitrunning
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 09:21 AM

Here's my gasoline to throw on the fire -- I recommend that anyone who is interested in _why_ the Columbian contact with the Americas caused such huge changes read "Guns Germs and Steel". He takes World History back to paleontology...

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 09:38 AM

Well, I can see that sarcasm is utterly lost on some people.

I am glad to see that you agree with me that the Europeans bear absolutely no responsibility for the Indians being technologically backwards. After all, stone age livin' was their deliberately chosen lifestyle.....BTW if they were so happy with their existing technology why were they willing to trade 15 beaver pelts for a steel hatchet? Could it perhaps be because they spent their lives hacking at wood (and each other) with stone axes and were thus able to immediately recognize the superiority of steel for this purpose, as opposed to certain modern thinkers (and I use the term loosely) who can't seem to grasp the difference?

What exactly do you know about the Constitutional Convention in Philedelphia? Which one of the Founding Fathers stood up and said, "Look, these native chaps have this outstanding system and we should copy it...."

Have you ever heard of the Achean League, or the Aetolian League, or the Illyrian League? These were all federations of cities in ancient Greece. Each city elected representatives and sent them to a Federal Council. There were Federal executives that were elected to handle the treasury, and the military, and to enforce the Federal laws....the Founders were well aware of all of these states and the systems they used. They were also well aware of the writings of John Locke (who lived in England and probably never spoke to an Indian in his life) who wrote profoundly and eloquently on the need for a seperation of powers in government. Oh, and there was also the Roman Republic that had a bicameral legislature some 2500 years ago (there was the Senate, and the Assembly of the People).

And the really amazing thing is, the Constitution is not directly based on any of this....the Founders imbibed certain principles about how a government should be run, from ancient history and contemporary thinkers (and sure, I will even throw the Iroquois in there if it will make you happy), and then proceeded to compromise their way to a document. Why don't you read the Federalist Papers, the Anti-Federalists, and James Madison's Diary if you want to discover the thought that went into the document? After all, these people were actually there and wrote the damn thing!!! (Let me guess, nothing more than Patriarchal White-Male European propaganda, that seeks to deny women and minorities their properly exalted place in history......)

It is hard to believe that some people will soak up whatever PC nonsense comes along, just because it appeals to their sense of collective guilt, their modern notions of equity, or modern ideas of morality.....

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 10:18 AM

You know those negative aspersions, broad generalisations, and assumptions about other members is just the thing we like to see around here. Looks like you've got them down to a "t".

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Gary T
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 11:04 AM

While "native American" could be correctly applied to anyone born in the U.S. (or,perhaps, in the Americas), my understanding is that the term "Native American" (note the capital N) arose from some government project/study that referred to "Native American Peoples". Such peoples include the various Amerindian tribes, Eskimos, Polynesian Hawaiians, etc.--the pre-Columbian inhabitants of the United States' land. It was not simply a PC substitute for (American) "Indian", though it did eliminate the confusion (with Asian Indian) and possible possible negative connotations of that term. While I have no philosophical objection to the phrase "Native American", I find it rather unsatisfactory for three reasons: it's unwieldy; it's indistinguishable from "native American" in speech; and most people are unaware that in its original application it included Hawaiians, etc. I prefer "Amerind", but it never seemed to really catch on.

One American Indian of my acquaintance indicated that the preferred term would indeed be the individual tribal name. This idea, unfortunately, presents its own problems. Most of us can look at an American Indian and indentify him as such, but we don't have a clue which tribe he may represent. What would you call someone whose heritage includes more than one tribe, and perhaps also some European ancestry? And it's still useful to have a term that refers to all American Indians, not just one tribe. As previous responses indicate, there doesn't seem to be a universally or even widely accepted term to use here.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 12:25 PM

ROFLMAO!!!!!

Ahhh let's see here....you said;

"Get all of your info from Hollywood, huh?"

and....

"It's hard to believe anyone would still buy into the old Euro-centrist teachings about indigenous peoples. "

and then implied a closed mindedness on my part with.....

"if you are at all open to learning about the past from many other perspectives."

Do ya' know the old saw about people who live in glass houses? Don't dish it out if you can't take it!!!!!

Do you honestly believe that the New World was one giant Woodstock fest prior to the Europeans arriving? And please answer my questions....have you ever heard of the Federated Greek states (if not, why not)? If the Indians were so happy with what they had, why were they so eager to trade for Euro-tech? How much have you studied the Constitutional Convention? Have you read the first hand accounts from the thing?

I am prepared to discuss the topic without flaming or innuendo....I am really interested in what you have to say, and I would like to know why you belive what you believe....okie dokie?

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: mousethief
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 12:58 PM

Copernicus did not discover the roundness of the earth. The ancient greeks knew about it and actually calculated the diameter of the globe (pretty close, too!).

Ptolemy, an Egyptian, wrote about the earth being round in his Almagest, which was the manual of astronomy throughout the middle ages. Granted he put the earth in the middle, but he did know the earth was round.

This notion that Columbus proved a new idea about the shape of the earth is hogwash. Perhaps the uneducated felt the earth was round; the educated (granted, a small minority of the population) knew better and always had.

Alex
O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Bert
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 01:27 PM

Just to lighten up the discussion a little, here's a song that I learned some years ago...

The day I well remember when Columbus landed here.
Me and forty Redmen were right there at the pier.
He asked me why my Indians wore feathers in their hair
Why that's to keep their trousers up and this I do declare.

Chorus...
I'm the man who built the Rockies up and placed them where they are
sold whisky to the Indians, from behind my little bar
'twas I who built Niagara Falls and first discovered beer
and that was many years before, Columbus landed here.

He asked me where he had to go to catch that China train.
It was clear the poor old coot had china on the brain.
I said 'no train I know of, leaves from here today,
but you'll find my Chinese laundry men not half a block away.

Chorus.

He noticed among my Indians, some had skins quite fair,
and asked if any white man, had been before somewhere.
I told him 'You must realise, I've been here quite some time,
and since they cannot be yours, they no doubt are mine'

Chorus.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 01:38 PM

The thing with Columbus is that he bought into a version of the world-is-a-globe hypothesis under which the planet was a lot smaller than it actually is. That's why he thought Asia was in sailing distance, and assumed that when he'd got Asia when he'd actually reached America.

What's puzzles me is why it ended up with all this stuff about Indians and so forth, when the initial assumption was that they had reached China. Logically speaking the people living there already should have been called Chinese, which would presumably have meant that the newcomers would have been embattled with the Red Chinese hundreds of years earlier than was actually the case.

It'd make more sense to refer to the people descended from the ones who were there first as just plain Americans, and to call the descendents of the newcomers New Americans. But I suppose it's too late now.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Kim C
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 01:39 PM

Let's see, the people we call Native Americans were not indigenous to North America, if the theory of them migrating across the former land bridge at the Bering Strait is true. Then there were those who came up fromn South America. But really, didn't everyone come from somewhere else in the first place?

(sarcasm alert) While we're at it let's take Andy Jackson off the $20 bill. History has noted that he was indeed a slave trader and an Indian killer.

Here's the deal, see..... anyone can have a parade anywhere they want as long as they get the proper permits. So bad, so sad. We don't like it when the KKK marches in Pulaski, TN, but the First Amendment protects the bad guys too. So the Italians should be able to have a parade, and anyone should be able to protest ---- they just ought to have the sense enough to do it without physical confrontation.

Or maybe I'm just naive.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: mousethief
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 01:41 PM

Ah, if you want a light-hearted song about Columbus, you can hardly do better than this:

Ein Mann, der sich Kolumbus nannt

Ein Mann der sich Kolumbus nannt,
War in der Schiffahrt wohlbekannt.
Es drückten ihn die Sorgen schwer,
Er suchte neues Land im Meer.

Gloria, Viktoria, widewidewitt jucheirassa,
Gloria, Viktoria, widewidewitt bumbum...

Als er den Morgenkaffee trank,
Da rief er fröhlich "Gott sei Dank".
Denn schnell kam mit der ersten Tram
Der span`sche König bei ihm an.

Der König sprach: "Mein lieber Mann,
Du hast schon manche Tat getan.
Eins fehlt noch uns`rer Gloria,
entdecke mir Amerika."

Gesagt, getan, ein Mann ein Wort,
Am selben Tag fuhr er noch fort.
Und eines Morgens schrie er: "Land,
Wie deucht mir alles so bekannt."

Das Volk an Land stand stumm und zag,
Da rief Kolumbus:"Guten Tag!
Ist hier vielleicht Amerika?"
Da riefen die Indiander: "Ja!"

-----

Translation available upon request (but it may take me a while as my college German is a bit rusty...)

Alex
O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: DougR
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 03:01 PM

Wow! The Mudcat family if "feeling it's oats" this fine day.

Carlin, you are a hard-hitter and I like your spunk.

Sometimes when I read threads like these, I think Mudcatters, perhaps, read too much. They certainly don't read the same books, obviously.

I did learn something, however, and kat I don't mean this in a bitey way at all, and that is that the Iroquois nation had a constitution. I had not idea they could even read English I guess it might have been in Iroquoin though. I would think some of our founding fathers would be fluent in that language.

I can't say whether I think Columbus deserves a holiday or not. When I was employed, I never reported to work if we had the day off though.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 03:30 PM

Your choice of "stone age" is what bothered me most, as it denotes "cave man" like mentality, when we know indigenous people in the Americas and elsewhere had sophisticated and some socially advanced societies. Of course, being a part of humankind they also had all of the negative that entails, as well.

My fault for assuming everyone knew I was not negating earlier civilisations' influence on the Constitution etc. There is evidence that Franklin was aware of the Iroquois document (Doug, I use that term loosely, as I do not know if it was written or not; I do have a book with it written in English, side-by-side with our Constitution); recognised its elegance and did draw from it.

As for PC, modern morality, equity, etc it is no mystery to the Mudcat that I am liberal, believe in being ethically conscious, work on human rights, figure the partriarchal age has been in its death throes since the Age of Aquarius began in the 60's, leaving some pretty special men and women in its wake, and, of course, this country was a giant WOODSTOCK before the whitehides got here!! Where do you think the hippies got their ideas??? I mean, like, really, man!

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: GUEST,Lyle
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 03:42 PM

Kendall: You are a little off on a couple things.

First, Columbus didn't prove anything about the shape of the Earth; it was known to be a sphere 2000 years before he was born.

Second, don't blame todays parade on the history that is being taught in the schools - the people involved in the Denver parade have been out of school a long, long time.

We should all recognize that Columbus did discover something; when he landed, he discovered that he was totally lost!

Lyle

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: mousethief
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 03:45 PM

Okay, here's two cartoons. I don't have links to them so you'll have to use your imagination.

Both consist in part of Columbus landing, with native peoples greeting him.

#1: The natives have a stew pot made of an upside-down viking helmet.

#2: The natives say, "We're so glad you came! We can't think of what we should call ourselves!"

Alex
O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Gary T
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 05:03 PM

It occurs to me that the image kat mentioned of "stone age" may suffer from its own misconceptions. In an academic sense, it essentially means having not progressed into metallurgy, meaning stone tools were the state of the art. In a sociological sense, we probably know very little of prehistoric culture, having only artifacts and a few pieces of artwork to go on. There have been "modern" stone age cultures found, mostly in remote islands, and of course they, like the Native American cultures, are more advanced than the popular cartoonish notions of "cavemen" that most of us have been exposed to. I would give Ely and Carlin the benefit of the doubt in using this term--I doubt they meant the American Indians were brutish "caveman" types.

Still, I think kat has a point in mentioning that most U.S. schoolchildren got a very simplistic and generally one-sided introduction to Native Americans, and most U.S. citizens probably haven't learned a whole lot more than what they were taught in school about it. I do question the implication that they chose the stone age life--what else did they have to choose from? They may have chosen to reject or avoid European culture, but I'll bet that if iron age technology were available to them without the Euro-culture, they would have embraced it without hesitation.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 05:33 PM

There are some mysterious things about Columbus. Here's an article that suggests that Christopher Columbus (or Cristóbal Colón, as he called himself) may have been a descendant of Spanish Jews.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 05:44 PM

I made reference which didn't carry through clearly. Thanks GaryT for your kind way of pointing this out.

I did not mean that NA tribes opted to live in a "stone age" way. What I mean and should have said much more clearly, is that what some people, in modern times, might consider to be *stone age*, is what others choose to live. And in this I am referring to a wide range of people, including the survivalist who chooses to live in a treehouse in Alaska (seen on tv last night!), with no running water, electricity etc. to certain tribes in South America who are losing their fight against "modernity" through usurpation of their lands and exposure to the "outside" world which they eschew.

You are right, Gary, there are some different interpretations of "stone age." What I have just described above, IMO, would better be referred to as "primitive."

Anyway, I am sure everyone just ran around with braids, and beads, and flowers in their hair, and a wreath of knickaknick(sp) wafting round their heads....yep, the original stoned age, fer sure!**BG**

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 06:08 PM

Terms like "stone-age" are relics of a grossly oversimplified pseudo-scientific paradigm in which there was a built-in technological sequence through whom all human societies passed - old stone age/new stone age/bronze age/iron age. Really that's just an inversion of the old Roman idea of there being an Age of Gold, followed by an Age of Iron and so forth, going down to a decadent Age of Clay.

Whereas it was a lot more complex than that, and the kind of things that get made out of iron are only one part of what is significant about a culture - even in terms of "cultural artifacts", it's just as significant to know whether a people are skilled at weaving or pottery or making things out of wood. But of course those kind of things don't survive in the ground so long. Nor do poems and songs and stories and music.

The pity is that the Vikings didn't take root, which would have enabled the two cultures to adjust to each other in a more equal and leisurely fashion. Or that the French didn't beat the English in the 18th Century, which might well have had, to some measure, a similar effect.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: sophocleese
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 06:23 PM

Anybody read Farley Mowat's Book The Farfarers? In it he postulates trading between the American peoples and the northwestern British (pictish? I can't remember) people as much as 1500 years ago. The Vikings followed them in order to take over their settlements and trading(sacking) opportunities. An interesting idea that needs a lot more research.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Haruo
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 06:23 PM

Kinni-kinnick is one way of putting it.
Liland

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 06:39 PM

Thanks, Liland, it just didn't look right no matter what way I tried it!

There is an interesting place in Connecticut called the Gungywamp, which I have hiked through with a long-time member of the Gungywamp Society. It is a fascinating place with what some believe to be evidence if just such contact as Sophocleese mentions. If you scroll down on their page you will see more about it.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 06:39 PM

KO dokie Kat...

When I used the term stone age I was speaking strictly about the level of technology....someone mentioned the book 'Guns, Germs, and Steel' which offers a number of reasons why the Indians didn't progress any farther with their technology. I wasn't trying to imply that they were not culturally sophisticated or very clever in making do with what they had.

As far as 'cave men' go, I see no reason to believe that the people that made the paintings at Lascoux (sp?) didn't have a sophisticated culture and society.

Kat said..."As for PC, modern morality, equity, etc it is no mystery to the Mudcat that I am liberal, believe in being ethically conscious, work on human rights"

Well, we should have some interesting discussions. In the interests of full disclosure I should point out that my wife says that politically, I reside somewhere to the right of Atilla the Hun *G*. I don't know about being ethically conscious, but I do try to be consciously ethical.

Oh, and for the people who are wondering why Columbus called the local indigenous personell Indians instead of Chinese.....well he wasn't really shooting for China, he wanted to get to the 'Spice Islands', ie. the East Indies.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 06:47 PM

>>>>>>>Or that the French didn't beat the English in the 18th Century, which might well have had, to some measure, a similar effect. <<<<<<<

Ya' think? Given France's colonial record in Indochina and the West Indies and Northern Africa, I would be surprised if there were any Indians left at all....

You might be right about the Vikings though....it would be an interesting exercise in alternative history.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 07:21 PM

Yeah - but the French seem to have hit it off better in North America with the locals than the English did.

All the colonial powers have been pretty disastrous for the people they landed on, but the English speakers seem to have been the ones with the most genocidal impact, going in for extermination rather than exploitation.

I don't put that down to any inbuilt wickedness, it's how the culture and the economics worked out in a particular historical time.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Margo
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 07:29 PM

Kat, I'm very interested in the evidence that Franklin drew from an indian constitution. I've read a lot of Franklin and about Franklin, and somehow I've missed that. Could you direct me to the book or article that talks about that? I'd really like to look at it... Thanks, Margo

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 12:10 AM

Whoa, Carlin... What do you mean about Attila? I'm one of his direct descendants, and I find your (and your wife's) comments implying that he anything but a fun-loving steppe-hippy to be VERY offensive. >;)

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 12:32 AM

Margo, as soon as I find that book I mentioned which had the two side by side I will send you the info. I've moved books here and there in this house and now find that I will have to pack them all up as we are moving to a different house, SO, hopefully I will find it. I can also ask a couple of other people who might remember the reference. Sorry I don't have it off the top of my head.

Carlin,if you go into the permathread at the top of all threads, entitled Mudcat FAQs, you will find some Classic Threads listed. You may find them of interest. I don't know if the one called "There's nothing wrong with PC-PC& Proud of it" is included, but that is THE discussion in which Rick Fielding suggested ethnically conscious and it got distilled to ethically conscious. It is a term I use a lot, esp, since you Atilla types usurped PC and made it into such a dirty word.**BG** (**BG**=**BIG GRIN**, by the way)

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: BlueJay
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 01:24 AM

Kat, I have to agree with LEF's title to this thread, ie Fiasco. I think it's been a fiasco for years. I'm just glad nobody got hurt. Now I have no Native American or Italian blood, that I know of. But I think the Parade organizers left the protesters with no choice except to protest after they reneged on the mediated agreement to drop the Columbus reference.
From what I've read, though, the parade organizers acted too hastily in that agreement, and had Hell to pay in the Italian community, hence their reversal.

I see both sides. I lived a long time in and near Northwest Denver, which still maintains a strong Italian presence, though not like it used to be. Gaetano's, Valenti's etc, the restaurants are still thriving. I think understand Italian Pride.

I'm not sure Columbus is the best choice to celebrate, however. He did bring unwanted violence and disease to the Carribean. And if you believe the papers, he was considered to be a failure in his own time, as he did not return from his three or four voyages with the ship filled with gold, as hoped. He died in obscurity.

For me, the ultimate irony of it all: I got a nice fat check on Saturday. All atwitter, I drove 60 miles to my bank on Monday, only to discover it was closed for Columbus Day! Expletives deleted, BlueJay

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 08:37 AM

Lepus!!!!

Having a conservative outlook doesn't preclude you from being a fun-loving type that likes to party.....it just means you pay for your own booze and you don't expect anyone else to clean up after you. ;p

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 08:46 AM

Kat!!!!

So, ethically conscious is the politically correct term for political correctness, eh?

You do realize that if we keep adding euphemisms to the language, one day it will reach critical mass and collapse in upon itself. It will become a black hole so powerful, not even satire can escape! *G*

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 10:19 AM

I stand by my statement that Columbus proved the world was round. Of course the ancient Egyptians knew that, but, they wer'nt europeans, so, they didnt count. Secondly, I do blame this foolishness on what is being taught. Too many people stop learning the day they leave school. If I were Italian, I would be too embarassed to march in that silly parade. They have much to be proud of...Columbus is not one of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: mousethief
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 02:11 PM

Columbus' second exposition to the new world saw him arriving with a fleet of seventeen ships, 1,200 men and a promise of 10 percent of the profits. They went from island to island taking captives along the way. The word spread among the natives about Europeans, so when Columbus came upon their villages, they were empty. The men Columbus had left behind were killed in retaliation for their brutal activities. Columbus captured more natives, men, women and children and began to ship them back to Spain. The Europeans brought disease with them as well, infecting the population with diseases such as smallpox. Columbus, for his part, felt that he was acting in the interests of God. "Let us in the name of the Holy Trinity go on sending all the slaves that can be sold."

But too many died in captivity. So Columbus forced the natives to bring him gold instead, and those that didn't bring their quota of gold had their hands chopped off. When they fled, the Spaniards hunted them down and killed the Indians and within two short years, half of the 250,000 population was dead. The Arawaks were driven into forced labor where many more died and it became so bad that women murdered their young rather than turn them over to Columbus. Bartholomew de Las Casas chronicled the genocide. He described the Arawak society as fair to women, rural, without commerce and peaceful. Total control by the European invaders meant total tyranny. Columbus' men sliced the natives with their blades for fun. Once, de Las Casas wrote, "two of these so called Christians met two Indian boys one day, each carrying a parrot, and beheaded the boys for fun." Men and women were sent to the mines where they worked until they died. Women became so tired that they had no milk for their infants and they died along with their infants. Between 1494 and 1508, over three million died at the hands of Columbus. "Who in future generations will believe this? I myself writing as a knowledgeable eyewitness can hardly believe it myself," said de Las Casas.

Thus, began the history of relations between the people of America and Columbus. Is it too much to ask why we celebrate this? Do you think we should have a Hitler day? Of course not! Columbus was a mass murderer who has had many of the great historians from Harvard singing his praises. There are many Italians who deserve our praise, what about a Da Vinci day? Surely, we can do better than Columbus.

Sources: Howard Zinn, A People's History of the United States

-----

Alex
O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 04:14 PM

The truth will out.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: DougR
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 07:49 PM

Carlin: That's a pretty good description of a conservative.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 07:55 PM

"That's a pretty good description of a conservative" - I take it you mean "a black hole so powerful, not even satire can escape!" Harsh but true enough.

Except that "conservative" just means someone who think things are good enough that they'll get worse if they are changed, and as I've said before, it's my dream to live in a place and time where that would describe me.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: GUEST,Albamist
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 08:18 PM

Who was this Columbus guy anyway? Everyone knows, or should, that the North American continent was visited by a fleet led by one Prince Henry Sinclair, Lord of the Orkneys. Columbus is believed to have used charts previously mapped out by Zeno who was on this expedition. One of the knights who accompanied Sinclair was Sir James Gunn, he died and is buried in Westford Ma. So America was "discovered" by none other than the Scots. Look that up in yer Funk & Wagnells

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 08:23 PM

OK time for the truth about good old Chris...the reason he gets all this credit is not for his real accomplishments, but, because Italian Americans vote in large blocks. Why not a Galileo day? Or a DiVinchi day? Hell, we might as well have a Mussolini day! he did no more damage to the Ethiopians in 1936.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 08:53 PM

Ouch! Kat if you can find where I used the term "ethnically conscious" I'd be amazed! First of all it makes no sense whatsoever, and if I DID write that, it was my biggest typo of the year. "Ethically conscious" (which is what I THINK I said in the first place) seems like an OK term for showing courtesy to others, but in general I worry about ANY terms we use to lump different situations into a handy category.

Just 'cause I had too much time on my hands yesterday, I started thinking about ALL the holidays we celebrate. Do you realize that VERY convincing arguements could be made that NONE of the folks being honoured, really deserve to be. Not saying that the arguements pro and con wouldn't sink to pretty low levels at time...but there'd be supporters on both sides.

I'd go for "Pete Seeger" day...but a lotta folks would complain that he was a Commie, so forget it.

Woody Guthrie Day would be nice....but how 'bout all those children (and first wife) he left to fend for themselves?

Many people decry Martin Luther King day because of his promiscuity.

Victoria Day was probably NEVER very popular with the millions who felt under the thumb of the British Empire.

Mickey Mantle (my hero) Day, would be popular with a lot of folks, but can you imagine how angry the people who've dealt with (and lost loved ones to) alcoholism would feel?

I know that there is a movement afoot in the States to name a holiday after Ronald Reagan....can you imagine the outrage from about 50% of the country?

Nope, to me Columbus was an early intrepid explorer, no more no less.

Rick

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: GUEST,Albamist
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 10:33 PM

Margo,

The U.S. constitution is based on The Declaration of Arbroath 1320 in which the Scots nobles pleaded with the pope of the day to support them in their bid for freedom against the oppression of the English.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: GUEST,albamist
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 10:44 PM

To McGrath of Harlow, At the risk of appearing to argue the case for English colonialism, let me say that you are mistaken in your assertion that the english speaking colonizers were genocidal in their administrations of their colonies. While they were certainly no angels and were self serving, when compared to the other European nations ( Portugal, France, Belgium, Germany )who colonized Africa, Britain left their former colonies with the infrastuctures still in place for those colonies to develop democratic states. In most cases good transportation systems and education systems were also a couple of the benefits from having been exploited by the Brits.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 11:32 PM

Rick, my apologies!! Your phrase was "ethically correct" in this posting: (Bert's CRS is spreading!)

Subject: RE: PC is NOT a dirty word!Proud to be PC!
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 27-Sep-99 - 01:44 PM

Bravo Jon W. Well put and historically accurate. I think Kat's mention of the language deficiencies make a lot of sense as well. New words (or phrases) are not that hard to throw out on to the playing field. I should know as "blue clicky thing" haunts me to this day. From now on I'm going to try and use the term "ethically correct" (EC) wherever I can. It accurately represents how I feel and appears not to be stigmatized as yet.

Rick

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: DougR
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 11:50 PM

Rick: Sure glad you did't pick on Santa Claus! I would think that old guy would be pretty well accepted as a role model, even if the official holiday is not named for him.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 12:25 AM

Excellent post Rick!!!!! It ain't what Columbus did after he got here that is celebrated on Columbus Day....it is the simple fact that he got here at all. Sure the Vikings may have got here before him....and there is actually some evidence that the Chinese may have made it across the Pacific to S America....but they weren't talkin'. After Columbus found the joint, it stayed found (I think that is a Frank Sinatra qoute).

McGrath!!!!

"..."That's a pretty good description of a conservative" - I take it you mean "a black hole so powerful, not even satire can escape!"...."

No Sir!!! (or ma'am...I honestly don't know) That would be Rosie O'Donnell you are thinking of and she is as liberal as they come.

Also it wasn't the British Victory in the 7 years War that sealed the fate of the Indians, as much as the colonists' victory in the Revolution. The British tended to regard natives as another people to be incorporated into the Empire....the American settlers looked upon them as another part of the landscape that needed to be cleared off to plant crops.

While I am at it....a conservative is someone who believes in individual liberty and freedom. In the last century we were called liberals.....

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: catspaw49
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 12:58 AM

Actually Doug, Santa is getting a pretty bad rap lately too. Lots of history crapping on the old boy. And what about the Easter Bunny? Promiscuity incarnate....and all those little children.

I think we need a holiday for everyone of the "Humor Challenged" folks who take the world so seriously. Man, it'd be GREAT!!!! We could have a SHITLOAD of parades, I tell ya' that........

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: GUEST,truckerdave
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 02:07 AM

Well, you know this was a pretty good place until all you guys came over and killed all the buffalo and stole the land. But we got you back after all. We showed you how to smoke tobacco.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 08:47 AM

Carlin, it is not a matter of the Vikings "May" have gotten here first. There is proof that they did. Now, if they had raped the natives, stole their land and given them diseases, they would be celebrated with parades!

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 11:42 AM

Ok, the Vikings got here first....but....

"Now, if they had raped the natives, stole their land and given them diseases, they would be celebrated with parades!"

Really! What makes you think they didn't do any of those things? Or , to put it another way, why do you think they would have treated the Indians any differently than they treated the inhabitants of Lindesfarne, or the Slavs in Russia, or the Eskimos in Greenland....or just about anyone else they ever came into contact with?

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 01:41 PM

becauise there is no recorded history of their actions on this continent. We have nothing to go on.More than likely, they did, but without records, its conjecture.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: GUEST,John Leeder
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 01:46 PM

A minor point, but I'm more comfortable using the term "Indians" since I was reminded that there was no nation called "India" in Columbus's time, and Europeans used the term "Indian" for anybody who lived east of the Indus River. Columbus thought he'd reached Asia, so it was perfectly reasonable that the people he met would be "Indians". The term stuck, and the people who came after haven't been able to come up with a catchy alternative that's been widely adopted.

In Canada, the term "First Nations" is gaining popularity, and to me is less ambiguous than "Native" (since, as someone above pointed out, anyone who was born here is a "native"). The French term "nations authochthones" is a neat phrase, but the English word "autochtonic" might be a bit cumbersome for some...

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: GUEST,John Leeder
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 01:57 PM

Make that "autochthonic".

According to the only stories we have about the Scandinavians in North America (they weren't really "Vikings" at that point), they traded with the natives, and fought with them. Sometimes the natives started the fights, and sometimes they won. The Scandinavians didn't get close enough to rape anybody that we know of, and weren't around long enough to steal anybody's land. Maybe they would have if they'd stayed around, and maybe they did inadvertently pass on diseases, but this is purely speculative.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: DougR
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 02:58 PM

Well, then Kendall, my friend, I suppose it would be conjecture on both of your parts, right?

Carlin: you like to live dangerously don't you? Admitting you're a conservative? Shocking! You're not a republican though, right?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 03:02 PM

not sure I follow you Doug. the part about the Morsemen beig here 500 years before Columbus is not conjecture. It has been proven by respected archeologsts.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 03:20 PM

John Leeder,

Thank you for the reminder of the term "First Nations." I had forgotten it and it has not caught on here in the States as much. I much prefer it.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 04:32 PM

Kendall....I concede the Vikings made it to NA before Columbus...the speculation resides in the question of how they interacted with the Indians. Given the Vikings record dealing with other societies, I figure they would have slaughtered raped and enslaved the Indians at the drop of a hat (or helmet). You seem to give them the benefit of the doubt because we don't have any hard historical record. But either assumption is conjecture....

DougR, I am a registered Libertarian....I think they have some very naive and foolish views on foreign policy....but for the most part, their views on how the government should be run are pretty close to mine. Where I really fall out with the Republicans is the drug war nonsense....

All that having been said, I am probably voting for Bush this year. I live in FL and right now it is a pretty tight race. If things open up and Bush looks like a clear winner in the state I will vote for Harry Browne....but I have too many family members and people I care about in the military to stand around and let Algore become president without a fight. He ain't gonna get FL's electoral votes because of me.....

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 04:34 PM

DRAT!!!!!
That should have been a BR in the html tag....not B....whoops....

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: DougR
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 04:47 PM

I was referring to your comment about the Vikings, Kendall.

Predictions are for a very close race in Arizona too.

I admire a lot about the Libertarian's philosophy, myself. Certainly much more than the Democrats.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: GUEST,John Leeder
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 04:55 PM

Kat, another interesting trend here is that groups are starting to be called by their real names. Previously they were called by the names their neighbours called them (the Europeans having met the said neighbours first), and often those names were not complimentary (e.g., "Eskimo", a Dené word, means "people who eat raw meat" or something similar -- their name for themselves is "Inuit"). Either that, or the Europeans couldn't pronounce the name, so made something up (e.g., "Huron").

In this locality, people who used to be called "Blackfoot" are now called "Siksika", people who used to be called "Sarcee" are now "Tsu'tina" (I hope I spelled that right), the "Bloods" are "Kainai", and the "Stoneys" are "Lakoda" (yes, they're Siouxans -- it's a form of "Dakota").

If only symbolically, it's a gesture of respect.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 04:55 PM

I take it you are both in favor of a bloated military? Thats corporate welfare at its worst. Doug, your own Sec. of Defense, Bill Cohen (republican) says Bush is wrong, that our forces are totally up to any job that comes up. What more do you want?

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 04:55 PM

I take it you are both in favor of a bloated military? Thats corporate welfare at its worst. Doug, your own Sec. of Defense, Bill Cohen (republican) says Bush is wrong, that our forces are totally up to any job that comes up. What more do you want?

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Penny S.
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 05:28 PM

Something that impressed me about the cultural level of the inhabitants of the large continent to the west when the whites arrived came from putting together two separate pieces of botanical information. One was a newcoined name for the plant we call plantain, arrived as a weed with Europeans, was in at least one tribe's nomenclature something like "White Man's Footstep" or "Footmark" (I can't be wholly sure about the detail): the meaning I recall, because it referred not only to the way the new plant spread where Europeans went, but also to the way it marked paths and heavily trodden areas. Not only was there sophistication of observation, though. A long time after I heard that, I heard a medicine man describing the use of plantain in medicine. That means that, after the Europeans arrived, there was active investigation of the effects of plants of which there could be no ancestral knowledge. That's "civilised".

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 05:39 PM

Lately there have been a couple of EXTREMELY heated situations going on in Canada. Native fishing rights in the Maritimes is one, and transporting Toronto's garbage (by contract) to Northern Ontario is another. Interestingly all the Toronto papers have begun actually identifying natives by their actual TRIBAL NAMES! And get this! They're spelling them the way the Natives do. I'd seen the name "Mic-Mac" for years, but the tribe always spelled it "Mq'maq". During the current troubles The Toronto Star is spelling it that way too. That's some kind of progress. Nuthin' wrong (or politically correct in a silly way) with showing those folks a little respect. 'Fraid they're gonna lose though, just not enough political clout.

Rick

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 05:47 PM

Kendall, DougR
If you want I can explain right here why the US needs a minimum of 12 operational carriers and their airgroups (this is assuming we don't make any new commitments....the 12 are required just to support what we are already committed too). I can also explain why using the Army for 'nation building' (isn't that a lovely way of referring to occupation troops) is not a good idea. I am even prepared to talk about why at least 3, and maybe 4, of the Army's divisions are unfit for combat.

This would involve a major veering away from the topic of this thread (although one would think that the history of the Indian's contact with the Europeans would give anyone pause to consider the virtues of military R&D). If you would care to take this discussion Here I would be happy to wade into it with the broadaxe swinging...

Kendall, just pop in say hi, and post why you think everything is just hunky-dory with the armed forces.....

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 08:46 PM

"You are mistaken in your assertion that the english speaking colonizers were genocidal in their administrations of their colonies." (GUEST Albamist)

Well, they were in America and Australia. All the colonial nations were brutal in all kind of ways. But the English speakers were the ones who succeeded in displacing and virtually wiping out the previous inhabitants of two continents.

"Also it wasn't the British Victory in the 7 years War that sealed the fate of the Indians, as much as the colonists' victory in the Revolution." True Carlin - but if the French hadn't been beaten I can't see how there'd ever have been a revolution at that time anyway, followed by an explosive expansion across the continent that, while "democratic", was in effect genocidal for the original inhabitants..

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 10:52 PM

If the colonists weren't willing to be ruled by a British King (who was at least restrained somewhat by Parliament) they would never have tolerated the Bourbon absolute monarchy. If anything a French victory would have led to the US being founded a generation early.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Oct 00 - 11:49 AM

I've sometimes speculated about an alternative history in which some sentry on the Heights of Abraham spotted the British climbing up to attack, because sopmeone sneezes, and he gives the alarm.

French victory in the battle leads to an end of the war in which Canada stays French, the Thirteen Colonies stay British. No revolution, because the British are seen as a valuable protection against the French, and the taxes don't seem such a bad price to pay for it.

A generation later the French have consolidated from Louisiana to Canada, in partnership with the existing inmhabitants, and have probably broken off from the France, where there hasn't been a French Revolution, which had largely been precipitated by defeat in the Seven Years War. And so forth.

All because of a sneeze. Alternative history is great stuff.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 12 Oct 00 - 06:58 PM

I hate that phrase "Hunky dory" I HAVE said it..in another thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: DougR
Date: 12 Oct 00 - 11:21 PM

Carlin: You don't need to explain the need to beef up the military to moi! That will be one of GWB's first priorities I believe. The fact that my family owns a slingshot manufacturing plant in Jerome, Arizona, has absolutely nothing to do with it either.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 12 Oct 00 - 11:47 PM

Doug, I just figured since Kendall's remark was aimed at the two of us you might wanna join in. Kendall ain't gonna bite though....can't seem to bring himself to take a chance on being outnumbered.....besides he might learn a thing or two and put his good standing in the knee-jerk liberal club in jeopardy.