Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Columbus Day - As Rape Rules Africa and American Churches Embrace Violent 'Christian' Video Games
"Gold is most excellent; gold constitutes treasure; and he who has it does all he wants in the world, and can even lift souls up to Paradise."
-- Christopher Columbus, 1503 letter to the king and queen of Spain.
"Christopher Columbus not only opened the door to a New World, but also set an example for us all by showing what monumental feats can be accomplished through perseverance and faith."
--George H.W. Bush, 1989 speech
If you fly over the country of Haiti on the island of Hispaniola, the island on which Columbus landed, it looks like somebody took a blowtorch and burned away anything green. Even the ocean around the port capital of Port au Prince is choked for miles with the brown of human sewage and eroded topsoil. From the air, it looks like a lava flow spilling out into the sea.
The history of this small island is, in many ways, a microcosm for what's happening in the whole world.
When Columbus first landed on Hispaniola in 1492, virtually the entire island was covered by lush forest. The Taino "Indians" who loved there had an apparently idyllic life prior to Columbus, from the reports left to us by literate members of Columbus's crew such as Miguel Cuneo.
When Columbus and his crew arrived on their second visit to Hispaniola, however, they took captive about two thousand local villagers who had come out to greet them. Cuneo wrote: "When our caravels... where to leave for Spain, we gathered...one thousand six hundred male and female persons of those Indians, and these we embarked in our caravels on February 17, 1495...For those who remained, we let it be known (to the Spaniards who manned the island's fort) in the vicinity that anyone who wanted to take some of them could do so, to the amount desired, which was done."
Cuneo further notes that he himself took a beautiful teenage Carib girl as his personal slave, a gift from Columbus himself, but that when he attempted to have sex with her, she "resisted with all her strength." So, in his own words, he "thrashed her mercilessly and raped her."
While Columbus once referred to the Taino Indians as cannibals, a story made up by Columbus - which is to this day still taught in some US schools - to help justify his slaughter and enslavement of these people. He wrote to the Spanish monarchs in 1493: "It is possible, with the name of the Holy Trinity, to sell all the slaves which it is possible to sell...Here there are so many of these slaves, and also brazilwood, that although they are living things they are as good as gold..."
Columbus and his men also used the Taino as sex slaves: it was a common reward for Columbus' men for him to present them with local women to rape. As he began exporting Taino as slaves to other parts of the world, the sex-slave trade became an important part of the business, as Columbus wrote to a friend in 1500: "A hundred castellanoes (a Spanish coin) are as easily obtained for a woman as for a farm, and it is very general and there are plenty of dealers who go about looking for girls; those from nine to ten (years old) are now in demand."
However, the Taino turned out not to be particularly good workers in the plantations that the Spaniards and later the French established on
Hispaniola: they resented their lands and children being taken, and attempted to fight back against the invaders. Since the Taino where obviously standing in the way of Spain's progress, Columbus sought to impose discipline on them. For even a minor offense, an Indian's nose or ear was cut off, se he could go back to his village to impress the people with the brutality the Spanish were capable of. Columbus attacked them with dogs, skewered them with pikes, and shot them.
Eventually, life for the Taino became so unbearable that, as Pedro de Cordoba wrote to King Ferdinand in a 1517 letter, "As a result of the sufferings and hard labor they endured, the Indians choose and have chosen suicide. Occasionally a hundred have committed mass suicide. The women, exhausted by labor, have shunned conception and childbirth... Many, when pregnant, have taken something to abort and have aborted. Others after delivery have killed their children with their own hands, so as not to leave them in such oppressive slavery."
Eventually, Columbus and later his brother Bartholomew Columbus who he left in charge of the island, simply resorted to wiping out the Taino altogether. Prior to Columbus' arrival, some scholars place the population of Haiti/Hispaniola (now at 16 million) at around 1.5 to 3 million people. By 1496, it was down to 1.1 million, according to a census done by Bartholomew Columbus. By 1516, the indigenous population was 12,000, and according to Las Casas (who were there) by 1542 fewer than 200 natives were alive. By 1555, every single one was dead.
This wasn't just the story of Hispaniola; the same has been done to indigenous peoples worldwide. Slavery, apartheid, and the entire concept of conservative Darwinian Economics, have been used to justify continued suffering by masses of human beings.
Dr. Jack Forbes, Professor of Native American Studies at the University of California at Davis and author of the brilliant book "Columbus and Other Cannibals," uses the Native American word wétiko (pronounced WET-ee-ko) to describe the collection of beliefs that would produce behavior like that of Columbus. Wétiko literally means "cannibal," and Forbes uses it quite intentionally to describe these standards of culture: we "eat" (consume) other humans by destroying them, destroying their lands, taking their natural resources, and consuming their life-force by enslaving them either physically or economically. The story of Columbus and the Taino is just one example.
We live in a culture that includes the principle that if somebody else has something we need, and they won't give it to us, and we have the means to kill them to get it, it's not unreasonable to go get it, using whatever force we need to.
In the United States, the first "Indian war" in New England was the "Pequot War of 1636," in which colonists surrounded the largest of the Pequot villages, set it afire as the sun began to rise, and then performed their duty: they shot everybody-men, women, children, and the elderly-who tried to escape. As Puritan colonist William Bradford described the scene: "It was a fearful sight to see them thus frying in the fire and the streams of blood quenching the same, and horrible was the stink and scent thereof; but the victory seemed a sweet sacrifice, and they [the colonists] gave praise therof to God, who had wrought so wonderfully..."
The Narragansetts, up to that point "friends" of the colonists, were so shocked by this example of European-style warfare that they refused further alliances with the whites. Captain John Underhill ridiculed the Narragansetts for their unwillingness to engage in genocide, saying Narragansett wars with other tribes were "more for pastime, than to conquer and subdue enemies."
In that, Underhill was correct: the Narragansett form of war, like that of most indigenous Older Culture peoples, and almost all Native American tribes, does not have extermination of the opponent as a goal. After all, neighbors are necessary to trade with, to maintain a strong gene pool through intermarriage, and to insure cultural diversity. Most tribes wouldn't even want the lands of others, because they would have concerns about violating or entering the sacred or spirit-filled areas of the other tribes. Even the killing of "enemies" is not most often the goal of tribal "wars": It's most often to fight to some pre-determined measure of "victory" such as seizing a staff, crossing a particular line, or the first wounding or surrender of the opponent.
This wétiko type of theft and warfare is practiced daily by farmers and ranchers worldwide against wolves, coyotes, insects, animals and trees of the rainforest; and against indigenous tribes living in the jungles and rainforests. It is our way of life. It comes out of our foundational cultural notions.
So it should not surprise us that with the doubling of the world's population over the past 37 years has come an explosion of violence and brutality, and as the United States runs low on oil, we are now fighting wars in oil-rich parts of the world. It shouldn't surprise us that our churches are using violent "kill the infidels" video games to lure in children, while in parts of Africa contaminated by our culture and rich in oil (Congo) rape has become so widespread as to make the front page of yesterday's New York Times.
These are all dimensions, after all, our history, which we celebrate on Columbus Day. But if we wake up, and we help the world wake up, it need not be our future.
80 Comments so far
Show AllIt amazes me that folks like Thom H. beat around the bush SO much. Why not be honest for once and call it what it is...It's not "foundational cultural notions", it's Christianity as implemented by the church (though not Jesus). Generalized Manifest Destiny plain and simple. And THAT is what should be recognized and treated like the virus it is.
In his article, Thom wrote;
"This wasn't just the story of Hispaniola; the same has been done to indigenous peoples worldwide. Slavery, apartheid, and the entire concept of conservative Darwinian Economics, have been used to justify continued suffering by masses of human beings."
So how is that beating around the bush? I think his point was quite clear!
Yes of course the a major problem was/is the omission of the realities of the early invaders/explorers in the classroom.
Rape as still seen recently in Serbia and ongoing in the Sudan and now the Congo has to be the lowest form of human activity.
Who will stop it?
Refering to the belief system that leads to and encourages atrocities like those of Columbus "our foundational cultural notions" instead of calling it the Judeo-Christian foundations of Western society is beating around the bush. That's NOT to say that J-C values caused ALL instances of atrocity. Other belief systems resulted in similar atrocities, as Thom points out. But substitute the Native American belief system for the J-C system, e.g., and I doubt the atrocities would have occurred. The J-C belief system is primarily at fault, it infects almost everything so to speak, and until we come to grips with that, and encourage people to follow other belief systems, religion-neutral yet compassionate and loving, we'll never get to the place Thom so often asks us to imagine...a place where Peace rules the day.
In light of the facts presented here, would someone please explain to me why we are "celebrating" Columbus Day today?
Why are there parades in the United States to "honor" Christopher Columbus?
Why is the 10 Freeway in Los Angeles named "The Christopher Columbus Transcontinental Highway"?
About 20 years ago my son was attending an "alternative" magnet school in Venice, California. He came home one afternoon with a booklet of drawings portraying Columbus as a "mass murderer". I was infuriated! I dragged my son to the school and confronted the teacher. The teacher said, "Hey! I didn't make all this stuff up! It's all written here in these books, excerpts from the priests' journals who were on Columbus' ships!"
We are such Puritans.
As he jerks of with one hand, he sends in innocent children to execute his wekito in barbaric lands.
They must be taught civility, these barbarians.
God Bless America, and the moron Christopher Columbus, for he wanted to find a new route to India.
Thom's statement;
"This wétiko type of theft and warfare is practiced daily by farmers and ranchers worldwide against wolves, coyotes, insects, animals and trees of the rainforest; and against indigenous tribes living in the jungles and rainforests. It is our way of life. It comes out of our foundational cultural notions."
...is completely acurate!
If you would like to discuss the corruption of the Christian Church, well, that is also a valid point. Christian corruption also derives from what Thom called "the entire concept of conservative Darwinian Economics".
I don't want to defend christianity here, but I think Thom Hartmann could have also included other religions.
It is sad but true that mankind can be a vicious animal. It is in the nature of all of us to be violent, to be ruthless, to be selfish, either by ourselves against other individuals or together with our "clan" against other clans.
So I disagree with Thom that "It comes out of our foundational cultural notions". I absolutely agree that "It is our way of life". But it is our way of life, as determined by our genetic coding.
Culture, and as a subcategory of that, religion, has been invented to protect and promote "our clan". Hence, the warfare between religions, nations, races, or in more sublimated modern form, the Yankees vs. the Red Sox.
Culture surpresses the most basic instincts, teaches us that the same goals can be achieved better through other means. But, the "sophistication" that cultures both brings and requires, is only applicable within what man perceives as his own clan. Members of other clans are excluded from the priviliges afforded to our own.
No matter how loudly one clan (christianity, for instance)
proclaims how great they are, ultimately they all have to obey the genetic coding, honed over millions of years of evolution, that we want to spread our genes, protect our offspring, protect our clan, with any means necessary.
Christ -opher Columbus?
~I think there's a misnomer here!
Likewise in the term 'Christ-ian'.
The authentic *Christ* element seems too often to be missing from those with eponymous titles...
Ethnocide always accompanies ideologically sanctioned genocide.
In fact, the ethnocidal project is vastly larger than past and present forms of genocide.
Anglo/US domination of the global electronic/entertainment media, commercial music, the fashion industry and its status-driven consumer culture is efficiently exterminating the world's wide variety of dance, music, oral traditions, cosmologies, languages, and entertainment.
Of course, ethnocide replicates what is occuring in the natural and horticultural world. The genetic variety of the earth's fauna and flora are also being homogenized...into a narrow range of commercially viable food sources.
So, social darwinism operates in the realms of culture, genes, social organizations and people. Of course, corporate- or state-dominated capitalism drives social darwinism.
Much to our loss of understanding, knowledge, inner-growth, choice and the support system we need to face ever increasing future problems.
Christianity, and religion in general, are used as tools by powerful people, but also as locii of resistance by the powerless. There is no unitary essence of religion, and attempts by the Inter-Left to assert one are ahistorical, anti-intellectual, and counter-productive. Anger at particular examples of the merging of religious doctrine with colonialism or militarism is not an adequate rationale for ignoring the complexity of human culture.
Why would the left, which claims to be a defender of pluralism and diversity of expression, seek to be a destroyer of belief in invisible things? When did progressivism become the home of rigid logical positivism - which, by the way, is far more clearly at the center of imperialism and genocide than religion ever was.
Eugenics was scientific, not religious. Hiroshima was a technological feat, not a religious act. The Indian genocides, while given the fig leaf of religion, were of course the product of economic and ethnic greed.
It is amazing that so many on the left adopt such a sophomoric, narrow view of religion. This posture reveals a profound ignorance of the history of resistance to power both in the United States and elsewhere. Where do MLK, Ghandhi, the Sanctuary movement, the Berrigans, the Quakers and others fit into this picture?
The role of religion in imperialism is complicated and awful, but the world has changed a great deal in the last few hundred years. Religion, especially in the US, has become such a diverse set of phenomena that these sweeping generalizations are a sign of intellectual laziness.
I suggest that progressives keep their eye on the ball: the strong suit is the set of economic justice positions which are shared by the vast majority of Americans - living wage, universal health care, restraint of predatory corporate practices, and protection of the biosphere, whose destruction disproportionately affects the poor and lower middle class. Don't get distracted by uneducated ranting about religion being a "mental illness." It's not only hateful, it's just inaccurate.
And from manifest destiny's Pacific shore, Columbus' Caucasian heirs continued west through Hawaii, to the Phillippines, Japan, and later with a major stopover in southeast Asia. On and on, at last to circumnavigate the globe, coming to rest in the cradle of civilisation crescent between the Tigris and Euphrates. Any further west, and we're back to Europe where it all began.
Thom gives us a fine Howard Zinn-style treatment of the march of real American history. Such open talk of genocide, rape, and grandiose robbery used to be shunned as mainstream national narrative, relegated only to the marginalized left of the political spectrum.
But with the ascendancy of the neo-con militarists in the Bush administration, a strange thing has started to evolve: the far right, too, teaches "A People's History of the United States" in the mode of Zinn and Hartmann. The far right think tankers and GOP ideologues embrace the epic saga as proof that democracy and capitalism are still on the march, and that conversion of the heathen at the point of a sword has perhaps always been the inevitable, preordained lot of mankind. In Iraq, Chris Columbus has finally found the promised land right where it always was.
Maybe, just maybe, with the mythical history of American exceptionalism as some benign, peace loving, and tolerant City on the Hill being exposed by critique from both the left and from the right, there'll emerge a solid consensus that it's well past time to stop the merry-go-round.
Bill from Saginaw
I think Thom WAS including other religions. As a matter of fact, I don't think religion was at the center of what Thom was pointing out.
I think his point was about a corrupting influence in societies... an influence of "conservative Darwinian Economics".
I don't think man is genetically corrupt. I don't think it is our "nature" to subjugate and rape and pillage...
As Thom said;
"We live in a culture that includes the principle that if somebody else has something we need, and they won't give it to us, and we have the means to kill them to get it, it's not unreasonable to go get it, using whatever force we need to."
So it's not human religion nor is it human nature that is at the core of this corruption. It's a corrupt human society that believes "might makes right"... that we can take what ever we want, just because we want it.
So Thom maybe should have mentioned "Manifest Destiny" as a corrupt concept, but not because of Christianity or human nature.
The point that KaneJeeves makes above is incomplete and shows one particular bias dominating his or her ideological landscape. I could just as easily declare, say from a Radical Feminist perspective, that the problem is patriarchy. Ultimately, we'd both be right, but we'd both be incomplete in our perspective
Religion, be it Judeo-Christian or other, is merely how we justify our violence, but the origin appears to be genetic. Follow this link and see how chimpanzees display the same type of shocking violence as humans: http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2004/demonicape.shtml
Therefore, the question to me becomes this: (When) will humans make a conscious choice to evolve beyond our basest instincts? From my perspective, the one difference between humans and the gods is that the concept of sovereignty is granted to the latter but fought over by the former. The Greco-Roman-Norse gods possessed all the sovereignty their respective domains accorded them, but were just as lacking in virtue as present humans. In some ways, the idea of a god taking flesh and practicing humility displays a transpersonal conceptual evolution, which is the one reason why I don't completely detest Christianity. What I find offensive and deeply troubling is the blurring of the archetypal boundaries between myth and legend on one hand, and history on the other.
www.raycarlson.com
In this-case (and many), the Church. Similar stains, of course, apply to Muslims and Jews (historic and Modern); so, too, the pagan Hun/Mongol-Hordes who treated Christians/Muslims alike to similar.
The Taino are an appropriate-example today, however (and were followed by countless-others). Most people white-wash their own Historical/Current crimes against 'lesser/Others', learning/believing a history/Mythos celebratory of 'all held dear' rather than Ethical-truths. If the World would "wake up" to not repeating so-regularly such tragedy, it must begin with most of us learning how 'anyone' has the potential for such-transgressions (not just the 1940's civilized-Germans, Israeli-Jews, USSR's loyal-comrades, holy-Crusaders, or USA's Supported-Troops). The first-step to such an understanding is addressing and examining these 'road-kills' in our shared-shame (taking care not to fall into the Abyss when shocked by what is found).
My own late-life 'eye-opening' in this regard was stumbling upon:
http://www.ahealedplanet.net/columbus.htm
when trying to understand some framework to investigate what I subliminally was reacting-to and was uneasy-with, immediately after 9/11 (still seeking in that 'quest', btw). http://www.ahealedplanet.net/america.htm and http://www.ahealedplanet.net/lies.htm followed, and although I can't recommend this fellow's politics or other-judgments/activities, I shortly found his research into our 'true-History' both verifiable and horrifying. This material can't 'date', as it is the sorrier-side of our 'progress' as a civilization, and Historical, so I'd recommend it as further 'shock therapy' to begin any attempt to 'separate wheat from chaff' and to gain any context into which the Issues of today (or the future) can be properly-understood.
[I think we have to shed all pretext of 'our own intrinsic-good', compared to any Other, before we can free ourselves from dehumanizing-others in enabling social and selfish-Interests...]
arjenboatsma
"No matter how loudly one clan (christianity, for instance)proclaims how great they are, ultimately they all have to obey the genetic coding, honed over millions of years of evolution, that we want to spread our genes, protect our offspring, protect our clan, with any means necessary."
I have never heard a better recipe for self-annihilation and the probable annihilation of all life forms on the planet put so concisely. I suggest you commit suicide now.
Kane Jeeves: Great idea! Let's blame it on the Christian church! But wait...Islam believed in manifest destiny too...they were probably influenced by Christianity! Or maybe religion is a bad, bad thing. But what about the Roman Empire--clearly their manifest-destiny-inspired brutality can be traced to their fanatical paganism!
So many seem so adamant that Christianity, or religion except the good ones with no history, or anything but 200-proof atheism, is the disease. Those of us with an appreciation for religion wish it were as powerful as you think.
And the phrase "as implemented by the church"...what church? The church agrees on nothing.
For anyone who didn't already know about Columbus or any of the other oppressors in our history you should definitely read A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn:
http://tinyurl.com/237qqy
This should be required reading in every middle & high school in America. It also seems G. H. W. Bush needs a history lesson. Our heros of elementary school were rapists and murderers. What a wonderful country.
So the rape and pillaging of modern day Iraq is nothing new, the people in power have always resorted to the lowest form of life to achieve their goals, whether they are simply self-gratification or world domination. It will never change until either they annihilate humanity or the earth itself does. Happy Columbus Day...
Also, seeing this as a "left or right" issue is bogus.
Criticizing the left seems ridiculous in the context of Thom's article.
hablano:
The central tie in everything you mention is Rome. Think about that for a while.
Columbus Day like Thanksgiving Day is a special day of celebration in the US. When seen in the background these two "SPECIAL DAYS" represent a culture of genocide, slavery, occupation of "others" land and plunder.
- We also see two contrasting cultures: the culture of the native peoples, which was (is) welcoming and feeding the GUEST, and the western culture, which was (is) based on "chopping the hand (and head) that fed them", and occupying the land of the HOST. The irony is that the former is portrayed as barbarians and latter civilized and the LIGHT OF THE WORLD???????????
-The National Council of Churches summed up Columbus best by issuing this statement, among other similar statements, in 1990: "For the indigenous people of the Caribbean islands, Christopher Columbus' invasion marked the beginning of slavery and their eventual genocide."
"Columbus: a hero? Yes, for Slavery, Colonization, Genocide, Racism, Religious Fanaticism, and Human and Environmental Exploitation. Yet the US (and the West) do not only condone Christopher Columbus, it honors his life by celebrating and observing a holiday in his name. On second thought though, slavery and genocide are as American as apple pie."
Doesn't this culture of Columbus still continue in the US??? Iraq, Somalia, Congo, Afghanistan, Palestine, Lebanon, Nicaragua, Haiti, Chile, Philippines...... are the MONUMENTS OF THE CULTURE OF THE US AND THE WEST BASED ON THE COLUMBUS CULTURE.
-Let me leave this question for thought on this COLUMBUS DAY: who is civilized? And who is barbarian? Who lived out better human values? Who manifested canibalism?
Thom didn't say it was J-C at the root of the problem, but religion is a big part of it. Along with the Judeo-Christian we must add Islam. Seems that all those religions based on "The Good Book" (part I, at least) are so very good at persecution and if God says unbelievers don't count and can be killed (as is so often shown to be the only way to go in said 'Good book').
I don't know enough about the eastern religions, from what I've seen those seem to allow for other beliefs, but at the same time seem to result in making people more malleable to manipulators. But all of us who belong to the consumer culture are the root of the problem. Go back and read Thom's book "The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight". The younger culture (YC) that we are a part of began before Christianity*, but that doesn't mean it's in our genes. If it were, the last of the "Older Cultures" (OC) would have passed away long ago. But since it is "culture" and not genes, it's a learned way of life. Just like YC is learned. The indigenous people that the Mass Murderer found in the Caribbean were OC, as were most of the peoples of the new world. The problem with OC is that whenever YC and OC meet, OC is defeated. OC stands no chance against YC, OC has no tools to deal with YC, it's a completely alien way of life. That doesn't mean that we can't learn from OC – in fact if we want to survive as a species we will have to.
It's like we're all on a plane that's flying straight towards the Himalaya's in white out conditions and our instruments are turned off. Will we hit the mountains or run out of gas?
*I don't remember if it was it Thom's book, but the Cain and Able story is YC being victorious over OC. We are all Cain's children after all.
One more thing, I really wish someone would make a movie of the Howard Zinn version Christ-ofer Columbus. But to do the story justice they would have a hard time getting an "R" rating.
To gandhi
Yes. And you've said it well!
I urge the reader to go back up 3 posts and read gandhi's post.
He gets it!
The scary thing is that for the majority of the American Population, social justice is far less important (and less fun) than getting new stuff. And we don't realize the "new stuff" we get cheap is usually off the backs of near slave labor reinforced by ethnic cleansing and rape.
Very sad.
Its a bit incomplete to just blame Judeo Christianity.
Asians have been quite brutal and they are declared atheists.
The Makah whaling tribe kept human slaves.
There was a South American tribe that used to force the tusks of boars to grow in spirals so they can use them as ceremonial masks--though it was painful for the boars.
A Peruvian tribe has an annual ritual of sewing a bird to the back of an ox.
There was a New Guinea tribe(documented in the film Hearts of Darkness) that would insert a reed stick into the hearts of live pigs and watch them convulse to death,
Human depravity is a human trait--not a strictly religious one.
Religion is just the vehicle used to defend it, but its not the cause.
"We live in a culture that includes the principle that if somebody else has something we need, and they won't give it to us, and we have the means to kill them to get it, it's not unreasonable to go get it, using whatever force we need to."
**They just awarded a nobel prize for medicine to men who tormented and brutalized mice through genetic engineering--another form of rape.
As Tolstoy said--we will always have wars as long as we have slaughterhouses.
You cant put out the fire if you keep pouring kerosene in it.
We're primarily discussing Western events, so I've emphasized Christianity. By Church is meant...take your pick. Roman Catholic comes to mind, esp in the middle ages. So, hablano, yes in general it's the religious mindset I'm refering to, whether Moonie, Muslim, Christian or Roman Empire.
Muggles5 - comparing "religous vs scientific" - you're mixing apples and oranges. Science isn't a belief system, it's a method, or a tool, that can be used by athiest and theist alike.
Of all the great cultures around the globe, the white Western culture is closest to its barbarian past. The Europe of 1492 is perfectly captured in this passage from Ronald Wright's *Stolen Continents*:
"European secular government was a tangle of decayed feudal loyalties and personal ambition. The last proper roads had been built by the Romans more than a thousand years before. The rapidly growing cities were unplanned, ramshackle, without sanitation, seething with poverty and disease. If famine struck a region, the state was quite unable to provide relief. Life expectancy oscillated between the high teens and low thirties, lower than in the most deprived nations of today. The achievements of Europe were technological, not social. It had the best ships, the best steel, the best guns; it also had conditions desperate enough to make its people want to leave and use these things to plunder others."
Welcome to civilization!
Science is a belief system.
If you do an experiment 100 times you have faith that the same results will occur on the 101th try,
plus it is founded in the religious sytem of secularism--which is a religion. Secularists just dont like to face the fact that their belief in reality is also non absolute.
I find it offensive that we celebrate Columbus Day. First of all, we're not even sure he "discovered" America. It is said that several other Europeans have made it here before; Columbus just took the credit. And second, proclaiming that he "discovered America" is offensive to the millions of people who had been living here for thousands of years before his arrival. I think there are plenty of other historical figures that we'd be better off honoring than Columbus.
Do you think we should celebrate Columbus? http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=661
abbywood--check out the excellent "Lies My Teacher Told Me" by James Loewen for a comprehensive overview of ther European invasion of the Western Hemisphere, and then American history through the Iran-Contra affair as taught in American schools. The author make the point that the primary sources have always been available--like the journals, letters, and reports of Columbus and his contemporaries--and have been deliberately ignored by history textbook writers. The author dedicates his book to all the middle and high school teachers who teach the truth.
Also for unflinching, exhaustive, detailed accounts of the genocide of the native peoples of the Western Hemisphere, Ward Churchill's (AIM member and professor at U.of Colorado) "A Little Matter of Genocide" is a must read.
"Science is a belief system.
If you do an experiment 100 times you have faith that the same results will occur on the 101th try,"
Science is a system which eliminates belief in favor of evidence. Faith, on the other hand, incorporates failure into its system. It's much more like baseball, where a successful hitter fails seven out of ten times. A person of faith does not believe that God is not listening or isn't faithful simply because he or she doesn't receive the gift asked for or the response expected, because they don't believe that God is an impersonal thing who is subject to the manipulations of finite beings. In science, the scientist and the subject stand on equal ground; in faith, there is no such equality, since the faithful can put no constraints on the divinity they believe in.
Science and faith are both goods when the individual places him or herself at the service of others, rather in command of them, and both are bad when people decide to reduce others to instruments of their own will.
the french huegonot was the first to try to settle florida and 'christianize'the indigenous dweller.the huegonot used principles very akin to democracy in its compelling nature.but as we all know know,a freak hurricane(a lilithwind)shipwrecked the goodtiming liberal french and the 'evil'genociding spanish,won-no contest.beheading every single frenchmen,with the exception of four french musicians,the conquistidors kept alive for the sake of some entertainment for a rowsing good party.i blame the saint"augustine"for putting it into their heads that even genocide was acceptable,if it succeeded in converting the heathens.since the spanish were fasciststyled catholic chistians,they never read the words of jesus,for themselves.EVIL was allowed to prevail because the spanish were into nation building and at the time,it seemed a 'good idea'anyway,my point is,columbus was no different,he was familiar with the notion of the city of god and believed in genocide.his holiday is a celebration of GENOCIDE !!
kelmer October 8th, 2007 4:57 pm
Science is a belief system.
If you do an experiment 100 times you have faith that the same results will occur on the 101th try,
__________________
You sound a little confused kelmer; even your logic proves science IS a methodolgy, that's why you perform the same experiment for the 101st time!? Get it now? Not knowing the type of scientists you socialize with, the concept of experiments for the purpose of re-enforcing "faith" (in the expected results) is quite alien to me and some other scientist I know!
kelmer October 8th, 2007 4:53 pm
Its a bit incomplete to just blame Judeo Christianity.
Asians have been quite brutal and they are declared atheists
__________________
This sounds quite the perception-fulfillment broad brush; exactly which Asians are declared atheists??
The beginning of the colonial period in the new world began as the period of Eastern domination of Western Europe was closing. Columbus and Isabel were two years old when Constantinople fell, and nearing what was old age when the long re-conquest of Spain was completed. For them, this was indigenous resistance to foreign occupation. It would be another 80 years until the Battle of Lepanto, which established the last four centuries of European supremacy & largely concluded with the European auto-destruction in 1914-1945 & the de-colonial period. The re-evaluation of the begnning marks the conclusion of a half-millenium.
The rightwing decries the crimes that mark the decline of European supremacy, while it lauds those that began it; the non-revolutionary left, while decrying the former, somehow believes that the new period will be inaugurated without the same extensive violence.
Dichterfreund, well put. It's not the religion, or the science, it's the desire to control other people which is evil. 666 is not the mark of a demon, it's two-thirds: Me plus this other force wins over some other person.
As for the assertion that sceince is impartial method, not belief system: a lot of things are impartial in theory, like democracy for example. But in reality, science, like religion, is a tool in the hands of institutional and individual actors. There's nothing impartial about the CHOICE of questions scientists choose to investigate. There's nothing impartial about the goals governments and corporations have for the use of information gleaned from experiment. If our socially coniditioned uses of science are separable from a Platonic ideal of Science, then equally are our socially conditioned uses of religion separable from an ideal Religion. It's not apples and oranges. They are both (more overlapping than either faction cares to admit) ways of apprehending and filtering reality. The culture and the individual make choices about how to make use of these methods.
More broadly, many have made the point which bears repeating: brutality is a feature of almost all human cultures. Instead of seeking a deterministic explanation for our own depravity, we should instead be asking why some few groups and individuals have avoided cruelty as a way of life. "They are nice" will not be sufficient.
It is troubling to note the naivete of the defenders of science here. I don't see that science needs much defending, as it is more or less running the show in logistical and material terms. What is disturbing is the... well, there is no better word... "faith" that people whose lives are allied with institutional science have in its priorities and its assumptions. Surely the results speak for themselves. Science hasn't solved our problems, it has mostly made them worse. Religion has an equally bad track record. That does not make either way of thinking wrong, it means there's a problem that neither is dealing with.
all of life is based on hard science and i do not see this as being in conflict with a 'creator'i see it as,affirmation...
muggles,
"But in reality, science, like religion, is a tool in the hands of institutional and individual actors. There's nothing impartial about the CHOICE of questions scientists choose to investigate. There's nothing impartial about the goals governments and corporations have for the use of information gleaned from experiment"
The postmodernist view gets us in the same bind that Kant left philosophy in; it's a prelude to reaction, not a solution. Reproached with using junk science to support Exxon, the reactionary post-modernist responds that the science reporting vast climate & environmental changes is just as biased. The neocons are difficult to combat because they use this new form of intellectual nihilism to oppose progress. And it IS intellectual nihilism, not legitimate criticism, and it's primary aim is to abolish the very concept of human advancement.
Muggles - By "science is running the show", do you mean like when a father's life is extended by an artifical heart (the product of scientific work) so he can be with his family that much longer? Or any of a thousand medicines that make life better for people? Or the treatments a child takes to battle the cancer the creator has intelligently designed into her small body? Is that what you mean?
And speaking of Faith...I'll indulge your word games. I would argue that hardly any religious person has any TRUE faith in their god, whereas they Do in fact have faith in science. For example, everytime they drive over a bridge, they show their faith in science and engineering. Everytime they start their car in fact. And so on. On the other hand, how many would let go of the steering wheel while speeding down the highway, and rely on faith in their god to keep them safe? I'll bet none.
Didn't you guys see Apocalypto? The Europeans saved those funny-talking dudes.
From the out of print book, "He Walked the Americas" by L. Taylor Hansen, these are some excerpts. A Christ like beardeed white man was said to have travelled the Americas bringing a message of peace. Believe what you like about him.
"He repeated the warnings given at Tula against the deeds of the sacraficers, and foretold the invasion of White man. ...the suits of shining metal, the rods which make noise and kill at a distance."
"Once I had great hope for these people, for I saw them kneel and kiss the sweet earth, and I saw the shadow of the great cross which they carried with them. Yea, I had great faith in these people. Now I must warn you against them."
"They have but one love and that is for weapons. Ever more horrible are these weapons, until they reach for the one which is ultimate."
"For five full cycles of the Dawn star (Venus), the rule of the warring strangers will go on to greater and greater orgies of destruction."
"Their path will lead to the last destruction. Know that the end will come in five full cycles."
That is some of the excerpts I could have included.
I found out that the cycle of the Dawn star is 104 years. Five cycles is 520 years. 1492 + 520 = 2012.
This book was published in 1963 - many years before the Mayan callendar was decoded.
"...It shouldn't surprise us that our churches are using violent "kill the infidels" video games to lure in children..."
My partner thinks that I am paranoid, but I DO BELIEVE that they really are planning on killing us
KaneJeeves: you so little understand faith, and you know me less. I never said anything about doubting the claims of science in either of my posts. You're talking to a stereotype of a religious person who lives in your head, not to me. And that's exactly what I was getting at.
You speak of word games. These are truly word games YOU are dealing in, certainly not anything akin to science. Why would I need to let go of a steering wheel to demonstrate faith? You see, faith is in the invisible, the intangible, or else it is not faith. I'm not concerned with you sharing my beliefs. But what you fail to notice is that the insults are all going one way here. I never put down science, I merely pointed out that it is a human creation, not an abstraction.
Yes, I am grateful for medicine. Like the prosthesis that allows my son to walk. (But you thought this was an abstraction for me, I take it. Your particular brand of anger has not been mitigated by your trust in science.)
But I also know that medicine almost killed my sister, because she was not allowed to seek any alternatives to kidney-destroying drugs in dealing with her mental distress. No, she was forced by the state to take drugs which nearly killed her. And it is the alliance of science with corporations and the state which give the lie to notions of "impartial method." Just as it is the alliance of religion with the state and with rapacious capitalism that gives the lie to notions of "higher purpose."
You want to have it all one way. You want to assert a purity of science, a science which has no responsibility for outcomes, but you lay anything done in the name of religion at the feet of every religious person. Are thalidomide, the bomb, toxic waste, the fault of every scientist? Of course not, that's a ludicrous proposition, and you would recognize it as such. I'm not a "post-modernist," as someone above implied. I am simply a person.
The diatribes back and forth between a tiny minority of Christians who have vicious notions of morality, and a tiny minority of secular progressives who harbor hatred for religious people, these exchanges are distractions. I intended not to continue the fight, but to point back, as I've said again and again in these forums, towards the concerns for justice and peace which leftists of all cosmologies ought to share. It is only this generation of progressives who have found it impossible to bridge these divides on a a state and national level, and it is for precisley this reason that we are unable to achieve critical mass in politics and movement building.
muggles5,you bring to light a valid point.justice and peace is something most humans desire and is not as voliatile as religion or politics,that is the reason democracy opted for separation of church and state and it is still a good idea.
christianity is NOT a peaceful religion. Take one good read thru the bible, the old testament is an account of one slaughter after another, with revelations being the final orgy of violence and judgement. i know there are peaceful christians but how anyone can still be surprised that there's so much elements of violence within it, well that amazes me. the belief that it's a peaceful religion just simply isn't true.
"The central tie in everything you mention is Rome. Think about that for a while."
About that...there is a video game out called Rome: Total War where you capture cities with the roman legions and are given the following options about what to do with the people:
Occupy Settlement
Enslave Settlement
Exterminate Settlement
It just so happens the third option is the most economical in the game, followed by the second, whereas in the first the people can revolt.
I think Rome pretty much set the standard for today's empires.
From Hispanola to Darfur, there is a terrible trail of cruelty running through human history.
Columbus and the Conquistadors are especially offensive because they were so pious about it.
Greed is the root of all evil, and greed is just an expression of fear. When you do not believe that God will provide, you start to take more than you need... soon you are pawn in an empire clashing with other empires.
What did Columbus fear, that drove him to such inhumanity?
Ok, I'm going to attempt to say something intelligent about history, religion, science, and progress...
It seems like many posts and comments on this website are animated primarily by (usually just) one of three things: horror of the past, horror of the present, and horror of the future. This seems like an abuse of the concept of time--not that we can't have it all three ways, but that if we want to do that, rationality itself suggests we remove history from the equasion and focus on our horror.
But it's not everything that horrifies us; only the things about which we have detailed, reliable information. We sense that being horrified by everything familiar leaves us a bit unbalanced, so we claim to be smitten by things we do not and can not know anything about.
Our horror of the past keeps us grinding our teeth about evil religion; when this horror is dominant, we adopt a comfortable assumption of progress and a hope for the unbounded potential of reason. When horror of the future becomes too intense, however, we turn away, and take refuge in a personalized spirituality, loosed on principle from any institutional or historical claim on us. If we can't stomach that, there's always raw paranoia.
We're preoccupied with shame, blame, and horror--we may as well be Christians!
Columbus: a bad man, to be sure. Roman Catholicism: not for me. But the Roman Empire all bad? Really?
People, let's heal our relationship to the past. I don't want to live in a world without religion any more than I want to live in a world without art--and I mean art in its historical continuity, not art as some flatulent avant-garde amusement to relieve the tension of our oppressive and necessary reckoning with the past.
We may able to change things without mastering the past, but I think it's unlikely we will change them to our liking.
I'm preaching to myself; I'm horrified too. But is that why I'm a leftist? Nah. I'm a leftist because conservatism is stupid, because we're all in this together, and because I'm thinking we can do better.
As is so often the case with Mr. Hartmann, a great informative article opening many of our eyes to specific facts about vague feelings of doubts we carry about the greatness of Columbus.
Throughout history and especially in modern times with the ability to "sell" propaganda to us the masses, we have confused fame, wealth and power with greatness. I am reminded as to the latest attempt to canonize a average mundane man into greatness. Given enough time and money the conservatives might actually put Ronald Reagan's puss on some our rapidly devaluing money. Maybe the penny would be appropriate so we could have a worthless coinage (which Reagan's piss-down theory of economics hastened) with a worthless president gracing it's face. It becomes more and more apparent why ex-presidents and their cheerleaders put so much time and money into their presidential libraries. Such institutions are often little more then a more literate form of promotional billboard buying their historical significance.
May I compliment and second muggles 5 for his intelligent examination of the relation of religion and politics. As I have said before lets not throw the baby out with the proverbial dirty bath water. In the world of duality the dirt is necessary to give meaning and radiance to the clean. Every shell doesn't contain a pearl else pearls would only have the value of sea shells. Gold is often blacked (in traditional times) to prevent recognition by the thief. Precious metal and gems are often hidden deep in the protective bowels of the earth and cannot be found by the casual digger.... even though it is a somewhat different vain: The fruit laden tree bends low in humility.
Just a great thread. Wish I could have found so much stimulation and knowledge in
college. If such pursuit of truth was offered there we might not be in this present predicament of living in a nation where democracy has become a mere slogan.