Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Christopher Columbus may have been Spanish and Jewish, documentary says

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 363 posts

Re: Christopher Columbus may have been Spanish and Jewish, documentary says

#271

Post by sameoldtune »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #268
dathinab wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

idk. USA people seem to be the only ones obsessed with him sometimes to a point as treating him as a hero from their history also people often treat it as the beloved kind of "small person who know better even through everyone told them they where wrong and succeeded by not giving up" story but the funny thing is the more you learn about him the more you might realize how wrong all of this is firstly he hadn't had su…

The lionization of Columbus was started by late 19th century Italian immigrants who wanted something to demonstrate their worth to an America that looked down on them. It is somewhat relevant if he wasn't actually Italian.

It hardly matters anymore. Probably at least half of all Americans live in a state or city that celebrates Indigenous Peoples Day instead of Columbus Day. Italians have secured their place in society.

Re: Christopher Columbus may have been Spanish and Jewish, documentary says

#272

Post by kajecounterhack »

InDubioProRubio wrote: post #203
kajecounterhack wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention that he was hugely genocidal and enslaved the Tainos; who really wants to lay claim to that.

To be fair- they all were and are like that, back then and now. It just that the industrialization dividend created a cultural power asymmetry which made those nightmares a permanently one sided affair for a while.

Why do we need "to be fair" about who we celebrate? I don't understand why anyone is arguing the point that we shouldn't celebrate people who did awful things.

They also weren't all the same. Not everyone goes around enslaving people and using their life to seek riches and fame. I don't think anyone complains about historical figures who, flaws and all, fought for higher ideals like personal liberty.

Re: Christopher Columbus may have been Spanish and Jewish, documentary says

#273

Post by kajecounterhack »

juunpp wrote: post #107
kajecounterhack wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention that he was hugely genocidal and enslaved the Tainos; who really wants to lay claim to that.

I don't know that Columbus was genocidal. He was a slaver, rapist, murderer, gold digger and all-round motherfucker for sure, so much so that the Spanish monarchy sent an envoy to arrest him, bring him back to Spain to be tried, and threw him in jail I think for a couple years. Aside from gold and spices sent from him back to the Spanish monarchs after his first arrival, he also sent back slaves and the queen was, pr…

def genocidal: relating to or involving the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group.

Pedantic to say that Columbus subjugating entire people groups with mass murder doesn't qualify here. The manpower skew was huge, so how exactly did they subjugate the Tainos without genocide? 7M tainos died when all was said and done.

Re: Christopher Columbus may have been Spanish and Jewish, documentary says

#274

Post by kajecounterhack »

ithkuil wrote: post #145
chucke wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling Cortes genocidal is also quite farfetched, considering that he conquered the Aztec territory, despite being vastly outnumbered, because every native tribe and settlement they found on the way banded together to overthrow the Aztec. I wouldn't call the Aztecs genocidal either, despite the ritual sacrifices, brutal treatment of other peoples, and everybody in mesoamerica who came to know them hating them so muc…

Yeah I think the light use of the word genocide doesn't make justice for the instance where there was actual genocide, which is when you murder people with the explicit intent of destroying a nation/culture/group.

The approach of colonizers from the west in the new world was broadly genocidal though. Like, "we want to live here, so go on git." Killing buffalo to literally starve natives, for example. Allowing natives in occupied lands to be only slaves or dead, for example. Even if it doesn't 100% fit whatever hard definition you're using, it approximates it pretty goddamn well.

Re: Christopher Columbus may have been Spanish and Jewish, documentary says

#275

Post by grumple »

pvaldes wrote: post #159
dumbo-octopus wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of Jesus’s original disciples were Jewish. And you can be certainly be Jewish without having Jewish DNA, but there’s some controversy as to whether the reverse is true.

There is not such thing as "Jewish" DNA. Is a culture and religion, but not a fully different race. Some genes could be in the past more represented, but it was just "Mediterranean dotation". A mix of European, African and Asian. Today is much more mixed fortunately.

You are wrong on this point. Genetically, Jews are as distinct as any other race (and the world's obsession with Jews mean that you can find plenty of studies on Jewish genetics). Jews take DNA tests and get marked as "Ashekanzi Jewish" (or other Jewish type) on tests like 23andme.

Re: Christopher Columbus may have been Spanish and Jewish, documentary says

#276

Post by cafard »

slightwinder wrote: post #265
wpasc wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed that his ethnicity is a silly topic to be discussed, but calling Christopher Columbus a "slightly" relevant guy definitely feels like a stretch.

He was a small gear in a long chain of events. If not Columbus, someone else would likely have found the New World. It was the age of (Europeans) Discovery after all, where many people were sailing the world and finding new routes and lands.

Indeed. Next thing somebody will be making a fuss about Isaac Newton.

Re: Christopher Columbus may have been Spanish and Jewish, documentary says

#277

Post by borski »

slightwinder wrote: post #265
wpasc wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed that his ethnicity is a silly topic to be discussed, but calling Christopher Columbus a "slightly" relevant guy definitely feels like a stretch.

He was a small gear in a long chain of events. If not Columbus, someone else would likely have found the New World. It was the age of (Europeans) Discovery after all, where many people were sailing the world and finding new routes and lands.

Sure. But it wasn’t someone else; it was Columbus.

If it were someone else, I’m certain we’d be talking about them instead.

Re: Christopher Columbus may have been Spanish and Jewish, documentary says

#278

Post by Thiez »

lazyeye wrote: post #270
slightwinder wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was a small gear in a long chain of events. If not Columbus, someone else would likely have found the New World. It was the age of (Europeans) Discovery after all, where many people were sailing the world and finding new routes and lands.

This same logic applies to every discovery in all of human history.

Sure. This is just Great Man theory [1] in action. It's a bit absurd, once you know about it you see it everywhere.

It's especially distasteful when it's about people who 'discovered' places, because the next step was usually the subjugation or genocide of the people already living in the discovered place. But we still celebrate the explorers as heroes.

1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_man_theory

Re: Christopher Columbus may have been Spanish and Jewish, documentary says

#279

Post by WorkerBee28474 »

netdevnet wrote: post #197
WorkerBee28474 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You pretend like it was a bunch of villages living in happy harmony until the Catholics arrived. You're lying. It was part of the post-Roman empire, then it got conquered by Muslims, then it got re-conquered by Catholics. Hence, reconquista.

Off-topic but why do people keep referring to Catholic Christians as Catholics as opposed to just Christians? I noticed that a lot in anglo-saxon spheres. It seems to function as an othering technique. I wonder if you are aware of you doing it. Other groups don't seem to get that kind of categorisation (just look at this thread)

> Off-topic but why do people keep referring to Catholic Christians as Catholics as opposed to just Christians

Mostly because it's a way to communicate such that the listener knows who you're talking about. Another example is calling Mormons 'Mormon' instead of Christian.

If you say 'Christian' people will think of what is likely in that geographic area the most common type of Christian, probably some form of protestant. If you say 'Catholic' the listener knows that you're talking about the group of people who follow the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. If you say 'Mormon', they'll also know who you mean.

It's also possible to subdivide the group referred to above as 'Christian' - you can use 'Baptist', 'Pentecostal', etc. Those are also names that aren't "Christian" for groups of Christians.

Re: Christopher Columbus may have been Spanish and Jewish, documentary says

#280

Post by alephxyz »

slightwinder wrote: post #265
wpasc wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed that his ethnicity is a silly topic to be discussed, but calling Christopher Columbus a "slightly" relevant guy definitely feels like a stretch.

He was a small gear in a long chain of events. If not Columbus, someone else would likely have found the New World. It was the age of (Europeans) Discovery after all, where many people were sailing the world and finding new routes and lands.

IIRC Cabot was trying to raise money for an expedition at the same time as Columbus and did reach continental America before him.
Post reply on HN