Patterico's Pontifications


Columbus Day

Filed under: Current Events,Education — DRJ @ 12:04 am

[Guest post by DRJ]

The way things used to be — We celebrated Columbus Day by making models of his ships, the Nina, Pinta and Santa Maria, and reciting poems about discovery. We were the kids at Art Linkletter’s House Party:

Here’s another Kids Say the Darndest Things video if you want a trip down memory lane.

The way things are today — Columbus Day is when some kids learn about genocide and schools teach the darker side of Christopher Columbus, because one man’s hero is another man’s villain:

“[Kindergarten teacher Jeffrey] Kolowith’s students learn about the explorer’s significance — though they also come away with a more nuanced picture of Columbus than the noble discoverer often portrayed in pop culture and legend.

I talk about the situation where he didn’t even realize where he was,” Kolowith said. “And we talked about how he was very, very mean, very bossy.” Columbus’ stature in U.S. classrooms has declined somewhat through the years, and many districts will not observe his namesake holiday on Monday. Although lessons vary, many teachers are trying to present a more balanced perspective of what happened after Columbus reached the Caribbean and the suffering of indigenous populations.”

A bossy ship’s captain? Imagine that.

I’m glad I live in today’s nuanced world but it’s nice to visit Art Linkletter’s world, especially on Columbus Day.


69 Responses to “Columbus Day”

  1. A “bossy” ship’s captain on a ship that was barely seaworthy, crossing the Atlantic. IIRC, only one ship made it back. He probably didn’t even let the sailors take weekends off!

    Kevin Murphy (3c3db0)

  2. Columbus was pretty typical of his time. The “indigenous people” of Europe were pretty much all slaves serfs at the time, ruled over by a hereditary “nobility.” Yes, the Spanish treated the natives poorly, but they treated everyone poorly. It surely wasn’t something Columbus thought up.

    Kevin Murphy (3c3db0)

  3. Thanks, DRJ, for posting, esp. the videos. Not familiar w/ either of the Linkletter shows (the last one ended 2000…?? wow) but wish now I’d seen him more. Second vid (@ link) is especially funny. Wiki’d him and didn’t know he’d lost two of his own five children – very sad.

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  4. “And we talked about how he was very, very mean, very bossy.”

    The sad thing is “mean” and “bossy” may be how the teacher actually thinks of him instead of the words he uses for kid-level consumption. “Commanding” and “strong” are not qualities admired in men today by many.

    It’s true the accurate picture of Columbus is both positive and negative but I feel bad for men (esp boys) today that American culture just pounds on them incessantly for, it seems to me, being male.

    The lie that men and women are the same has crept into every corner of life; a friend who has five growing and grown boys has had to, with her husband, specifically inoculate her boys all their growing years (mostly by instilling critical thinking skills by example) against the ever present media message that traditionally male qualities are negative and something to be suppressed. Did a good job too; they’ve raised (and are raising) five chivalrous, considerate, mature and VERY male sons.

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  5. The moral equivalency is really getting out of hand – but at least most kids are learning that Leif Erikson discovered North America, not Columbus. Why some still insist otherwise is a wonder to me.

    Dmac (5ddc52)

  6. If Columbus was a Union man his sins would never have been mentioned.

    HeavenSent (01a566)

  7. Good thing Chris landed when he did!

    His “discovery” and the subsequent surge of European settlers into the New World, prevented the genocidal extinction of a vast majority of native American tribes at the hands of other stronger/crueler native American tribes!

    Ever notice that each tribe’s name for itself almost always translates to “human beings” or “the people”, inferring that members of other tribes, competing for the same resources to survive, were not?

    The “Noble Savages” were not so noble in dealing with each other, let alone the incoming Europeans!

    Those natives who remain and thrive should celebrate Columbus Day with gusto!

    Earl T (a440f9)

  8. So, Columbus was the vanguard of a new group that came and conquered the group that had conquered the preceding group that conquered the preceding group … (rinse and repeat) … all the way back in human and pre-human history.

    This time the conquering has lasted for a few few more years than usual. It won’t last forever.

    Let’s hope that the human sacrifice and cannibalism that the evil invaders ended for a time stay ended.

    quasimodo (4af144)

  9. Of course, the Europeans were very thoughtful to the natives. Their morality allowed them to wipe them out equally, with no discrimation whatsoever.

    JEA (71fcb6)

  10. There is a novel called Pastwatch: the Redemption of Christopher Columbus by Orson Scott Card. Good novel, mostly, but i always found it disturbing that in his fantasy he essentially eradicates the U.S.A. without much of a thought. true in that situation it was literally either that or anihilation, but the nihilism was disturbing. fortunately it doesn’t show up in much of what he writes, indeed, it makes one wonder if he had a change of heart since 9-11.

    A.W. (e7d72e)

  11. Their morality allowed them to wipe them out equally, with no discrimation whatsoever.

    Yes, so unlike the peace – loving tribes of our fair land, who routinely killed off competing tribes via complete annihilation, not only scalping men, women and children, but also impregnating any surviving women of child – bearing age, in order to assure the tribe’s destruction.

    Then we have the nature – loving tribes of the plains, who burned off thousands of virgin acres of timber in order to destroy other tribes, and also routinely drove thousands of buffalos to their deaths by stampeding them over the cliffs.

    Your continuing ignorance really knows no bounds, does it?

    Dmac (5ddc52)

  12. Art Linkletter is still with us, in our world. He’s 97.

    Official Internet Data Office (4514e0)

  13. I am sure the prevailing progressive attitude toward Columbus would change if they found a diary irrefutably proving that he was gay.

    Huey (b957d9)

  14. You mean, he wasn’t?
    Why else would he go to sea for extended periods with a ship full of men?

    AD - RtR/OS! (f793c7)

  15. “A bossy ship’s captain? Imagine that.” – I LOL’d

    I feel bad for men (esp boys) today that American culture just pounds on them incessantly for, it seems to me, being male.”
    – I agree totally. We are going to need some men around here in the future, and it would behoove us to have some in places other than ‘red’ counties in the South. No offense intended, but all of these skinny metrosexuals with purses messenger bags in Chicago have me feeling down about the species.

    carlitos (ad57b1)

  16. What’s the difference if the Pre-Columbus native tribes were brutal to one another or not? It doesn’t change the fact that Columbus was a brutal slaver SOB – even if he went about being one in a “manly” fashion. Find another example of manliness, one that doesn’t involve slavery and oppression – I’m sure there are plenty.

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  17. (raises hand) – taking care of your kids?

    carlitos (ad57b1)

  18. #

    (raises hand) – taking care of your kids?

    Comment by carlitos — 10/12/2009 @ 9:05 am

    Yep yep. Which includes disciplining them. Being (gasp) authoritative, even.

    Being faithful to your wife despite all temptations would be another admirable trait. (Given plain old biology this takes more virtue and strength from men.)

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  19. Hi Leviticus: the problem here is the ever-popular “flexible yardstick.”

    The European invaders did bad things, yes. But most of the native people in North America did the same kinds of things, except without iron weapons and gunpowder. Slavery, infanticide, environmental pillaging. The whole menu, except without soap and water and technology.

    It doesn’t mean the Columbus was a saint. But neither were the native peoples here. Or anywhere, for that matter.

    Why not have a celebration for native peoples AND for European explorers?

    I think that the idealization of non-technological cultures and the demonization of technological cultures is the genesis of Western society’s penchant for putting itself through a microscope, looking for error, while playing Mr. Magoo with other cultures.

    It’s the Noble Savage conceit that is all through our schools. Rousseau versus Hobbes.

    It’s historically inaccurate, and nowadays, it is dangerous.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  20. Most of the Native American population was killed through disease, not slavery and oppression. Columbus exploited populations. So what? That was the norm back then. He did not have the learned benefit of liberalism (freedom of religion and speech) that exists today. Expecting a man in the 15th century to adhere to todays moral standards is ludicrous and quite honestly naive.

    Newtons.bit (a67c58)

  21. Comment by Leviticus — 10/12/2009 @ 9:03 am

    Another “tell” of how extended education, and learning, are two different things.

    AD - RtR/OS! (f793c7)

  22. And a study of the Aztec Empire sheds light on this. But it doesn’t fit Rousseau’s Narrative.

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  23. What’s the difference if the Pre-Columbus native tribes were brutal to one another or not?

    The difference is that part of history is swept under the carpet by all the “leftys” throughout the education establishment, along with other details that run counter to the kum-bah-yah sentiments (or propaganda) that such people want to promote. Details such as some of the most vile aspects of the slave trade being due to the full, active participation of African tribal leaders.

    By contrast, a guy like Franklin Roosevelt, in spite of his being of Euro descent (just like Columbus was), is treated by the same educators as though he were the Second Coming of Christ. Never mind that researchers now conclude some of FDR’s policies actually worsened the effects of the Great Depression and that he was the ultimate limousine liberal in his own personal dealings with the taxes he raised and the charitable contributions he was rather stingy about.

    Mark (411533)

  24. So an ex-pat Italian, sailing for Spain, miscalculated the circumference of the planet by a factor of 2 and ended up tripping over an unknown continent which he assumed was India.

    THAT’S why they call us Indians, son.

    mojo (8096f2)

  25. What’s the difference if the Pre-Columbus native tribes were brutal to one another or not?

    There is no difference – and that’s the problem; too many of today’s moralists state that of course there was an appreciable difference, despite all evidence to the contrary.

    I was at a party not too long ago where this type of claptrack was being espoused, with all nodding their heads in agreement, just like good sheeple should. I asked the famous pontificator who among the many conquerers and settlers of native lands were so awesomely wonderful and benign, since we were so amazingly awful. Surprise, surprise – he couldn’t actually name any, and was quite concerned when I detailed the Dutch, Spanish, French and British dominations of their “subjects” as a result of empire. I also told him of the infamous story of when the US gave the Phillippines their much – deserved freedom, after quite a few ugly actions by our troops during their war of independence and our later occupation of their lands (they didn’t exactly cover themselves in glory, either). As the naval ships were sailing out of their harbor, they saw a huge sign near the tip, and it said (in English) “YANQUE GO HOME. AND TAKE US WITH YOU.”

    Dmac (5ddc52)

  26. I talk about the situation where he didn’t even realize where he was, Kolowith said.

    I guess he’s talking about Columbus thinking he had found India. Maybe I’m missing something, but how was he supposed to know where he was? This comment indicates Kolowith is a real dingbat. It’s PC in a nutshell.

    Gerald A (a66d02)

  27. Decrying the loss of masculinity in our society always seems to skip over the, ahem, big gorilla in the room. Why is it people gloss over the very mean and bossy segment of the gangsta prison actual and wannabe crowd that exudes multiple manly traits of instant violence and mayhem? Attract their share of female admirers and sick-o-fants, too. They’ve given rise to significant trends in garb and guns, music and movies. It’s mostly a non-racial trend, although whites are admittedly a little slim on the gross numbers side, if not the inked up scale. Bad boys, bad boys…hey, Colombus was Italiano. The Genoa Family, right? ‘Course he’s gonna be a hard ass, c’mon.

    Linkletter would still work today. But the sound track would be major bleeped.

    political agnostic (489580)

  28. I recall a program where Art was interviewing the children and a little black boy replied .. “Yes Sir”.
    Art reached in his pocket and pulled out a Saving Bond and handed it to the child.
    Seems a viewer, who though manners really mattered, had sent in the bond to be given to the first child that answered a question with “Yes Sir”

    Neo (7830e6)

  29. All I know is Columbus Day means almost everywhere is gonna have pumpkin spice thingers. Pumpkin muffins and pumpkin lattes and used to be pumpkin ice cream but stupid Trader Joes doesn’t carry it no more.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  30. We will not see the like again of Art or Christopher. Which part of this statement is true and which is false?

    The entire statement is true.

    JerryT (b585a2)

  31. But Karl, what do all those facts prove, anyway? That’s just…different!

    Dmac (5ddc52)

  32. Bear in mind a good deal of anti-colonialism is really just nationalism, which is a happy-face word for racism. tyranny is tyranny, whether it is from a guy who looks like you or not. It wasn’t right for England to conquer various kindgoms and put them under their boot, but its idiotic to complain that you would much prefer it if the boot on you neck belonged to a guy who looks much more like you. Of course England would have been right to liberate those countires, but why do you think it was so easy for the conquisadors and the colonialists? Because the local tyranny was so despised.

    As for columbus himself, we have to detangle what columbus did from what the people who arrived after him did. it helps to ask the question: if i could go back in time, would i kill columbus before he sets up this trip to america? forget issues like “would killing columbus in effect prevent me from being born” and just look at it from a utilitarian perspective. For instance, this means there never would have been a U.S.A. think on that. no new birth of freedom, etc. so when britain was fighting back the nazis, who would have been there to help? because, not to knock the british, but i don’t think they could have won that without us (and the Russians, for that matter).

    So if you don’t think that on balance you would go back in time and kill columbus and undo america, then you have to accept that on balance more good than evil came out of it. which is not to excuse the evil parts. i fully believe that many of the conquisadors are burning in hell right now. but there you go.

    Btw, many of the same liberals who hate columbus and the conquisadors always excuse and minimize the savagery of different evil groups. like the palestinians can’t help what barbarians they are–the isrealis are at fault, or so the argument goes. but if that is true, then isn’t the entire conquisador movement really the fault of the moors? tell them that and watch their heads explode. Of course there are known reasons why it is inconcievable to them that the moors caused the conquisador movement, but not for any logical reason.

    A.W. (e7d72e)

  33. Mojo, you should be glad we Spaniards came and civilized you.

    For without us, your ancestors probably would have been the main course in some bizarre exercise of power.

    But, history proves Indians were certainly not representative of a “Garden of Eden” continent.

    Only a pretty half ass, violent world where the lack of technology and lack of WESTERN forms of thinking would be described as a cruel, inhumane and destitute world.

    Much like Blacks who whine about Slavery .. the sad fact is “what would be of us if we stayed?”

    The answer is invariably Western Europeans changed the world for the better. Even with our “sins.”

    HeavenSent (01a566)

  34. And “whine” because facts is none actually went through mind I add you.

    Being a distant relative to a victim does not make you a victim.

    HeavenSent (01a566)

  35. Re-reading Leviticus’ comment, I think he might have been asking for ‘another example’ of manliness, like another person, one who didn’t slave and what-not.

    If that’s the case, I amend my answer to “Carlton Fisk.”

    carlitos (ad57b1)

  36. I’m not going around canonizing the North American native tribes – I know they did horrible things, and I have no real admiration for them (except for warpaint, which is ridiculously badass). But that doesn’t change the fact that Columbus was a shit. Living in a generation of brutal people doesn’t justify being one of them. And to lionize Columbus just to spite a bunch of dumb liberals is… immature.

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  37. “..Columbus was a shit…”
    and you have proof of this how?

    AD - RtR/OS! (f793c7)

  38. Glenn Reynolds has a non-PC view of Sr. Columbus posted at 2:34pm.

    AD - RtR/OS! (f793c7)

  39. Don’t you just love it when the libs judge people who lived 500 years ago by the standards of today?

    Which makes me wonder: in the year 2500 AD, will folks consider the abortion supporters of the 21st century to be barbarians?

    One more thing: if you’re REALLY offended by the tactics of Columbus and company, why don’t you put your money where your mouth is and leave North America? (In case you missed it, that’s a takeoff on the “chickenhawk” argument espoused by so many libs.)

    Bubba Maximus (456175)

  40. Thanks, DRJ; exactly the right amount of sweetness I needed today.

    htom (412a17)

  41. “Columbus was a shit”

    OK, now that you’ve made the flat – out claim, you’ve got to offer some proof of his awesome horribleness. We have to compare and contrast with other explorers of his day. Remember, this was in 1492, for goodness sakes.

    Dmac (5ddc52)

  42. Columbus bad.
    Martin Luther King, noted philanderer – wonderful!

    Van Halen (e4735c)

  43. I’ve got no problems with Columbus, HeavenSent, other than the whole “Indians” name-thing. Never understood why all them plains tribes wanted to live like that, anyway. Hunter-gatherer is a tough row to hoe (that’s a pun, son). “Nasty, brutish and short” pretty much describes life in the pre-Columbian times. Not to mention my lawyer.

    I prefer “Amerind” myself. Less prissy-sounding than “Indigenous People”.

    mojo (8096f2)

  44. Leviticus,

    Can you please explain this sentence here? Because I don’t get it.

    Living in a generation of brutal people doesn’t justify being one of them.

    So, if you were born as a white guy in Georgia in 1833, you would have risked it all to free the slaves, right? If you were born and raised a Muslim in Yemen in 1920, you’d be all over that emancapation of women thing, right? Because you are such a good guy, and not a shit?

    Columbus was, in many ways, a shit. But the cross-generational judgement is not realistic.

    ‘Splain, please.

    carlitos (ad57b1)

  45. Granted he was indeed a sh-t; but again, I fail to see an appreciable distance from what he did compared to the mores of his day.

    Dmac (5ddc52)

  46. Agreed. But if Leviticus was an explorer back then, his crew would have listened to him and obeyed out of love and tenderness. Ditto the natives of Hispaniola, who just wanted to co-exist and all.

    carlitos (ad57b1)

  47. “So, if you were born as a white guy in Georgia in 1833, you would have risked it all to free the slaves, right? If you were born and raised a Muslim in Yemen in 1920, you’d be all over that emancapation of women thing, right? Because you are such a good guy, and not a shit?”

    – carlitos

    I don’t know what I would’ve done in a different historical context – who does? I will say that some white guys were risking it all to free the slaves in that day and age, and I hope I would’ve been one of them. And I will also say that if I’d been a white guy in Georgia in 1833, and I’d owned slaves, I’d have been a shit.

    Leviticus (51f6cb)

  48. I mean, what do you want me to say? That it’s okay that Thomas Jefferson owned slaves because he was such a brilliant democratic theorist?

    No. I won’t say that.

    Leviticus (51f6cb)

  49. South Dakota does not even have a Columbus Day. They call October 12th Native American Day. Many school children this week have been putting Columbus on trial for war crimes. Columbus, they say, is guilty of murder, hate-crimes, thievery and even genocide.

    I’m in Cali, I don’t even know when Native American Day is here but I bet the casino on my rez is giving out discount dinners that night. The elders love a good meal.

    And on the news that at a school in Pennsylvania today, 4th graders put CC on trial and he was sentenced to life in prison for his brutality toward the indigenous people.

    [note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]

    Dana (863a65)

  50. No, I’d expect you to say that Thomas Jefferson was a brilliant man who owned slaves, as was the custom for brilliant men of his time. In Virginia anyway.

    Jesus Christ healed slaves and complimented a Roman on his faithfulness to his sick slave. He preached to at least one slave, telling him to strive to me more like his master.

    Jesus was a shit, right?

    carlitos (ad57b1)

  51. DRJ, I’m stuck in moderation again.

    Dana (863a65)

  52. There you go again, carlitos, being all reasonable.

    I see this kind of thing all the time. And it’s ironic (and no, I am not accusing Leviticus of this), because some of the same people who want to judge people of the past by modern standards seem unable to judge other cultures right now very harshly.

    For example, I will bet cash money that the teachers putting Columbus “on trial” would never dream of putting Mohammed on trial for having sex with little girls. Which he did—his wife Aisha, who was nine or ten years old when the marriage was consummated.

    Why not?

    Heck, Shakespeare had more than a whiff of the anti-Semite about him. Should we not read Shakespeare?

    I keep hearing that we need to respect other cultures, and not judge them through the prism of our own culture. But I find that that particular standard is not applied in a nonpolitical way.

    I’m just sayin’.

    Eric Blair (c8876d)

  53. Why are leftists so bigoted towards Italians?

    And everyone else for that matter? Except politically correct slave owners, like Muslims.

    SGT Ted (c47cc2)

  54. So you see, way back then, uh, Sicilians were like, uh, wops from Northern Italy. Ah, they all had blonde hair and blue eyes, but, uh, well, then the Moors moved in there, and uh, well, they changed the whole country. They did so much f**** with Sicilian women, huh? That they changed the whole bloodline forever. That’s why blonde hair and blue eyes became black hair and dark skin. You know, it’s absolutely amazing to me to think that to this day, hundreds of years later, that, uh, that Sicilians still carry that n***** gene. Now this…

    ‘Cause you, you’re part eggplant.

    carlitos (ad57b1)

  55. Hey, carlitos, that is my favorite scene from “True Romance.” I mean, Christopher Walken is chilling. That goes without saying.

    But you can see why Dennis Hopper is a truly great actor. He thinks about it, and knows that they are going to kill him, so he wants to goad Walken’s character into killing him before he gives up his son’s address.

    You can see it on his face, and how much he enjoys his cigaret before he starts in the Walken-insult fest.

    Classic scene.

    Eric Blair (8484db)

  56. “Jesus Christ healed slaves and complimented a Roman on his faithfulness to his sick slave. He preached to at least one slave, telling him to strive to me more like his master.

    Jesus was a shit, right?”

    – carlitos

    Yes, that’s totally equivalent – totally “reasonable”. Healing a slave is the same as owning a slave, as is complimenting a Roman for showing kindness to a slave, as is preaching to a slave, telling him how to live a moral life. All the exact same thing, and all obvious endorsements of slavery – quite similar to Columbus’ actual enslavement of indigenous folks in the Americas for his own economic benefit. Great argument. You really showed me what’s what.

    Eric Blair: I still read/watch Shakespeare, but that doesn’t mean that I have to admire his anti-Semitism. I still read Jefferson, but that doesn’t mean I excuse his slave ownership – though that he treated them better than most speaks somewhat well of him. I admire their work but not some of their personal choices.

    Columbus and Muhammed seem about the same to me – that is, they seem to have contributed little if anything that would counterbalance their moral shortcomings. I suppose you could fairly say of Columbus that his was a brave journey, and his success a testament to his skill, but that does little for me in light of his treatment of native peoples – its not a weighty enough rebuttal. It’s like arguing that we should honor Rommel because he was a skilled general.

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  57. “I see this kind of thing all the time. And it’s ironic (and no, I am not accusing Leviticus of this), because some of the same people who want to judge people of the past by modern standards seem unable to judge other cultures right now very harshly”

    – Eric Blair

    And that cuts both ways, carlitos. There’s a lot of jacked up stuff going on in, say, sub-Saharan Africa. Are you willing to excuse that stuff as just the custom of the place and time for sub-Saharan African warlords? In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, anway?

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  58. It’s like arguing that we should honor Rommel because he was a skilled general.

    No, we should honor Rommel for realizing his error for allowing a homicidal maniac to wreck destruction on the civilized world, and attempting to kill him before more harm was done. And for that courage, he was forced to kill himself, in order to spare his family.

    Dmac (5ddc52)

  59. I should correct myself here – we shouldn’t honor Rommel, but I do think his later actions speak well of his character.

    Dmac (5ddc52)

  60. As does Jefferson’s better-than-most treatment of his slaves, as I said earlier, but you see what I mean?

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  61. I totally spaced Rommel’s involvement in the assassination attempt, by the way – I was just trying to think of the most skilled Nazi generals, and he immediately came to mind. But I could probably think of a better example, given the character of the man as you detailed in #59 – though I also agree with your sentiments in #60.

    You get the idea, one way or another.

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  62. Leviticus,

    Good points on sub-saharan Africa. The difference being that our civilization is superior to theirs. I can compare the two, as they both exist at the same time. I suspect that, were I living 500 years ago, I would say that the regime in Hispaniola was superior to that in Congo at the time as well – better technology, more rights, etc.

    Jesus had 30 years to say one word condemning slavery and did not. Would you have done better?

    carlitos (ad57b1)

  63. Oh. Okay. So judging morality across disparate geographic contexts is okay, but judging morality across disparate temporal contexts is not. What the hell is everyone so pissed off at Roman Polanski for, then? I mean, it was thirty years ago!!!1!1! Morality changes over time, right?


    And, as to your other point, Jesus’ entire ministry was premised on ending slavery – the slavery of man to sin. It’s all over the Epistles. If you refuse to draw any concrete parallels out of that ministry then I don’t know what else to say.

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  64. Since Polanski was arrested, charged and plead guilty to a crime, what he did was obviously judged to be immoral and illegal at the time.

    Keeping this in mind, the fact that abolitionists were at work circa 1800 does damn Jefferson. The letters from Adams dance all around this, if I recall, as I don’t think he wanted to poison the friendship.

    I agree about Jesus’ ministry, obviously, but the fact remains he never (I don’t believe) called slavery per se a sin. Or maybe the guys that wrote this stuff down just didn’t buy it.

    carlitos (ad57b1)

  65. “Since Polanski was arrested, charged and plead guilty to a crime, what he did was obviously judged to be immoral and illegal at the time.”

    – carlitos

    Good point (seriously). But remember that Columbus was also arrested in his time for his brutal governance of Hispaniola.

    Does that mean that what he did was judged to immoral and illegal at the time? And does that mean we should judge him similarly?

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  66. Noted.

    Let’s all celebrate Leif Erikson day instead :)

    carlitos (ad57b1)

  67. You are all tools of the white patriarchy.

    JD (f4ed57)

  68. in re: Leif Erikson Day,

    I concur, provided that I don’t find out that he made a hobby of clubbing baby seals or some other proclivity that offends my fashionably liberal palate.

    What? He wore fur? The bastard!

    Guess we’ll just have to celebrate Everyone-Found-America-(Except-Columbus-And-Leif-Erikson) Day.

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  69. Hoo Boy, if we’re going to discuss the Viking’s treatment of conquered peoples, then we’re in for a very long night.

    You get the idea, one way or another.

    I do, and thanks for the clarification. Wish we had more commenters like you, but the cupboards’ pretty bare these days.

    Dmac (5ddc52)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4249 secs.