A note about Glenn's comments on the importance of Columbus - I think he's talking about the importance of the idea of Columbus (that he is a stand-in/proxy for the initiation of European cultural and political world domination that would last for hundreds of years and transform the world) rather than the man himself. Columbus was one of many New World explorers who initiated that European expansion, but he was also (as John mentioned) a particularly jerky and awful person out of that explorer pool.
The centrality of Columbus, ironically, came from the last great effort to re-frame America as a nation of immigrants (particularly Catholic ones) in the early 20th century.
History is an inevitably mixed bag. If we demand perfect sanctity of our historical figures., we shall have to limit ourselves to Jesus Christ and the BVM (I am a Roman Catholic). Meanwhile Confederate monuments can teach us a civilizing lesson: that there can be honorable men and women on both sides of a bloody conflict. None of this should make us less militant in opposing the slavery that is still going on today.
Celebrating Columbus with a day or statue was beloved ny my Italian American friends mattered not who he sailed for or what he did. Statues. Need to be around so students can learn about the time, if today legislators will alllow students to wade into history
It is easy to gloss over how the inventions and civic structures of the past 250 years have fundamentally transformed the way we CAN relate to our fellow humans. My grandmothers were able to go to college because they didn’t have to stay home and scrub laundry by hand. And yes it took three generations to get to a point where their granddaughters could go to college and be viewed as fully equal to the male students. But it is the washing machine that made that manifestation possible. This is what I tell my young children: “It wasn’t until recently that we figured out that it’s better to be nice to one another than mean. Not that long ago, everyone thought that you had to be mean, that the world was a fierce place and that the only way to get by was to be tough. But we realized that a lot of people were sad, and that actually, it is better to be nice to people. Some people do a better job of being nice. And some people haven’t learned this yet and are still mean. And everyone is still always learning how to do a better job of being nice.” For starters, while it sounds a bit treacly, I kind of think this is true. Humanism, especially postmodern plural humanistic social egalitarianism, is relatively young in comparison to civilization. But I also regularly give this preamble because I want my children to be able to engage with the terribleness (or even just the outdated cultural representations of that time) of the world and history without also believing that the world and people are fundamentally terrible and split between good and bad. I also think that this is a more “workable” perspective than the paradigm of oppressors and oppressed, because it allows for true critical thinking that can see the dilemmas and contexts on all sides and sees humanity as something that has evolved (and can evolve) over time. I want them to become mature humans who can be simultaneously self-worthy and self-critical, and not be afraid to hold competing ideas and feelings. I also think this helps avoid the devolvement into purity the good/bad split pulls for, with the corresponding need to sanitize the environment of anything deemed offensive.
I support the naming of the holiday as “Christopher Columbus”. Because of Columbus’ arrival, the Americas became a different place. As far as indigenous- technically native Americans are from east Asia. And everyone on the planet aside from inhabits with lineage native to Southern and Eastern Africa are immigrants/colonizers.
The Spanish colonization of Latin America resulted in trade with China (silver and corn and chili peppers). I accept the history, warts and all. I believe that if the opportunity had arisen, any other country would not have hesitated to colonize a distant land during that era. 100 years after the death of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), Muslim colonizers had made their way to India, China, Northern Africa and possibly Southern Europe.
Changing the name of the holiday will provide no tangible benefit to indigenous peoples.
More on Columbus, his ship crew was from Estremadura (spelling?) province of Spain which was and still is Spain’s most impoverished province. Inhabits had much of their daily life controlled (or at least affected) by landed nobility, especially marriage-age peasant daughters. All ship crew were granted freedom from serf status.
On the Confederate statues (and flag) - I don’t trust my own opinion because it comes from woke history sources. So, I am undecided on that one. SF mayor Diane Feinstein had the Confederate flag flying amongst an array of other flags during her time as mayor. I imagine the flag and statues mean different things to different people.
I am amazed that John seems to have some sympathy for the removal of a statue of Christopher Columbus, because he thinks, to some extent, that Columbus may have been motivated by the desire to make money and wasn’t a good person. My goodness, Columbus led the group that discovered the new world! An event that shaped and continues to shape our world in profound ways with both great positive and negative effect. He is a figure of immense historical importance. How is it that he can even consider canceling Christopher Columbus, and to make room for what? What narrative does he think will replace it when the statue is removed? What do we elevate to take its place, a memorialization of 1619?
How should we weigh the importance of John’s concerns against the monumental role Columbus has played in world history? Relegate his statue to a museum? It’s a shame some people are triggered by the statue and therefore seem willing to downplay the role he has played in our consciousness, by removing his statue. But, there are a great many things we can learn from the story of Christopher Columbus, and his role in how we got to be where we are today as a nation, and as a civilization. There are positives and negatives. I’m sorry people get triggered. I take it that John is truly disturbed, I would say triggered, by some aspects of the Christopher Columbus story, but the story needs telling. The good and the bad. For those who are concerned that the statues venerate, let them denigrate. Statues in prominent places remind us of our history. So, let those who focus on the negative tell that story when they see the statue, and those who see another picture tell that story, but the stories need to be told. They need to be called to our attention. They need discussing. Erasing statues is intended to remove the stories. In this case of our history, important history. Let’s not let that happen.
Thank you for taking this on. Unfortunately many young people - products of universities in recent decades - know so little history that they may be unable to even discuss your points.
Also, if you all have missed it, have you seen Slate's parenting advice column yet? It's truly a sight to behold.
https://slate.com/human-interest/2021/08/sons-soccer-team-racist-name-care-and-feeding.html
A note about Glenn's comments on the importance of Columbus - I think he's talking about the importance of the idea of Columbus (that he is a stand-in/proxy for the initiation of European cultural and political world domination that would last for hundreds of years and transform the world) rather than the man himself. Columbus was one of many New World explorers who initiated that European expansion, but he was also (as John mentioned) a particularly jerky and awful person out of that explorer pool.
The centrality of Columbus, ironically, came from the last great effort to re-frame America as a nation of immigrants (particularly Catholic ones) in the early 20th century.
History is an inevitably mixed bag. If we demand perfect sanctity of our historical figures., we shall have to limit ourselves to Jesus Christ and the BVM (I am a Roman Catholic). Meanwhile Confederate monuments can teach us a civilizing lesson: that there can be honorable men and women on both sides of a bloody conflict. None of this should make us less militant in opposing the slavery that is still going on today.
Celebrating Columbus with a day or statue was beloved ny my Italian American friends mattered not who he sailed for or what he did. Statues. Need to be around so students can learn about the time, if today legislators will alllow students to wade into history
It is easy to gloss over how the inventions and civic structures of the past 250 years have fundamentally transformed the way we CAN relate to our fellow humans. My grandmothers were able to go to college because they didn’t have to stay home and scrub laundry by hand. And yes it took three generations to get to a point where their granddaughters could go to college and be viewed as fully equal to the male students. But it is the washing machine that made that manifestation possible. This is what I tell my young children: “It wasn’t until recently that we figured out that it’s better to be nice to one another than mean. Not that long ago, everyone thought that you had to be mean, that the world was a fierce place and that the only way to get by was to be tough. But we realized that a lot of people were sad, and that actually, it is better to be nice to people. Some people do a better job of being nice. And some people haven’t learned this yet and are still mean. And everyone is still always learning how to do a better job of being nice.” For starters, while it sounds a bit treacly, I kind of think this is true. Humanism, especially postmodern plural humanistic social egalitarianism, is relatively young in comparison to civilization. But I also regularly give this preamble because I want my children to be able to engage with the terribleness (or even just the outdated cultural representations of that time) of the world and history without also believing that the world and people are fundamentally terrible and split between good and bad. I also think that this is a more “workable” perspective than the paradigm of oppressors and oppressed, because it allows for true critical thinking that can see the dilemmas and contexts on all sides and sees humanity as something that has evolved (and can evolve) over time. I want them to become mature humans who can be simultaneously self-worthy and self-critical, and not be afraid to hold competing ideas and feelings. I also think this helps avoid the devolvement into purity the good/bad split pulls for, with the corresponding need to sanitize the environment of anything deemed offensive.
If anyone is interested in what is probably the greatest synoptic study of slavery and a work of extraordinary scholarship:
"Slavery and Social Death" by Orlando Patterson
I support the naming of the holiday as “Christopher Columbus”. Because of Columbus’ arrival, the Americas became a different place. As far as indigenous- technically native Americans are from east Asia. And everyone on the planet aside from inhabits with lineage native to Southern and Eastern Africa are immigrants/colonizers.
The Spanish colonization of Latin America resulted in trade with China (silver and corn and chili peppers). I accept the history, warts and all. I believe that if the opportunity had arisen, any other country would not have hesitated to colonize a distant land during that era. 100 years after the death of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), Muslim colonizers had made their way to India, China, Northern Africa and possibly Southern Europe.
Changing the name of the holiday will provide no tangible benefit to indigenous peoples.
More on Columbus, his ship crew was from Estremadura (spelling?) province of Spain which was and still is Spain’s most impoverished province. Inhabits had much of their daily life controlled (or at least affected) by landed nobility, especially marriage-age peasant daughters. All ship crew were granted freedom from serf status.
On the Confederate statues (and flag) - I don’t trust my own opinion because it comes from woke history sources. So, I am undecided on that one. SF mayor Diane Feinstein had the Confederate flag flying amongst an array of other flags during her time as mayor. I imagine the flag and statues mean different things to different people.
I am amazed that John seems to have some sympathy for the removal of a statue of Christopher Columbus, because he thinks, to some extent, that Columbus may have been motivated by the desire to make money and wasn’t a good person. My goodness, Columbus led the group that discovered the new world! An event that shaped and continues to shape our world in profound ways with both great positive and negative effect. He is a figure of immense historical importance. How is it that he can even consider canceling Christopher Columbus, and to make room for what? What narrative does he think will replace it when the statue is removed? What do we elevate to take its place, a memorialization of 1619?
How should we weigh the importance of John’s concerns against the monumental role Columbus has played in world history? Relegate his statue to a museum? It’s a shame some people are triggered by the statue and therefore seem willing to downplay the role he has played in our consciousness, by removing his statue. But, there are a great many things we can learn from the story of Christopher Columbus, and his role in how we got to be where we are today as a nation, and as a civilization. There are positives and negatives. I’m sorry people get triggered. I take it that John is truly disturbed, I would say triggered, by some aspects of the Christopher Columbus story, but the story needs telling. The good and the bad. For those who are concerned that the statues venerate, let them denigrate. Statues in prominent places remind us of our history. So, let those who focus on the negative tell that story when they see the statue, and those who see another picture tell that story, but the stories need to be told. They need to be called to our attention. They need discussing. Erasing statues is intended to remove the stories. In this case of our history, important history. Let’s not let that happen.
Good amuse bouche! Read Niall Ferguson's "Empire" for the main course.
Thank you for taking this on. Unfortunately many young people - products of universities in recent decades - know so little history that they may be unable to even discuss your points.