The Leftist Libel of Columbus

Spectator: Primary documents on Columbus

Columbus has been demonized by leftists seeking to raise a generation hating their country. In many cases, wrongs Columbus stood against were attributed to him.

But the left can’t get it’s “Progress” without making youth hate this country, or at best, be ashamed of it.

So, Washington, Jefferson, Columbus, and yes, Lee, must be libeled to drain the pride from American youth.

20 thoughts on “The Leftist Libel of Columbus

  1. Kindly put, you are full of it.

    Teaching to good, the questionable and the bad in our history are more important than phony patriotism.

    Why are the right wingers so afraid that we will learn that our nation is like many others. And if we don’t address the flaws, we will never get better.

    We fought two long wars in the last 60 years. Both cost big bucks, killed tens of thousands, maimed 10 times that. And that is just Americans. Trillions lined the pockets of dictators and our own arms manufacturers.

    We lost both wars. Are we God’s favorite? Are we exceptional?
    Think about it before you sugar coat our history. And don’t say we have to put founders on a pedestal without criticism.

    Now questioning Columbus may not be popular in MAGA-Ville. But let’s not build a fantasy land like Stalin, et.al.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. RE: “Why are the right wingers so afraid that we will learn that our nation is like many others?”

      They aren’t, in my experience. The bias here is all yours: Your statement assumes that being like other nations makes America ugly and common.

      You should perhaps contemplate the notion that patriotism doesn’t require one’s nation to comply with utopian ideals. America, however, was explicity founded on the utopian ideal of liberty, a fact of history that is perhaps unique and certainly notable.

      If you can wrap your mind around such considerations, you might be less inclined to make cynical comments like the one I am commenting on.

      Like

      1. “ Your statement assumes that being like other nations makes America ugly and common.”

        Your assumption is wrong.

        We are no more ugly than most other nations, better than many and worse, perhaps, than a few.

        The point is that history evolves as we learn more. That criticism and reevaluation are not politically correct in the conservative circles is a telling issue.

        Patriotism based on myth is a common tactic. Yet patriotism based on constant improvement and understanding is much more durable.

        Yes, the American experiment has held for more time than just about any other nation. The reasons are many, complex and worthy. We are at a junction now, however. And if we are going to decide the future for ourselves, should it not be based on truth, good and bad, rather than myth?

        Liked by 1 person

        1. RE: “The point is that history evolves as we learn more. That criticism and reevaluation are not politically correct in the conservative circles is a telling issue.”

          Where Columbus is concerned, history has evolved into falsehood, primarily at the hands of radical leftists. That’s the argument the source article makes.

          RE: “We are at a junction now, however. And if we are going to decide the future for ourselves, should it not be based on truth, good and bad, rather than myth?”

          Yes, of course. I simply reject the notion that truth is impure or necessarily tainted by objectionable realities.

          Like

          1. “ I simply reject the notion that truth is impure or necessarily tainted by objectionable realities.”

            Tainted or just an accompaniment. If you want history to be a cheerleader or a record is what matters.

            Lincoln held supremacy views with regard to race according to his own words. Yet he is lauded with saving a nascent nation from self-destruction. No reason for one to cancel the other. I feel similarly about the founders. Jefferson had a relationship with a slave yet his vision was instrumental for our core political structure. We should acknowledge his peccadilloes as well as his scholarship.

            We all have feet of clay and the more we accept that, the more we can admire others who accomplished great things in spite of the human shortcomings.

            Black and white thinking with regards to moral and ethical issues is Taliban thinking. And I think it also affects conservatives more than liberals. There are a lot of gray areas in most moral musing.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. “ Where Columbus is concerned, history has evolved into falsehood…”

            The article makes broad brushed accusations that the Canida (Caribe) people ate eyeballs for breakfast. (My hyperbole in case someone misses the point.) The truth is still being researched with some new archeological evidence that ritual cannibalism MAY have been part of the warrior culture. But hardly as outlined by The Spectator.

            Europeans burned apostates at the stake, so life was tenuous at best. States were almost always in a state of war. Indigenous Westerners were no better or worse, just different. Add in the atrocities by European clergy to force conversions and we are debating whether it is better to stab someone in the back with a knife or a pike.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. RE: “Indigenous Westerners were no better or worse, just different.”

            That’s your fallacy in a nutshell. Assuming a truth before you have proved it.

            You should read more carefully. That some of the American natives Columbus encountered were cannibals is nowhere in dispute. The idea that Columbus should have treated them as equals, but didn’t, is pure crazy and in any case it is not supported by the historical record itself.

            Like

      1. Yes, I read it. The writer makes assumptions and wild statements based on little.

        It is possible, based on evidence, that cannibalism was practiced as a ritual for warrior strength. Not as a common food source.

        Cannibalism is so reviled that even those who ate the deceased survivors in strandings were ashamed, Donner Pass, the Peruvian plane crash come to mind.

        Branding an entire peoples, the Caribes, as consuming others for daily nourishment is convenient if you want to subjugate them as beasts of burden.

        Columbus did contribute to opening the Western Hemisphere. Like all of those intrepid explorers, the search for riches was paramount. He never did set foot on the mainland, but the door was cracked.

        Yet, is it wrong to delve into the very human qualities of conquest and power that drove history, including ours?

        History is most often written by the winners until relatively recently. We are lucky to be in an era where history can be also seen from the losers due to universal education. That is, common folks can also be literate, not just the ruling and religious classes.

        Is some of the reaction to the foibles of our founders a bit overboard? Yes. But more importantly, we are getting a different look through a sharper lens at what drove us to where we are today.

        “Cancel culture” is just the nomenclature preferred by the right to describe what is really a reexamination of historical assumptions. Not all is perfect, but neither were the myths.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Perhaps you should read the article again.

          The degree to which Caribes were cannibals(they even ate their own dead, they did not waste meat) is unimportant as the incident in which they were mentioned was falsely reported in every aspect. Columbus was not even present, the false history mis-identified the tribes involved, and his sailors were not the aggressors.

          Like

          1. Are you assuming the article is factual?

            Here is probably a more realistic take on that history;

            https://www.jstor.org/stable/24606255

            There is a difference between ritual cannibalism of war prisoners and an evening meal with and by “friends”. The supposed gentle Arawaks also practiced ritual cannibalism.

            Much easier to exploit the indigenous if they are nothing but animals, right?

            My point earlier is that the history as written by the indigenous or their descendants will look different.

            Here is a related history of Africa and Europe around the Age of Discovery.

            https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/oct/12/africa-slaves-erased-from-history-modern-world?CMP=oth_b-aplnews_d-1

            Liked by 1 person

          2. Again, how is that relevant? The degree to which the Caribes were cannibals played no part in the account.

            The encounter with the Caribes mentioned by Zinn was an attack on some of Columbus’s sailors who went to their island seeking trade.

            Zinn’s account of the incident was a total fraud, and even misidentified the tribe.

            Oh, and Zinn couldn’t even read Spanish.

            The article I cited relies on primary documents from the time of the journeys, so, yes, I take it to be more accurate than one written by Marxists hundreds of years after the fact.

            Like

  2. Why do you and your chum (p)s hate America so much? Reading too much Das Kapital? Striving for a socialist utopia? Hate yourself? Talk about full of it…imho of course…

    Like

      1. No, your aspirations only lead to suffering and the need for Prozac, not inspiration, hope or success.

        You don’t love your country, you love wallowing in pity.

        Like

  3. So I was at the Redskins Saints game and this young black girl sitting next to me asked if I knew why the Skins were called the Hogs since that was her deceased dad’s team. I explained the history and asked her if she wanted to know the history of the name as well. She said she truly wanted to know because she didn’t understand why the name was changed. I told her of Indian football, the team name selection and head coach being native American when the name was selected and approved by him in 1932. She said didnt think the name should have changed and didn’t think others would have either if they knew the history. It all just depends on how the history is explained and the defeatist, self serving socialist apologists of the left only want to focus on the few failings of humanity amongst our great visionaries, leaders and our foundation.

    Like

    1. Your story reveals that controlling language and narrative is the motive at work. Facts and truth don’t matter.

      It is a psychosis.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s