|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On September 01 2017 19:53 SoSexy wrote:Just a minor thing Puppers, I agree with your post but the flat-earth during the middle-ages is a myth. In fact Columbus took that route because it believed it could lead to Asia way faster, he simply did not consider another continent inbetween. A proof of this is De Sphaera Mundi: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_sphaera_mundiI specialized in medieval philosophy and get picky about these things  anyways, the importance of Columbus is out of discussion. Maybe that guy has been living under a rock, I dunno.
It's not that he's living under a rock, it's this strain of racism that made it fashionable to shit on every historic white person, especially scientists.
What SJWs believe science should be like
Basically, science, history, discovery etc. are all tools invented by white devils to suppress women and minorities.
|
On September 01 2017 19:58 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2017 19:57 Aquanim wrote:
To be clear, that question didn't imply that I don't think Columbus has any significance, but I was curious what people thought in particular was important.
As an aside, you'll find statues of the first European to discover Australia around the place here, but we don't have a day in memory of the guy or anything... Half your country is named for events in his bloody diary *ahem, ship's log* though.
What's your point?
|
edit: oops
On September 01 2017 19:58 PM_ME_NICE_PUPPERS wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2017 19:53 SoSexy wrote:Just a minor thing Puppers, I agree with your post but the flat-earth during the middle-ages is a myth. In fact Columbus took that route because it believed it could lead to Asia way faster, he simply did not consider another continent inbetween. A proof of this is De Sphaera Mundi: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_sphaera_mundiI specialized in medieval philosophy and get picky about these things anyways, the importance of Columbus is out of discussion. Maybe that guy has been living under a rock, I dunno. It's not that he's living under a rock, it's this strain of racism that made it fashionable to shit on every historic white person, especially scientists. What SJWs believe science should be likeBasically, science, history, discovery etc. are all tools invented by white devils to suppress women and minorities.
I'm not shitting on Columbus. I'm curious what in particular people thought was the most important thing about him. Like I said, in my country we don't idolise his counterpart nearly as much.
(And yes, I think I remember hearing somebody wanted to take down a statue of Cook. I guess they wanted to be fashionable.)
|
On September 01 2017 19:58 PM_ME_NICE_PUPPERS wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2017 19:53 SoSexy wrote:Just a minor thing Puppers, I agree with your post but the flat-earth during the middle-ages is a myth. In fact Columbus took that route because it believed it could lead to Asia way faster, he simply did not consider another continent inbetween. A proof of this is De Sphaera Mundi: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_sphaera_mundiI specialized in medieval philosophy and get picky about these things anyways, the importance of Columbus is out of discussion. Maybe that guy has been living under a rock, I dunno. It's not that he's living under a rock, it's this strain of racism that made it fashionable to shit on every historic white person, especially scientists. What SJWs believe science should be likeBasically, science, history, discovery etc. are all tools invented by white devils to suppress women and minorities.
lol that video...
|
On September 01 2017 19:59 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2017 19:58 Acrofales wrote:On September 01 2017 19:57 Aquanim wrote:
To be clear, that question didn't imply that I don't think Columbus has any significance, but I was curious what people thought in particular was important.
As an aside, you'll find statues of the first European to discover Australia around the place here, but we don't have a day in memory of the guy or anything... Half your country is named for events in his bloody diary *ahem, ship's log* though. What's your point?
That there's various ways to honor a person's memory and accomplishments. "Not having a day" is not nearly as impressive a downplaying of James Cook as it sounds when you realize he named about half the places in your country. Everybody in the Whitsundays knows they are called the Whitsundays because James Cook sailed past them on Whitsunday. Everybody in Australia knows that 1770 is called thus, because James Cook landed there in 1770. And there are Cook streets all over the country (and Tasman streets in the places there aren't Cook streets, not to mention an entire island-state named after the guy). Trying to downplay Australia's fetish for its discoverer(s) by saying that "at least you don't have a Cook day" is frankly bizar.
And I really don't have a problem with it. Just as I don't have a problem with remembering Columbus. But you seem to have a problem with Columbus, so I don't really get it.
I mean, I honestly think James Cook was a pretty awesome dude, and his travels around the world were wicked sick. Both for exploration, and for science. But then again, I think Columbus was quite similar, just 3 centuries earlier.
And they both claimed all the lands they came across in the name of their crown. It was just the way the world worked back then.
|
On September 01 2017 18:36 SoSexy wrote:You can make any analogy you want, I just wrote the first one that came to my mind. Do you prefer the statue of Caesar? + Show Spoiler +https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/Roma-Statua_di_cesare.jpg Or the statue of Alexander the Great in Skopje? Both leaders killed hundred of thousands of people. Should we erase their memory? No. You can't look at Columbus and say 'he used violent methods'. He used that methods that were used by everyone in his time. It's the same debate with the Inquisition - they weren't peculiar sadists, they were using the tools that were common in all law courts in Europe. We can't do history with our modern lenses.
Rather ironic that you chose the example of the statue of Alexander the Great in Skopje, seeing that statue is actually an attempt on revisionist nation building on the part of the former Yugoslavian country. Alexander the Great and the ancient Kingdom of Macedon has nothing to do with current country of Macedonia; not the same peoples, not the same language, not part of the cultural fabric, and he never lived there. Officially, it isn't Alexander the Great, it just happens to look like him.
In any case you cannot say Columbus nor the Inquisition weren't oustandingly cruel for their times; the contemporaries of Columbus were rather shocked by his actions, and in some parts Catholic Europe the Inquisition were viewed with suspicion and in some cases outright refusal such as in the Catalan region of Spain and in Venetian lands, whilst Protestant countries can only look at the Inquisition with horror.
|
|
|
On September 01 2017 20:02 SoSexy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2017 19:58 PM_ME_NICE_PUPPERS wrote:On September 01 2017 19:53 SoSexy wrote:Just a minor thing Puppers, I agree with your post but the flat-earth during the middle-ages is a myth. In fact Columbus took that route because it believed it could lead to Asia way faster, he simply did not consider another continent inbetween. A proof of this is De Sphaera Mundi: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_sphaera_mundiI specialized in medieval philosophy and get picky about these things anyways, the importance of Columbus is out of discussion. Maybe that guy has been living under a rock, I dunno. It's not that he's living under a rock, it's this strain of racism that made it fashionable to shit on every historic white person, especially scientists. What SJWs believe science should be likeBasically, science, history, discovery etc. are all tools invented by white devils to suppress women and minorities. lol that video...
Decolonize your mind and embrace voodoo magic.
|
On September 01 2017 19:58 PM_ME_NICE_PUPPERS wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2017 19:53 SoSexy wrote:Just a minor thing Puppers, I agree with your post but the flat-earth during the middle-ages is a myth. In fact Columbus took that route because it believed it could lead to Asia way faster, he simply did not consider another continent inbetween. A proof of this is De Sphaera Mundi: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_sphaera_mundiI specialized in medieval philosophy and get picky about these things anyways, the importance of Columbus is out of discussion. Maybe that guy has been living under a rock, I dunno. It's not that he's living under a rock, it's this strain of racism that made it fashionable to shit on every historic white person, especially scientists. What SJWs believe science should be likeBasically, science, history, discovery etc. are all tools invented by white devils to suppress women and minorities.
Glad to know the rightwing will stand in defense of science when it's attacked.
|
On September 01 2017 20:07 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2017 19:59 Aquanim wrote:On September 01 2017 19:58 Acrofales wrote:On September 01 2017 19:57 Aquanim wrote:
To be clear, that question didn't imply that I don't think Columbus has any significance, but I was curious what people thought in particular was important.
As an aside, you'll find statues of the first European to discover Australia around the place here, but we don't have a day in memory of the guy or anything... Half your country is named for events in his bloody diary *ahem, ship's log* though. What's your point? That there's various ways to honor a person's memory and accomplishments. "Not having a day" is not nearly as impressive a downplaying of James Cook as it sounds when you realize he named about half the places in your country. Everybody in the Whitsundays knows they are called the Whitsundays because James Cook sailed past them on Whitsunday. Everybody in Australia knows that 1770 is called thus, because James Cook landed there in 1770. And there are Cook streets all over the country (and Tasman streets in the places there aren't Cook streets, not to mention an entire island-state named after the guy). Trying to downplay Australia's fetish for its discoverer by saying that "at least you don't have a Cook day" is frankly bizarre.
All of the above notwithstanding, my impression is that the US makes a much bigger deal of Columbus than we do of Cook. The fact that we don't rename a bunch of places has less to do with respect for Cook and his legacy than it does with the fact that renaming places is a difficulty-causing and fairly unproductive activity. I suppose it's possible I've misjudged how the US generally feels about Columbus.
And I really don't have a problem with it. Just as I don't have a problem with remembering Columbus. But you seem to have a problem with Columbus, so I don't really get it.
I don't personally have a problem with Columbus, but I don't have a problem with there being a few less statues of him around, either. (To be clear, I do have a problem with them being vandalised - that is a different thing. And I wouldn't want to see them all come down.)
The question I put on the last page has led to a whole bunch of jumped conclusions about my viewpoint that are regrettable.
|
On September 01 2017 20:13 SoSexy wrote:Ffs, I just chose the name of someone who is known by everyone. Do you really believe I chose him to attemp a revisionist nation building attempt?! Just take whatever you like - it is an example, just as this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleon_as_Mars_the_Peacemaker
No I don't. I presume you chose the statue in Skopje due to ignorance, and at that a rather ironic example considering it is the very opposte of what you want to use it as an example of, so I am bringing that ignorance to your attention.
However, for someone who professes to "specialise in medieval philosophy" you do seem to be rather lacking in European history in general.
Btw, funnily enough I went to Milan a couple of weeks ago and walked past Plaza Brera and I swear I didn't see such a grand statue. Was it removed?
|
As long at the statue doesn't gloss over the messy parts of Columbus's journeys, he can have a statue. That is what the plaque for. But to often these monuments flatten history and remove all of its complexity, turning the historical figures into folk heroes, rather than nuanced historical figures.
|
On September 01 2017 20:15 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2017 19:58 PM_ME_NICE_PUPPERS wrote:On September 01 2017 19:53 SoSexy wrote:Just a minor thing Puppers, I agree with your post but the flat-earth during the middle-ages is a myth. In fact Columbus took that route because it believed it could lead to Asia way faster, he simply did not consider another continent inbetween. A proof of this is De Sphaera Mundi: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_sphaera_mundiI specialized in medieval philosophy and get picky about these things anyways, the importance of Columbus is out of discussion. Maybe that guy has been living under a rock, I dunno. It's not that he's living under a rock, it's this strain of racism that made it fashionable to shit on every historic white person, especially scientists. What SJWs believe science should be likeBasically, science, history, discovery etc. are all tools invented by white devils to suppress women and minorities. Glad to know the rightwing will stand in defense of science when it's attacked.
Yeah, "right wing" is really not a term that is in any way applicable to me. You guys call anyone right-wing who only agrees with you on 95% of all issues. That's really destructive, there's a middle-ground between literally Hitler and Noam Chomsky.
I just don't see any point in joining the Anti-Trump-Circlejerk (with which I agree whole heartedly) because I have nothing to add. Talking about points of friction is, in my view, more productive but that doesn't mean that if we cared to, we wouldn't find major agreements on a large majority of issues.
|
That's an interesting defintion of right wing you have there.
|
On September 01 2017 20:15 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2017 20:07 Acrofales wrote:On September 01 2017 19:59 Aquanim wrote:On September 01 2017 19:58 Acrofales wrote:On September 01 2017 19:57 Aquanim wrote:
To be clear, that question didn't imply that I don't think Columbus has any significance, but I was curious what people thought in particular was important.
As an aside, you'll find statues of the first European to discover Australia around the place here, but we don't have a day in memory of the guy or anything... Half your country is named for events in his bloody diary *ahem, ship's log* though. What's your point? That there's various ways to honor a person's memory and accomplishments. "Not having a day" is not nearly as impressive a downplaying of James Cook as it sounds when you realize he named about half the places in your country. Everybody in the Whitsundays knows they are called the Whitsundays because James Cook sailed past them on Whitsunday. Everybody in Australia knows that 1770 is called thus, because James Cook landed there in 1770. And there are Cook streets all over the country (and Tasman streets in the places there aren't Cook streets, not to mention an entire island-state named after the guy). Trying to downplay Australia's fetish for its discoverer by saying that "at least you don't have a Cook day" is frankly bizarre. All of the above notwithstanding, my impression is that the US makes a much bigger deal of Columbus than we do of Cook. The fact that we don't rename a bunch of places has less to do with respect for Cook and his legacy than it does with the fact that renaming places is a difficulty-causing and fairly unproductive activity. I suppose it's possible I've misjudged how the US generally feels about Columbus. Show nested quote +And I really don't have a problem with it. Just as I don't have a problem with remembering Columbus. But you seem to have a problem with Columbus, so I don't really get it. I don't personally have a problem with Columbus, but I don't have a problem with there being a few less statues of him around, either. (To be clear, I do have a problem with them being vandalised - that is a different thing. And I wouldn't want to see them all come down.) The question I put on the last page has led to a whole bunch of jumped conclusions about my viewpoint that are regrettable.
When someone argues against the status quo (for example, when advocating removing a statue), they usually have a stronger argument than "I don't have a problem with there being less of them".
|
On September 01 2017 20:26 Plansix wrote:
As long at the statue doesn't gloss over the messy parts of Columbus's journeys, he can have a statue. That is what the plaque for. But to often these monuments flatten history and remove all of its complexity, turning the historical figures into folk heroes, rather than nuanced historical figures.
It should be just the statue, with the name and the wiki article link.
|
On September 01 2017 20:27 PM_ME_NICE_PUPPERS wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2017 20:15 Nebuchad wrote:On September 01 2017 19:58 PM_ME_NICE_PUPPERS wrote:On September 01 2017 19:53 SoSexy wrote:Just a minor thing Puppers, I agree with your post but the flat-earth during the middle-ages is a myth. In fact Columbus took that route because it believed it could lead to Asia way faster, he simply did not consider another continent inbetween. A proof of this is De Sphaera Mundi: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_sphaera_mundiI specialized in medieval philosophy and get picky about these things anyways, the importance of Columbus is out of discussion. Maybe that guy has been living under a rock, I dunno. It's not that he's living under a rock, it's this strain of racism that made it fashionable to shit on every historic white person, especially scientists. What SJWs believe science should be likeBasically, science, history, discovery etc. are all tools invented by white devils to suppress women and minorities. Glad to know the rightwing will stand in defense of science when it's attacked. Yeah, "right wing" is really not a term that is in any way applicable to me. You guys call anyone right-wing who only agrees with you on 95% of all issues. That's really destructive, there's a middle-ground between literally Hitler and Noam Chomsky. I just don't see any point in joining the Anti-Trump-Circlejerk (with which I agree whole heartedly) because I have nothing to add. Talking about points of friction is, in my view, more productive but that doesn't mean that if we cared to, we wouldn't find major agreements on a large majority of issues.
If this is how you feel then I advise you not to lead with some generalisation about "lefties" next time:
On September 01 2017 18:41 PM_ME_NICE_PUPPERS wrote:...
Lefties think that we must destroy history lest we learn from it. Because if we acknowledge that WASPMs aren't just responsible for most bad stuff in history but also most good stuff in history, Shaniquankwa might feel left out.
as if people on the left wing of politics agree about 95% of anything.
EDIT:
On September 01 2017 20:29 Sbrubbles wrote:...
When someone argues against the status quo (for example, when advocating removing a statue), they usually have a stronger argument than "I don't have a problem with there being less of them".
I guess that would be why I'm not really advocating for its removal then.
|
On September 01 2017 20:29 Sbrubbles wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2017 20:15 Aquanim wrote:On September 01 2017 20:07 Acrofales wrote:On September 01 2017 19:59 Aquanim wrote:On September 01 2017 19:58 Acrofales wrote:On September 01 2017 19:57 Aquanim wrote:
To be clear, that question didn't imply that I don't think Columbus has any significance, but I was curious what people thought in particular was important.
As an aside, you'll find statues of the first European to discover Australia around the place here, but we don't have a day in memory of the guy or anything... Half your country is named for events in his bloody diary *ahem, ship's log* though. What's your point? That there's various ways to honor a person's memory and accomplishments. "Not having a day" is not nearly as impressive a downplaying of James Cook as it sounds when you realize he named about half the places in your country. Everybody in the Whitsundays knows they are called the Whitsundays because James Cook sailed past them on Whitsunday. Everybody in Australia knows that 1770 is called thus, because James Cook landed there in 1770. And there are Cook streets all over the country (and Tasman streets in the places there aren't Cook streets, not to mention an entire island-state named after the guy). Trying to downplay Australia's fetish for its discoverer by saying that "at least you don't have a Cook day" is frankly bizarre. All of the above notwithstanding, my impression is that the US makes a much bigger deal of Columbus than we do of Cook. The fact that we don't rename a bunch of places has less to do with respect for Cook and his legacy than it does with the fact that renaming places is a difficulty-causing and fairly unproductive activity. I suppose it's possible I've misjudged how the US generally feels about Columbus. And I really don't have a problem with it. Just as I don't have a problem with remembering Columbus. But you seem to have a problem with Columbus, so I don't really get it. I don't personally have a problem with Columbus, but I don't have a problem with there being a few less statues of him around, either. (To be clear, I do have a problem with them being vandalised - that is a different thing. And I wouldn't want to see them all come down.) The question I put on the last page has led to a whole bunch of jumped conclusions about my viewpoint that are regrettable. When someone argues against the status quo (for example, when advocating removing a statue), they usually have a stronger argument than "I don't have a problem with there being less of them".
I see where Aquanim is coming from, I think we have the same view on this. It goes something like "Yeah I think you're right/making a decent point but if I were to unfuck the US that would be the 117th thing I would focus on"
|
On September 01 2017 20:33 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2017 20:29 Sbrubbles wrote:On September 01 2017 20:15 Aquanim wrote:On September 01 2017 20:07 Acrofales wrote:On September 01 2017 19:59 Aquanim wrote:On September 01 2017 19:58 Acrofales wrote:On September 01 2017 19:57 Aquanim wrote:
To be clear, that question didn't imply that I don't think Columbus has any significance, but I was curious what people thought in particular was important.
As an aside, you'll find statues of the first European to discover Australia around the place here, but we don't have a day in memory of the guy or anything... Half your country is named for events in his bloody diary *ahem, ship's log* though. What's your point? That there's various ways to honor a person's memory and accomplishments. "Not having a day" is not nearly as impressive a downplaying of James Cook as it sounds when you realize he named about half the places in your country. Everybody in the Whitsundays knows they are called the Whitsundays because James Cook sailed past them on Whitsunday. Everybody in Australia knows that 1770 is called thus, because James Cook landed there in 1770. And there are Cook streets all over the country (and Tasman streets in the places there aren't Cook streets, not to mention an entire island-state named after the guy). Trying to downplay Australia's fetish for its discoverer by saying that "at least you don't have a Cook day" is frankly bizarre. All of the above notwithstanding, my impression is that the US makes a much bigger deal of Columbus than we do of Cook. The fact that we don't rename a bunch of places has less to do with respect for Cook and his legacy than it does with the fact that renaming places is a difficulty-causing and fairly unproductive activity. I suppose it's possible I've misjudged how the US generally feels about Columbus. And I really don't have a problem with it. Just as I don't have a problem with remembering Columbus. But you seem to have a problem with Columbus, so I don't really get it. I don't personally have a problem with Columbus, but I don't have a problem with there being a few less statues of him around, either. (To be clear, I do have a problem with them being vandalised - that is a different thing. And I wouldn't want to see them all come down.) The question I put on the last page has led to a whole bunch of jumped conclusions about my viewpoint that are regrettable. When someone argues against the status quo (for example, when advocating removing a statue), they usually have a stronger argument than "I don't have a problem with there being less of them". I see where Aquanim is coming from, I think we have the same view on this. It goes something like "Yeah I think you're right/making a decent point but if I were to unfuck the US that would be the 117th thing I would focus on"
I wouldn't even be discussing this if the argument that "the left wing wants to erase history by bringing down some statues" hadn't been made.
|
I think this is something that has more Europeans interested (and an Australian) than Americans, and "our" prevailing view appears to be that of nonchalance. I am curious to hear what exactly does the Statue of Columbus represent to each American member of this thread?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
