Support NeoGAF

[Mahonay]

I mean, yeah, these guys were monsters in reality. Just slaughtering the indigenous people. Literally removed them from existence.

I've not liked Columbus Day for a while now.

As far as the statue goes, not sure how I feel about it. Just being randomly smashed doesn't sit right with me. Not the way to go about it.

 

[Thelonelykoopa]

I agree with this. The logic seems to be that if anybody is offended then its an issue. Slavery was an awful thing. However our planet (like it or not) was built on slavery. Pyramids were built (recently discovered) by ancient building like companies and I would put money on the fact that those builders used slaves.
I think the practice is demeaning and uncalled for, but at that time it was what it was.

The issue is more if someone has a monument in a Public Space that person should be a Paragon of Virtue which will have positive effect on the community. If a person isn't a Paragon of Virtue than than the monument should be in a museum where context can be added.

 

[Spieler Eins]

People sure like to sit on a high horse while handwaving anarchist behaviour. This discourse would be vastly different if it was about replacing/normally removing the contents and not about a bunch of wannabe communists wrecking shit. The statue could not educate about Columbus the person in a museum, but it would be a piece of history of thought and about how the figure of Columbus was perceived during a certain period time.

Also gotta smh anytime someone is using the term genocide falsely. Mass murder isn't automatically genocide. And even mass murder is kind of relative when talking about the early Spanish conquest, considering that a majority of natives died of European bacteria/diseases.

 

[A Link to the Past]

People sure like to sit on a high horse while handwaving anarchist behaviour. This discourse would be vastly different if it was about replacing/normally removing the contents and not about a bunch of wannabe communists wrecking shit. The statue would not educate about Columbus the person in a museum, but about the history of thought and how the figure of Columbus was perceived at a certain time.

Also gotta smh anytime someone is using the term genocide falsely. Mass murder isn't automatically genocide. And even mass murder is kind of relative when talking about the early Spanish conquest, considering that a majority of natives died of European bacteria/diseases.

Yes, a lot of deaths were from disease.

A lot of deaths were also a willful attempt to kill, including for sport.

 

[OverBlood 3]

Imagine if there was treasure in that space. That would've been cool.

 

[gutter_trash]

As an Italian-American, I can say you're wrong.

This wasn't about Italy. It was about people here and about America.

Propaganda

 

[BudokaiMR2]

Do you take issue with the fact that no Nazi monuments exist in Germany?

I really hate even bringing up the word, but I think this is where moral relativism comes in.

In the 1940s society had moved to the point where contemporaries were rightfully disgusted and appalled at what Nazi Germany did. That is why there were no monuments and such out up at that time which now need to be destroyed.

These monuments (and the holiday) were for the most part put up during a time where his genocidal acta were definitely not even known by the general populace, but even if they were plenty of contemporaries would not have been bothered by his actions.

When I learned years ago that he was actually reprimanded by the Spanish monarch I was actually shocked. They were capable and willing to do many of the same atrocities.

I just don't see a direct comparison between Columbus monuments, Jim Crow era monuments, and (hypothetical) Nazi monuments that some want to draw. There is overlap but the intent is very different, even if it was very misguided.

 

[TyrantII]

Propaganda

Gutter_trash

But have a nice day!

 

[CampbellzSoup]

The issue is more if someone has a monument in a Public Space that person should be a Paragon of Virtue which will have positive effect on the community. If a person isn't a Paragon of Virtue than than the monument should be in a museum where context can be added.

This I can agree with.

 

[DerZuhälter]

Removing monuments to columbus does not remove the historical significance columbus had. It's removing glorification for a really shitty person nobody should glorify.

The glorification part is completely subjective. It's a monument, a statue, a painting, a bust, a book, a poem, a video game. It's an art piece. Some are more flattering than others. What we need to do is change the context we give to them. If you don't preserve history you will never be able to learn out of mistakes and wrong doing and are destined to repeat it.

In all my traveling abroad I've never seen any statues without a sign giving context and additional information. That's what needs to be changed.

Confronting people with the factual history is far more helpful than erasing it. And don't tell me about "they can find the information in books" because we all know how many Americans open them at all.

 

[AJLma]

People sure like to sit on a high horse while handwaving anarchist behaviour. This discourse would be vastly different if it was about replacing/normally removing the contents and not about a bunch of wannabe communists wrecking shit. The statue could not educate about Columbus the person in a museum, but it would be a piece of history of thought and about how the figure of Columbus was perceived during a certain period time.

Also gotta smh anytime someone is using the term genocide falsely. Mass murder isn't automatically genocide. And even mass murder is kind of relative when talking about the early Spanish conquest, considering that a majority of natives died of European bacteria/diseases.

No one needs to know or acknowledge Christopher Columbus in any way besides "look at this vile cretinous excuse of a human being". It doesn't deserve to be respectfully removed, embarrassing defacing and destruction by the people is more appropriate.

 

[Corronchilejano]

One day I'd love for history to accurately depict the guy as the reason south American history was butchered before colonialism.

 

[DevilFox]

Well, wow. You sure look like you know the deepest truths of the universe, yet you act like barbarians. You also seem sure to be on the right side of history at all time and for that I envy you, really.
Honestly, even though I live thousands of miles far from you, I'm growing to find unbearable this hateful behaviour of yours and I hope it doesn't take traction here. Also, in my opinion, with mindless and disrespectful acts such as these, you're only feeding a grain of hate and tensions that's already big enough in your country right now; please hope most people don't care.
My take: sure, tearing down a statue does not erase history, but how does that condone the vandalism act itself? It's not ok just because it's you who's doing it, you know. It's like a "I'm not racist / violent but.." pattern.
You see these statues as a glorification of what they represent, I slightly disagree. If every ink drop and brush stroke are like words in a very long book that narrates your story, then every statue or monument erected to represent a person or a very significant event is like a bookmark or a new chapter. Like it or not, Columbus was important and George Washington a lot more. Every country in the world probably had a madman at one point who turned the helm and shaped the cultural future of thousands or even millions, deal with it because history is not a fairy tale and it's not a democracy either.
If you'd like to move it in a museum then ask for it, you'll get the support of a lot more people who are now against you, but to act like ignorant barbarians and feeling like heroes because "it's hate history" is outstandingly stupid, simplistic and quite irritating. It's like ripping off key pages from a book titled "The History of our Culture: Who We Are And Why We Are Here (ongoing until Skynet)": while you may not give a flying damn, it's worth more than gold for the generations to come.

 

[cwmartin]

It's like ripping off key pages from a book titled "The History of our Culture: Who We Are And Why We Are Here (ongoing until Skynet)": while you may not give a flying damn, it's worth more than gold for the generations to come.

It's absolutely nothing like that and you're being disingenuous for even suggesting it.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Well, wow. You sure look like you know the deepest truths of the universe, yet you act like barbarians. You also seem sure to be on the right side of history at all time and for that I envy you, really.
Honestly, even though I live thousands of miles far from you, I'm growing to find unbearable this hateful behaviour of yours and I hope it doesn't take traction here. Also, in my opinion, with mindless and disrespectful acts such as these, you're only feeding a grain of hate and tensions that's already big enough in your country right now; please hope most people don't care.
My take: sure, tearing down a statue does not erase history, but how does that condone the vandalism act itself? It's not ok just because it's you who's doing it, you know. It's like a "I'm not racist / violent but.." pattern.
You see these statues as a glorification of what they represent, I slightly disagree. If every ink drop and brush stroke are like words in a very long book that narrates your story, then every statue or monument erected to represent a person or a very significant event is like a bookmark. Like it or not, Columbus was important and George Washington a lot more. Every country in the world probably had a madman at one point who turned the helm and shaped the cultural future of thousands or even millions, deal with it because history is not a fairy tale and it's not a democracy either.
If you'd like to move it in a museum then ask for it but to act like ignorant barbarians and feeling like heroes because "it's hate history" is outstandingly stupid, simplistic and quite irritating. It's like ripping off key pages from a book titled "The History of our Culture: Who We Are And Why We Are Here (ongoing until Skynet)": while you may not give a flying damn, it's worth more than gold for the generations to come.

Tearing down a statue of someone who fed live babies to dogs isn't along the same lines as being a racist

Also, like cwmartin said, that comparison makes no sense. Books didn't unwrite themselves when this monument was vandalized. No information was lost. We still have the information about Columbus, and even the falsities about Columbus in print. Your example involves actively revoking knowledge from future generations.

 

[Spieler Eins]

Yes, a lot of deaths were from disease.

A lot of deaths were also a willful attempt to kill, including for sport.

Tearing down a statue of someone who fed live babies to dogs

I know. Genocide is still different though. It would mean that they wanted to erase the entire people based on religion or ethnicity. That wasn't the intent though, since they needed the natives as slaves.
Also, while the atrocities are certainly true, some of the reports on it also need to be critically read. I've spent some time with the likes of Las Casas and they've had to use overly dramatic rhetoric (and hell-like illustrations later on) to bring their point home.

 

[lawnchair]

does anyone over the age of 18 who has ever read a book or been in school think columbus was actually a great guy? maybe my perspective is skewed but i wasn't under the impression that anyone really gave a shit about christopher columbus in this country.

Link to the Past talking like Columbus was personally standing around feeding babies to dogs with his own hands up here too. lol

 

[ahoyhoy]

And that's the issue with Confederate statues. They were erected mostly in times of great racial strife by white folks to remind African Americans who was boss. Most went up around plessy vs ferguson and around the civil rights era. Most were funded by know racist organizations. Today they're still revered by Nazis and the KKK for the symbolism of racial superiority; the dog whistles of the lost cause or states rights or the agressive north.

They're not being torn down because of the person they were based on. They're being torn down because of the symbolism pushed by the people that erected them.

I suppose the counter argument to parallel the "statues of Roman Emperors" example would be to understand how similar the historical context of which those statues were erected to the Confederate examples.

They glorified the martial achievements of leaders who invaded foreign lands, killed hundreds of thousands of soldiers and civilians alike, and enslaved hundreds of thousands more. Those statues were built to exemplify Roman rape and pillage and the accomplishment of the Raper In Chief, sometimes centuries after the fact. I'm sure many a Gaul looked at those statues in the piazza and were horrified.

What seems to have changed from 2000 years ago to now is time. Those wounds have mostly healed, and those symbols of oppression are now symbols of abstract ancient history and the art style of a people long dead.

But how much time must we wait? Is 220 years not long enough in the case of the Columbus statue? Is there not enough history here?

 

[Kthulhu]

Not really a fan of people destroying a statue if their is a legal way to take it down.

But like I said in another thread, it's not really that big of a deal IMO considering who it was of.

 

[JORMBO]

I don't think we should leave it up to random vandals to decide if these statues should stay, be moved elsewhere or be destroyed.

 

[Heshinsi]

I am 100% behind the legal removal of the bullshit Jim Crow-era Confederate statutes, but this feels a bit too extreme.

Too extreme? When you've got Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand calling you back to court to ask, "yo What the fuck!" You know that you're even more insane than your contemporaries.

 

[Breakage]

What does damaging this monument achieve? Do people gather around it to worship it? Is the end goal to make people forget about Columbus? Got to erase him from the history books as well, right?

"I don't like this so I am going to smash it up!" Yeah, that's a very mature attitude to have.

It reminds me of those images of ISIL destroying history they didn't like.

 

[His Majesty]

No one needs to know or acknowledge Christopher Columbus in any way besides "look at this vile cretinous excuse of a human being". It doesn't deserve to be respectfully removed, embarrassing defacing and destruction by the people is more appropriate.

A statue of 250 years old should not be defaced or destroyed in any way. The content of the statue is irrelevant.

 

[A Link to the Past]

I don't think we should leave it up to random vandals to decide if these statues should stay, be moved elsewhere or be destroyed.

Who should it be left up to? Because the people who can remove it are not exactly racing to do so.

 

[cwmartin]

I suppose the counter argument to parallel the "statues of Roman Emperors" example would be to understand how similar the historical context of which those statues were erected to the Confederate examples.

They glorified the martial achievements of leaders who invaded foreign lands, killed hundreds of thousands of soldiers and civilians alike, and enslaved hundreds of thousands more. Those statues were built to exemplify Roman rape and pillage and the accomplishment of the Raper In Chief, sometimes centuries after the fact. I'm sure many a Gaul looked at those statues in the piazza and were horrified.

What seems to have changed from 2000 years ago to now is time. Those wounds have mostly healed, and those symbols of oppression are now symbols of abstract ancient history and the art style of a people long dead.

But how much time must we wait? Is 220 years not long enough in the case of the Columbus statue? Is there not enough history here?

I'm not sure if you think Rome existed in a bubble or something because you keep mentioning it. Someone already mentioned Emperor Commodus in this thread, and nearly every statue of him was destroyed by Rome after his assassination. So what exactly is your point? Rome has old statues that are valuable for being old, so let the Columbus statues get old so we can appreciate the artistry of them? Rome destroyed statues of shitty people too. 'Whatabout' using that as an example?

 

[kingkaiser]

As a European I am quite shocked about such vandalism getting rationalized.

Vigilante justice is a very dangerous path to walk on my fellow Americans friends.

 

[RedSparrows]

I'm not sure if you think Rome existed in a bubble or something because you keep mentioning it. Someone already mentioned Emperor Commodus in this thread, and nearly every statue of him was destroyed by Rome after his assassination. So what exactly is your point? Rome has old statues that are valuable for being old, so let the Columbus statues get old so we can appreciate the artistry of them? Rome destroyed statues of shitty people too. 'Whatabout' using that as an example?

But there are plenty of statues that didn't get destroyed, presumably some are of some heinous people. Thus the observation still has some provocative power.

Man, if I had the time it'd be interesting to dive into the discourse this thread taps into. Ideas of public history and how it is best accessed, art as glorification/as record-keeping, ideas of morality as projected into history. Fascinating stuff, and so very thorny.

The issue is more if someone has a monument in a Public Space that person should be a Paragon of Virtue which will have positive effect on the community. If a person isn't a Paragon of Virtue than than the monument should be in a museum where context can be added.

'Paragons of Virtue' (?!) aren't easily found, and weren't necessarily even historically significant. Again, the thorns abound.

 

[entremet]

As a European I am quite shocked about such vandalism getting rationalized.

Vigilante justice is a very dangerous path to walk on my fellow Americans friends.

Us Americans have always been a wild bunch. Our recent peacefulness is actually an exception in our history.

That said, I don’t support what happened to the statue.

 

[ahoyhoy]

I'm not sure if you think Rome existed in a bubble or something because you keep mentioning it. Someone already mentioned Emperor Commodus in this thread, and nearly every statue of him was destroyed by Rome after his assassination. So what exactly is your point? Rome has old statues that are valuable for being old, so let the Columbus statues get old so we can appreciate the artistry of them? Rome destroyed statues of shitty people too. 'Whatabout' using that as an example?

Were they destroyed recently? If some had survived in a museum or discovered in an archeological site and someone today had gone and smashed it with a hammer in protest, would they be justified in doing so?

 

[TyrantII]

I suppose the counter argument to parallel the "statues of Roman Emperors" example would be to understand how similar the historical context of which those statues were erected to the Confederate examples.

They glorified the martial achievements of leaders who invaded foreign lands, killed hundreds of thousands of soldiers and civilians alike, and enslaved hundreds of thousands more. Those statues were built to exemplify Roman rape and pillage and the accomplishment of the Raper In Chief, sometimes centuries after the fact. I'm sure many a Gaul looked at those statues in the piazza and were horrified.

What seems to have changed from 2000 years ago to now is time. Those wounds have mostly healed, and those symbols of oppression are now symbols of abstract ancient history and the art style of a people long dead.

But how much time must we wait? Is 220 years not long enough in the case of the Columbus statue? Is there not enough history here?

Time is most certainly a factor, but I'd argue the wounds from the Civil War have only been bandaged, festering and rotting still.

Confederate monuments were erected to keep the wound open and dirty.

 

[lawnchair]

Were they destroyed recently? If some had survived in a museum or discovered in an archeological site and someone today had gone and smashed it with a hammer in protest, would they be justified in doing so?

you can see busts of Commodus is roman museums today. if you went in there with a hammer and tried to bash one because you thought he was a piece of shit, you might be in .. a bit of trouble.

 

[CampbellzSoup]

Who should it be left up to? Because the people who can remove it are not exactly racing to do so.

Things don't just happen. Vote, discuss, and educate. The community/city should decide what to do with this things. Not vandalizing statues, I'm sorry as educated people this is not an acceptable answer.

 

[themagicalkitsune]

Come on, the first two harry potter movies weren't that bad

 

[Metroxed]

I don't even get why we honor him in grade school. Dude never touched American soil, and by all accounts was brutal dictator of espainola.

There's this place called the Americas that involves more places than just the US.

 

[Thelonelykoopa]

you can see busts of Commodus is roman museums today. if you went in there with a hammer and tried to bash one because you thought he was a piece of shit, you might be in .. a bit of trouble.

Yeah but that's within a museum not a public space. Think of it like this up until very recently their was no statues in public places of King John as he was recognized as an awful person even to his contemporaries in England. Nowdays he does have a statue recently put up but if their was public outcry against it than It should be removed (Where I'm not sure as it's a new statue so not fitting of a museum so likely just thrown away somewhere or maybe sold to the highest bidder)

 

[johancruijff]

Too extreme? When you've got Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand calling you back to court to ask, "yo What the fuck!" You know that you're even more insane than your contemporaries.

Yeah they surely had at heart the existence of the natives

come on people

A whole new continent meant money, power and influence

 

[Enduin]

I really hate even bringing up the word, but I think this is where moral relativism comes in.

In the 1940s society had moved to the point where contemporaries were rightfully disgusted and appalled at what Nazi Germany did. That is why there were no monuments and such out up at that time which now need to be destroyed.

These monuments (and the holiday) were for the most part put up during a time where his genocidal acta were definitely not even known by the general populace, but even if they were plenty of contemporaries would not have been bothered by his actions.

When I learned years ago that he was actually reprimanded by the Spanish monarch I was actually shocked. They were capable and willing to do many of the same atrocities.

I just don't see a direct comparison between Columbus monuments, Jim Crow era monuments, and (hypothetical) Nazi monuments that some want to draw. There is overlap but the intent is very different, even if it was very misguided.

This is kind of exactly the problem though. To many people Columbus and his actions and their effects on the Americas might be ancient history no different from the Roman destruction of Carthage, but that's not true for a lot of Native Peoples. Vandalism might not be the best way to go about it with this particular case, but Columbus statues, monuments and Columbus Day need to go one way or another and the public perception of him and the history surrounding him needs to be accurately portrayed and taught as its legacy and lasting effects are still influencing us today.

The re-imagining of history and widespread celebration of this monster serves no purpose in today's world. And whatever good it did back at the turn of the 20th century for Italian American's integration was yet again another thing done at the expense of Native Peoples who to this day are still one of the most marginalized groups in America.

Columbus both directly and indirectly ushered in the total destruction of native peoples throughout the Americas. Disease did most of the work, but Columbus and those who followed in his wake were more than happy to finish the job by their own hands. More importantly Columbus represents and personifies the first in a long history of subjugation and destruction of Native Peoples that is largely denied and sanitized and all too often presented as having little relation to the modern day issues that they face.

So yes, monuments/statues to Columbus and Columbus day are similar to that of Confederate monuments because they also represent a fabricated version of history that only serves to glorify and honor white people at the direct or indirect expense of minority peoples, the violence brought upon them and the struggles they faced, who to this day are still oppressed and struggling to be treated equally in society and government.

 

[JORMBO]

Who should it be left up to? Because the people who can remove it are not exactly racing to do so.

Have a vote. Discuss with the community. Be civilized.

The statue is over 200 years old. I don't think it urgently needs to be removed today.

 

[Mahonay]

Have a vote. Discuss with the community. Be civilized.

The statue is over 200 years old. I don't think it urgently needs to be removed today.

Yup and yup.

 

[Heshinsi]

But i wonder, if we think it this way that means that anything would be eligible for vandalism. Kings did awful things, pyramids were built by slaves... I think anything could be destroyed going this way. No i clearly think the answer is not to destroy things but put them in conext and then discuss with people, inform, debate, do constructive things.

This post is mindblowing because if you think this through you'll end with almost no monuments on the face of the earth which is the stupidest thing ever.



Yo i hope you don't like the Colosseum, most of Roman/Greek temples and statues, the most famous paintings in the world, Pyramids etc. etc.

Almost every single object of historic relevance is been brought you by the blood and tears of slaves and poor people.

You two do know that the Pyramids being built by slaves is historically inaccurate right? Evidence from what the workers were being fed, and burial places for those who died, indicates that they could not have been slaves.

 

[MilkyJoe]

Monuments like this exist in a trickier gray area. These statues are appreciated today not as a reverence to the individuals themselves but instead to the historical context in which they were erected/revered. We want to see statues of ancient Roman emperors for the sheer historocity of the objects themselves rather than try to emulate the feeling the statues might have evoked in a time when the genocide and suppression of Roman Emperors might have been seen as a boon to their society.

It can be argued that Statues of Columbus, especially ones erected over 200 years ago, offer some good history as to what the people of the early United States revered. It begs the question as to what should be considered a "cut off" for when recent history becomes ancient history and statues like this are more interesting to be studied rather than revered.

History doesn't start and stop when we choose it to. In 2 or 300 years time or even a thousand, these statues would fall into the same context as we look back on Roman, Greek or Egyptian monuments. And some of those people were right c*nts,

I am a firm believer is preserving anything of historical reverence, regardless of the subject matter.

 

[Heshinsi]

Yeah they surely had at heart the existence of the natives

come on people

A whole new continent meant money, power and influence

Ah, I'm saying that what he was doing was even too monstrous for Isbella and Ferdinand. As in, even they thought the man was too much.

 

[Mahonay]

History doesn't start and stop when we choose it to. In 2 or 300 years time or even a thousand, these statues would fall into the same context as we look back on Roman, Greek or Egyptian monuments. And some of those people were right c*nts,

I am a firm believer is preserving anything of historical reverence, regardless of the subject matter.

And unlike the low-grade mid-20th century Confederate statues, a Christopher Columbus statue that's hundreds of years old is an actual piece of history.

 

[AJLma]

A statue of 250 years old should not be defaced or destroyed in any way. The content of the statue is irrelevant.

250 years isn't shit. Especially when talking about a brick and plaster obelisk... Not exactly a master craftsmans work that needs to be preserved. Just glorification of a false history.

 

[Woetyler]

Came here for this. Thank you both.

 

[Mesoian]

Columbus day is still a national holiday fam. what should we do about this?

Change to "National Take a fucking break you workaholics" day.

 

[Spieler Eins]

250 years isn't shit. Especially when talking about a brick and plaster obelisk... Not exactly a master craftsmans work that needs to be preserved. Just glorification of a false history.

Which in itself is history.

Yeah but that's within a museum not a public space.

Without looking it up I'm taking a wild guess that Italy has statues of several Caesars in public also.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Another point that needs to be made is that regardless of your thoughts on the vandalism of things like these, this only occurred because of the inaction of those who could remove these statues. Vandalism in this case is a symptom of a greater issue. I'm fine with a "Monster Museum" for something like this to go in, but no one's making such a thing, and many people are opposed to removing these kinds of statues from public spaces.

 

[Akuun]

The guy was pretty much Ramsay Bolton given free reign over an entire race of people.

He definitely shouldn't be idolized.

 

[lawnchair]

Change to "National Take a fucking break you workaholics" day.

we could use a couple more of those.