Fuck Colombus Day

[thriller]

Celebrate a man who helped bring about the holocaust of the Native Americans? No thanks.

[Summerspeaker]

Indeed. I'm going to be attending Indigenous Day events at my university instead. Celebrating Columbus is celebrating white supremacy.

[Ele'ill]

You know- I reread the opening chapter(s) of A People's History of the United States(Zinn) and realized that people talk of 'the dark ages' and don't send us back to 'the dark ages' when it's obvious from a historical perspective when viewing social justice we've actually never left.

The slaves (of a wide range of ethnic origins) have 'jobs' now and they have the 'right' to participate in meaningless party politic activities such as voting- they have the right to go to some public places to spend their money on items made in an economy that is solely fueled by slave systems and white supremacy.

This isn't necessarily bad news in the sense that the left or the struggle for social justice hasn't exactly lost any ground- which is easy to think under such circumstances but at the same time it gives us the hope of future genuine victories that stick.


For everybody in the world.

[Il Medico]

Hey, I remember the shit storm on this from last year. Lets hope no more which doctors reval themselves.

[the last donut of the night]

Hey, I remember the shit storm on this from last year. Lets hope no more which doctors reval themselves.

indeed, that was quite the thread

[L.A.P.]

Columbus didn't even necessarily discover America but there is no denying the significance of what he accomplished but there is also no denying the horrible things he did.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

Columbus didn't even necessarily discover America but there is no denying the significance of what he accomplished but there is also no denying the horrible things he did.

I really hope you understand the significance of what he accomplished in the same way you understand the significance of Leopold's Congo, or the holocaust ...

[Red Commissar]

Even with out the day there is always going to be ways he is going to be enshrined in the west. There are plenty of political units named after him, from cities (Columbus) to entire countries (Colombia). I believe there is a volunteer order for Catholics called the "Knights of Columbus" too.

Growing up though, I hadn't really heard anything "negative" about Columbus or European colonization in general until I got up into high school, and even then it was but a passing comment.

[The Red Next Door]

I wore a shirt, which i wrote fuck columbus day on the back and the list of crimes on the front.

[Queercommie Girl]

From a Marxist perspective, the European colonisation of North and South America are not equal. North America was a primitive communist society when the Europeans arrived so in terms of productive relation the European conquest was wholly reactionary. It was a capitalist colonial society destroying an egalitarian one.

But the Incas and Aztecs already had class societies based on the slavery system when the Spanish arrived. While the substitution of slavery by capitalism is simply one ruling class replacing another, there was partial progress in terms of productive relation in some ways as elements inherent to slavery society such as human sacrifice and theocratic rule by god-kings essentially disappeared.

[black magick hustla]

tbh nobody really ccelebrates colombus day i dont even know what day it is its something for italian americans to jerkoff about thats it

[black magick hustla]

But the Incas and Aztecs already had class societies based on the slavery system when the Spanish arrived. While the substitution of slavery by capitalism is simply one ruling class replacing another, there was partial progress in terms of productive relation in some ways as elements inherent to slavery society such as human sacrifice and theocratic rule by god-kings essentially disappeared.

yea and it was replaced by fiefdoms, powerful landowners, near slavery status for most indigenous people, and smallpox

tbh i think this kind of value judgements are useless

[bcbm]

North America was a primitive communist society when the Europeans arrived

north american indian societies were not a homogenous entity

[thriller]

north american indian societies were not a homogenous entity

That's true. There's kind of this connotation (right use of the word?) in American society that all the Native Americans had the same system of living/culture. Plains Indians were predominately patriarchal while eastern Natives had more of a matriarchal system. They also fought each other, they weren't all united as one group. Once they saw impending doom brought about by Europeans, then they made alliances, and even then they still had conflicts.

[Queercommie Girl]

But by and large, they were still what Marxist anthropologists would classify as primitive tribal societies that did not possess explicit class differentiation. That's just an objective historical fact that cannot be denied.

I didn't say primitive tribal societies are the ideal communists should aim for, because they are not, but they are not class societies.

[thriller]

Right, one could classify some of the tribes as primitive communistic societies. But you can't group all Native Americans together in one camp. That's like grouping all Asians or Africans in one camp.

[Queercommie Girl]

Right, one could classify some of the tribes as primitive communistic societies. But you can't group all Native Americans together in one camp. That's like grouping all Asians or Africans in one camp.

I'm specifically talking about native Americans in North America. None of the tribes there ever developed explicitly class society.

The native civilisations of Central and South America were slavery societies, not tribal.

[IndependentCitizen]

Is this the day white Americans go on about how they love their European heritage, then tomorrow go on about how we're all communists over here, and we apparently don't shower?

Then fuck Colombus day.

[Ele'ill]

Something I always found amazing- specifically in regards to Zinn's People's History- is that when young students (kids) are taught about Native Americans the numbers and population density pre-Colombus are greatly understated or simply ignored so it appears as though there were a couple thousand natives living here and existing in North America was relatively new to everyone. The natives had just been there a bit longer and had mastered the land to an extent. We all know this is incorrect and makes a huge historical difference. Regardless of Zinn's number estimates that he pulled from multiple resources (25 million Native Americans in America and 75 million between the North and South- correct me if I'm wrong) it is an obvious attempt to play down the genocide.

The historical discussion is always framed around the false notion that 'Native Americans died and so did Europeans'- or 'Yeah the Europeans were not very nice but look at these impressive achievements!'

I'm not interested in looking back (not that long ago mind you) as if our society today is any less brutal- to take that high ground as a 'historian' while ignoring crimes against humanity.

[bcbm]

I'm specifically talking about native Americans in North America. None of the tribes there ever developed explicitly class society.


um this is just not true. many american indian societies developed complex social and political relations, including classes and slave systems.

[Queercommie Girl]

um this is just not true. many american indian societies developed complex social and political relations, including classes and slave systems.

Most didn't. What you say here is in contradiction to what Engels wrote about the Iroquois in his Origins of the Family.

Having "complex social and political relations" doesn't imply it's a class society in the Marxist sense, since many late tribal societies could be extremely complex without having any explicit class differentiation. For instance, in ancient China prior to the establishment of the first dynasty - the Xia - and the formal onset of slavery society around 2000 BCE, the Longshan late neolithic cultures on the North China Plain were very advanced technologically, certainly significantly more so than most North American tribes prior to European contact, but they were still late patriarchal tribal societies, not slavery societies.

[Agnapostate]

So you're still on this same thing? And where do you get the idea that the Aztec Triple Alliance was in "South America," incidentally? It was well into North America, almost completely north of Central America, in fact.

[Queercommie Girl]

So you're still on this same thing?

:confused: Sorry, but are you talking to me?

[Agnapostate]

:confused: Sorry, but are you talking to me?

I am talking to you. I remember you making similar statements a few months ago. I was wondering how your semi-Maoism connected with Sendero Luminoso's assertion that the Inca Empire represented vertical socialism in Peru.

[bcbm]

Most didn't.

many were arranged in various tribal formations, but there were also sedentary and agricultural socities.


What you say here is in contradiction to what Engels wrote about the Iroquois in his Origins of the Family.quite a bit of archeological work has occurred since engels' time and the iroquois are representative of the iroquois, not all american indian society prior to european contact.


Having "complex social and political relations" doesn't imply it's a class society in the Marxist sensewhich is why i specified "including class and slave systems."

[Queercommie Girl]

I am talking to you. I remember you making similar statements a few months ago. I was wondering how your semi-Maoism connected with Sendero Luminoso's assertion that the Inca Empire represented vertical socialism in Peru.

Well, in a nutshell, the Inca empire is certainly not "vertical socialist" (which is a ridiculous term anyway, what the hell is "vertical socialism", like "socialism with classes"? Socialism by definition must be "horizontal" and equalist), it was a slavery society, which used a large number of slaves for human sacrifice.

Just because there is a "state-owned" economy doesn't make it into a "socialist" society. Socialism is determined by the economic base rather than the political superstructure.

But back then I never talked about natives in North America, and it has been quite a long time since I mentioned this topic at all. Do you have a problem with me or something?

[thriller]

Engels was a rad dude, but much of his ideas and research on Native American tribes is out dated. Plains Indians had a very strict social hierarchy. No, it wasn't class based, but then again bourgeoisie society had yet to take root. North American Native tribes were very diverse. Just because someone is part of a Native American tribe doesn't mean they fit into Iriqouis society. Call a Ho-Chunk native a Cherokee and you will get knocked the fuck out.

[Queercommie Girl]

many were arranged in various tribal formations, but there were also sedentary and agricultural socities.


Ok, I don't disagree, but these were still tribal formations, not explicitly class societies. The Longshan cultures in China before 2000 BCE were also sedentary and agricultural societies, but they were late patriarchal chiefdoms, not explicit class societies (i.e. slavery societies).

That's what I said, most North American natives, despite having different forms of tribal organisation etc, many of which were very complex, never actually developed into explicit class societies. There may have been one or two exceptions, but I'm not aware of any direct evidence for them.

Generally speaking, in archaeology, the emergence of class society always corresponds with things like the construction of rammed earth or stone walls to defend cult centres, very significant differentiation in terms of the quality and quantity of burial goods between different tribal members, very significant differentiation in terms of the living space possessed by different tribal members, evidence for the use of a large number of specialist weaponry for relatively large-scale wars, and the use of human sacrificial victims for religious and cultural purposes. In many cases there were also the beginnings of using copper and bronze as materials for tools etc. These things appeared in China by the time of the Xia dynasty, so archaeologists and historians label it as a slavery society, but not in the Longshan late neolithic cultures, which were still late tribal.

[bcbm]

not all american indian societies were tribal, though.

[Plagueround]

Ok, I don't disagree, but these were still tribal formations, not explicitly class societies. The Longshan cultures in China before 2000 BCE were also sedentary and agricultural societies, but they were late patriarchal chiefdoms, not explicit class societies (i.e. slavery societies).

That's what I said, most North American natives, despite having different forms of tribal organisation etc, many of which were very complex, never actually developed into explicit class societies. There may have been one or two exceptions, but I'm not aware of any direct evidence for them.

Generally speaking, in archaeology, the emergence of class society always corresponds with things like the construction of rammed earth or stone walls to defend cult centres, very significant differentiation in terms of the quality and quantity of burial goods between different tribal members, very significant differentiation in terms of the living space possessed by different tribal members, evidence for the use of a large number of specialist weaponry for relatively large-scale wars, and the use of human sacrificial victims for religious and cultural purposes. In many cases there were also the beginnings of using copper and bronze as materials for tools etc. These things appeared in China by the time of the Xia dynasty, so archaeologists and historians label it as a slavery society, but not in the Longshan late neolithic cultures, which were still late tribal.

You should probably stop posting now, go get a copy of 1491, Indian Metropolis, or Facing East From Indian Country (if not all of them), and start reading. Come back when you're more informed. That is not meant to be cruel, but an honest suggestion. Please stop postulating on how our complex and varied societies fit into Marxist theory until you fully understand them.

[the last donut of the night]

um this is just not true. many american indian societies developed complex social and political relations, including classes and slave systems.

An example of this can be the indigenous tribes of the northwestern Pacific in North America. Many, especially the Haida, I believe, had slave systems and private property, along with a centralized leadership system.

[the last donut of the night]

many were arranged in various tribal formations, but there were also sedentary and agricultural socities.


Very right. For example, the Aztec society had abandoned tribal structure by the time of Columbus's 'discovery'.

[Plagueround]

An example of this can be the indigenous tribes of the northwestern Pacific in North America. Many, especially the Haida, I believe, had slave systems and private property, along with a centralized leadership system.

This is a good one. The most shining examples would be the mound cultures that covered about half the United States until being displaced by disease induced collapse. These cultures were still kicking and relevant by the time Columbus got lost.

[∞]

On another note, do you know they(Native Americans) called Washington "town burner" because when his cavalry came, they'd burn down everything (even the people).

Guess where I got that, Derrick Jensen.

[Queercommie Girl]

This is a good one. The most shining examples would be the mound cultures that covered about half the United States until being displaced by disease induced collapse. These cultures were still kicking and relevant by the time Columbus got lost.

Doesn't the line of blaming the collapse of native American civilisations primarily on disease objectively excuse the white European colonists from their genocidal actions?

I'm not a PSL member but this is good article on this topic. No genuine socialist should ever forget about the crimes done by white European capitalist forces in the Americas:

http://www.pslweb.org/site/News2?id=5796

[Queercommie Girl]

So you're still on this same thing? And where do you get the idea that the Aztec Triple Alliance was in "South America," incidentally? It was well into North America, almost completely north of Central America, in fact.

I meant "north America", excluding "central and south America".

[bcbm]

Doesn't the line of blaming the collapse of native American civilisations primarily on disease objectively excuse the white European colonists from their genocidal actions?

I'm not a PSL member but this is good article on this topic. No genuine socialist should ever forget about the crimes done by white European capitalist forces in the Americas:

http://www.pslweb.org/site/News2?id=5796

i don't think plagueround would be one to forget the crimes committed by europeans, but they are correct that the spread of disease decimated many indigenous peoples prior to actual contact.

[Plagueround]

Doesn't the line of blaming the collapse of native American civilisations primarily on disease objectively excuse the white European colonists from their genocidal actions?


No, in fact I've argued strongly against that on this site in the past. However, for the Mississippian culture in particular this was the case as they collapsed prior to heavy colonization. The remnants of this culture went on to become the bulk of the Southeastern "civilized" tribes, all of which certainly felt the impact of American aggressions, expansionism, and ethnic cleansing. It should also be noted that some oral tradition (particularly Cherokee) suggests that during this decline, a revolution against the priest classes may have occurred.

[Rafiq]

Once they saw impending doom brought about by Europeans, then they made alliances, and even then they still had conflicts.

Divide and Conquer... They had probably serveral more conflicts with each other, due to Europeans starting conflict between them.

[bcbm]

statue of columbus attacked with red paint (http://sysiphus-angrynewsfromaroundtheworld.blogspot.com/2010/10/providence-statue-of-christopher.html)

[Agnapostate]

I meant "north America", excluding "central and south America".

Central America is in North America, and aside from that, the Aztec Triple Alliance was almost entirely north of Central America; I believe there was a tiny sliver in present-day Guatemala. In fact, Mayan culture was prevalent in present-day far southern Mexico, and still is in the Yucatan and adjacent regions, the states of Chiapas, Quintana Roo, etc. And as has been said before, the fact that the vast majority of natives were killed by diseases to which they had no previous exposure is a well-documented historical reality. That you've previously insisted that indigenous peoples must have been subjugated because of their monumental technological inferiority is simply evidence of your ignorance of the topic, nothing more.

[Tavarisch_Mike]

I just want to point out that there where ancient civilizations in North America, that had connections with the ones in central america.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahokia

[Queercommie Girl]

Central America is in North America, and aside from that, the Aztec Triple Alliance was almost entirely north of Central America; I believe there was a tiny sliver in present-day Guatemala.


It depends on how you divide up the world. There is more than one way to do it. It can either be just "north and south America" or "north, south and central America".



And as has been said before, the fact that the vast majority of natives were killed by diseases to which they had no previous exposure is a well-documented historical reality.


Which objectively speaking conveniently lifts the blame for the destruction of native cultures and peoples away from the Western colonialists.

Any socialist who doesn't recognise the great genocidal crimes committed by whites against the natives in the Americas is not a genuine socialist, period. I suggest you read some Howard Zinn, rather than BS mainstream Western bourgeois sources.

[Agnapostate]

It depends on how you divide up the world. There is more than one way to do it. It can either be just "north and south America" or "north, south and central America".

And in no instance would Central America be in South America. Its division from "North America" is simply a political rather than geographical classification at present.


Which objectively speaking conveniently lifts the blame for the destruction of native cultures and peoples away from the Western colonialists.

Not at all. The encroachment onto native territories and imprisonment of natives, both of which facilitated the spread of the communicable diseases in question, can be added to the genocide count. And there are still millions of Indians that were deliberately murdered, so it still constitutes a genocide nonetheless even if the majority were killed by infectious disease


Any socialist who doesn't recognise the great genocidal crimes committed by whites against the natives in the Americas is not a genuine socialist, period.

Not a genuine progressive, perhaps, but socialism is part and parcel of a wider leftist worldview. Socialism itself requires only support of the collective ownership and management of the means of production, not any particular historical view.


I suggest you read some Howard Zinn, rather than BS mainstream Western bourgeois sources.

Why don't you cite historical epidemiological research that indicates that the overwhelmingly supported scholarly consensus that the majority of natives were killed by infectious disease is false?

[Agnapostate]

I just want to point out that there where ancient civilizations in North America, that had connections with the ones in central america.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahokia

Yes, the Mississippian Mound Builder society rose, along with other advanced civilizations in eastern North America, when the crop trinity of maize, beans, and squash that had propelled Mesoamerica forward arrived around 1250 AD or so.

[ZeroNowhere]

Any socialist who doesn't recognise the great genocidal crimes committed by whites against the natives in the Americas is not a genuine socialist,Actually, that is not a criterion for socialism, and has no role in determining whether somebody is or is not a socialist. It's about as relevant as whether or not one believes the Earth to be roughly spherical.

[Queercommie Girl]

Actually, that is not a criterion for socialism, and has no role in determining whether somebody is or is not a socialist. It's about as relevant as whether or not one believes the Earth to be roughly spherical.

So you think opposing imperialism, colonialism and genocide is not a relevant matter for socialists?

So suppose hypothetically global socialism is constructed by white workers genocidally slaughtering every single non-white people and then on this basis create a genuinely democratic worker's state, would that be real socialism and acceptable for you? Is your socialism so narrow-minded as to only include narrow class-reductionist economist elements and no wider social and political elements at all?

[Queercommie Girl]

And in no instance would Central America be in South America. Its division from "North America" is simply a political rather than geographical classification at present.


Political classifications can still be used.



Not a genuine progressive, perhaps, but socialism is part and parcel of a wider leftist worldview. Socialism itself requires only support of the collective ownership and management of the means of production, not any particular historical view.
So suppose hypothetically global socialism is constructed by white workers genocidally slaughtering every single non-white people and then on this basis create a genuinely democratic worker's state, would that be real socialism and acceptable for you?

Frankly, socialism that is reactionary/not progressive can be even worse than capitalism, just as Mao said that revisionism can be even worse than real capitalism.

Personally, not all self-proclaimed socialists are my friends or comrades, and to be frank with you, I view some of these socialists with even more suspicion than I view some capitalists in some ways. The struggles within the socialist camp can indeed at times exceed the struggles between socialism and capitalism, as history has already shown.

I'm not a "class-reductionist" and "everything must be subservient to class struggle" doesn't work for me.



Why don't you cite historical epidemiological research that indicates that the overwhelmingly supported scholarly consensus that the majority of natives were killed by infectious disease is false?
Why do you automatically assume mainstream bourgeois sources to be always trustworthy? You think "science" has no class basis?

Why is it that people like Howard Zinn don't seem to talk about the impact of infectious diseases as much as mainstream bourgeois sources and emphasise more on the genocidal aspects? Why is it that mainstream Western sources always tend to "shy away" from a detailed description of the genocide itself, as Zinn himself pointed out?

[Barry Lyndon]

Something I posted elsewhere but no one responded to:confused::
The Genocide-and the resistance- continues:

Between 1492 when Columbus landed, and 1890 the indigenous population of the Western hemisphere(estimated at 50-100 million total 500 years ago) declined by 95% due to European colonialist warfare, enslavement, starvation, and smallpox epidemics. Imagine if every white and black person in the United States today died and you might get a sense of the enormity of this genocide of literally apocalyptic proportions.
To get a glimpse of the humanity behind these numbers, here are two stories from David Stannards book on the subject 'American Holocaust':

A Spanish conquistador describing the conquest of the Maya in Mexico in the 16th century:
"The captain Alonso Lopez de Avila, brother-in-law of the adelantado Montejo, captured, during the war in Bacalan, a young Indian woman of lovely and gracious appearance. She had promised her husband, fearful lest they should kill him in the war, not to have relations with any other man but him, and so no persuasion was sufficient to prevent her from taking her own life to avoid being defiled by another man; and because of this they had her thrown to the dogs."

A United States Cavalryman describing a massacre of a Cheyenne camp in Sand Creek, Colorado, in 1864:
"There was one little child, probably three years old, just big enough to walk through the sand. The Indians had gone ahead, and this little child was behind following after them. The little fellow was perfectly naked, travelling on the sand. I saw one man get off his horse, at a distance of about seventy-five yards, and draw up his rifle and fire-he missed the child. Another man came up and said, 'Let me try the son of a *****; I can hit him.' He got down off his horse, kneeled down and fired at the little child, but he missed him. A third man came up and made a similar remark, and fired, and the little fellow dropped."

This is not just distant history. The genocide, merely in the more subtle form of cultural destruction and social disintegration, continues to this day, with Native Americans continuing to rot on their reservations from poverty, unemployment, alcoholism, and general despair, with barely any notice from the rest of society. The suicide rate of Native Americans aged 15 to 24 is over 3 times the national average, because they see no future. This while the United States became the richest nation on earth in large part because of the vast tracts of gold, copper, oil, and other resources taken from their stolen land.

In Latin America, overt violence and extermination continues to this very day. US-backed neo-fascist proxy states continue to assault, torture, murder, and expel indigenous Americans to make way for agribusinesses, logging companies and mining corporations:
Clashes in Peru leave over 30 dead:
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/06/08/peru.violence/index.html (http://www.anonym.to/?http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/06/08/peru.violence/index.html)
Indigenous Colombians face possibility of extinction:
http://latindispatch.com/2010/09/10/indigenous-colombians-face-extinction-u-n-report-says/ (http://www.anonym.to/?http://latindispatch.com/2010/09/10/indigenous-colombians-face-extinction-u-n-report-says/)

As Mao once said, where there is oppression, there is also resistance. The continuing assault against indigenous peoples has not ended, but the fightback did not die out either. When at Wounded Knee, I talked to aging American Indian Movement veterans who defended the very hill that we stood at the foot of against a siege by FBI agents in 1973. One of those veteran freedom fighters, Leonard Peltier, continues to rot in federal prison on trumped up charges for 33 years and counting, with Obama shamefully becoming one of a long line of US presidents to continue to incarcerate him.
http://www.freepeltiernow.org/welcome.htm (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.freepeltiernow.org/welcome.htm)

In Latin America, indigenous peasants continue to fight for control of their water and their land-and sometimes win against the odds:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/South_America/Bolivia_WaterWarVictory.html (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/South_America/Bolivia_WaterWarVictory.html)
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/06/18/peru.indians/ (http://www.anonym.to/?http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/06/18/peru.indians/)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/apr/23/cochabamba-climate-court (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/apr/23/cochabamba-climate-court)

For Columbus Day, remember Tupac Amaru, Crazy Horse, Sitting Bull, Geronimo, and the countless indigenous people past and present who have fought to survive against the imperialist juggernaught. It is they, and not their persecutors and killers, who deserve to be celebrated and when at all possible supported.

[Barry Lyndon]

For all those who said-"the disease did it":

The official definition of genocide, by the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide(1948) is any of any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy (http://www.anonym.to/?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide#Intent_to_destroy), in whole or in part (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide#In_part), a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

a)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mystic_massacre (http://www.anonym.to/?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mystic_massacre)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sand_Creek_massacre (http://www.anonym.to/?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sand_Creek_massacre)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Robinson_tragedy (http://www.anonym.to/?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Robinson_tragedy)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Grant_massacre (http://www.anonym.to/?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Grant_massacre)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wounded_Knee_Massacre (http://www.anonym.to/?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wounded_Knee_Massacre)
Among many other examples....

b) http://www.bcmj.org/traumatic-pasts-...ceptualization (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.bcmj.org/traumatic-pasts-canadian-aboriginal-people-further-support-complex-trauma-conceptualization)

c)Smallpox deliberately spread by British colonial authorities:
http://www.nativeweb.org/pages/legal...lord_jeff.html (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.nativeweb.org/pages/legal/amherst/lord_jeff.html)

Buffalo systematically slaughtered to starve Native Americans:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...lo.html?cat=37 (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/206157/history_of_the_buffalo.html?cat=37)

d) Native Americans sterilized in the United States:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJyYL4mpAd8 (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJyYL4mpAd8)

e) Indian boarding schools to 'civilize' Native American children:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=16516865 (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16516865)

By all the official criteria, it was a genocide.

[Agnapostate]

So you think opposing imperialism, colonialism and genocide is not a relevant matter for socialists?

Opposition to those rather unpleasant things is not necessarily an issue of socialism qua socialism. It effectively can be, because if a given ethnic group is being annihilated or even discriminated against in a way that prevents their economic managerial input, collective ownership and management of the means of production does not actually exist.


So suppose hypothetically global socialism is constructed by white workers genocidally slaughtering every single non-white people and then on this basis create a genuinely democratic worker's state, would that be real socialism and acceptable for you? Is your socialism so narrow-minded as to only include narrow class-reductionist economist elements and no wider social and political elements at all?

These are aspects of broader forms of social progressivism, which socialists are typically affiliated with. It is, however, logically counterintuitive for a socialist economic paradigm to emerge from genocidal slaughter because this would be the antithesis of participatory democratic input, unless the targeted ethnic groups consented to their own genocide.


Political classifications can still be used.

Not accurately or meaningfully. In fact, most laypersons believe that Mexico is in Central America, while it is in North America "proper." But the fact that Central America is in North America, with Mexico being completely outside of Central America, means that the Mesoamerican cultural area is indeed a "North American" native cultural area.


Frankly, socialism that is reactionary/not progressive can be even worse than capitalism, just as Mao said that revisionism can be even worse than real capitalism.

Personally, not all self-proclaimed socialists are my friends or comrades, and to be frank with you, I view some of these socialists with even more suspicion than I view some capitalists in some ways. The struggles within the socialist camp can indeed at times exceed the struggles between socialism and capitalism, as history has already shown.

I'm not a "class-reductionist" and "everything must be subservient to class struggle" doesn't work for me.

I'm sure that's all true; socialism is simply a component of Marxism or anarchism, and the other progressive elements would cause individuals inclined to be socialists to object to reactionary conditions anyhow, though.


Why do you automatically assume mainstream bourgeois sources to be always trustworthy? You think "science" has no class basis?

That the primary cause of native desolation was communicable disease is not challenged by any modern historian, anthropologist, or archaeologist that I know of, though you're certainly free to demonstrate the converse. That doesn't preclude the possibility that disease transmission was itself a genocidal policy in some form, which is the argument made by Ward Churchill, and apparently David Stannard.


Why is it that people like Howard Zinn don't seem to talk about the impact of infectious diseases as much as mainstream bourgeois sources and emphasise more on the genocidal aspects? Why is it that mainstream Western sources always tend to "shy away" from a detailed description of the genocide itself, as Zinn himself pointed out?

Mainstream Western perceptions tend to view native desolation as caused by primitive nomadic hunter-gatherers futilely resisting sophisticated European warriors, with academic Western perceptions regarding the issue as far more complex, but viral/pathogenic disease as the primary cause of actual death, even if the context or nature of their transmission was genocidal. For the record, are you stating that this is not the case, that the majority of Indians were killed by direct violence rather than disease transmission?


For all those who said-"the disease did it":

This insinuation that I or anyone else who attributes the primary cause of death to the importation of communicable disease that Indians had no previous exposure and therefore no acquired immunity to is necessarily a "genocide denier" is absurd, and a silly strawman. In fact, as with what you've apparently done, I started a thread contending that such a genocide (the "American Holocaust") did occur at the rightist forum that I post at, also having been inspired by the format and links that PrairieFire posted in refuting whichdoctor's assertions: http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?29020-American-Indians-and-Genocide

[Barry Lyndon]

This insinuation that I or anyone else who attributes the primary cause of death to the importation of communicable disease that Indians had no previous exposure and therefore no acquired immunity to is necessarily a "genocide denier" is absurd, and a silly strawman. In fact, as with what you've apparently done, I started a thread contending that such a genocide (the "American Holocaust") did occur at the rightist forum that I post at, also having been inspired by the format and links that PrairieFire posted in refuting whichdoctor's assertions: http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?29020-American-Indians-and-Genocide

Sorry about that, comrade.

[Agnapostate]

Sorry about that, comrade.

Didn't mean to snap at you either, Barry. It's simply that Iseul's insistence on repeating what I and many other people here consider thoroughly inaccurate claims about indigenous America while not knowing elementary facts about the topic put me in a bad temper.

[Plagueround]

Which objectively speaking conveniently lifts the blame for the destruction of native cultures and peoples away from the Western colonialists.

It also obtusely dismisses facts to suggest that the vast majority of native deaths weren't caused by disease, especially in the case of the Mississippian cultures (i.e. the ones you didn't know existed until this thread). However, after (and in many cases along with) the disease came all the other terrible atrocities. I for one am also fully convinced that much of the disease was deliberate, in as much as it could have been in a time when germs were not fully understood. (Nor did it stop...As late as the 1970s, perhaps even later, our IHS clinics and hospitals were used as testing grounds for new vaccines, sometimes with horrible reactions and deaths). No one is suggesting that none of these things happened anymore than one would say there wasn't a world war 1 because the 1918 flu killed millions of people.


Any socialist who doesn't recognise the great genocidal crimes committed by whites against the natives in the Americas is not a genuine socialist, period. I suggest you read some Howard Zinn, rather than BS mainstream Western bourgeois sources.Zinn is great, but I get most of my native history from books written by Indians and conversations with my elders.

[B0LSHEVIK]

"Any socialist who doesn't recognise the great genocidal crimes committed by whites against the natives in the Americas is not a genuine socialist"

I fail to see the correllation of the two events. They are independent of each other, for one can deny the Native holocaust, while at the same time adhereing to Marxism.

Not that its right, it isnt, it was cruel and evil. But, at least in 'Spanish' colonies, its important to remember that it wasnt the really the Spaniard proletarian who oppressed our people, more the bourgeois Mestizo that ruled our colonies in the name of the Spanish crown.

[Agnapostate]

Spaniards are "mestizos," in a sense; Mediterranean Europeans have a minority amount of North African genetic admixture. This would especially apply to Andalusians, however, and I think that the colonial governance on the part of "Spain" was essentially always a matter of Castilian cultural dominance.

[B0LSHEVIK]

Very true.

Spanish people are not by any measure 'pure blood' people. But I do think that argument can be made about anyone. Having said that, I dont think there is a pure bred person, anywhere in the world.

But Im using the defintion of a mestizo as somebody whom is descendant from a native american tribe, any tribe mixed with any other race, African, Euro, Asian, any. The mestizos who ruled in Latin America, as is very evident from the du jour leaders, are the lighter skinned mestizos, more adopted to Euro civilization than to the natives; Señoritos, I think was the term.

[ChaChaman]

I'm specifically talking about native Americans in North America. None of the tribes there ever developed explicitly class society.

Right on, brother! Right on! :D

[Plagueround]

I'm specifically talking about native Americans in North America. None of the tribes there ever developed explicitly class society.

Right on, brother! Right on! :D

No. That's fucking moronic. It's bad and people should feel bad. As a Yakama and Choctaw I must insist people shut up and stop talking. seriously.

[JosefStalinator]

All peoples are guilty of developing classes. That's not the issue about opposing Columbus Day.

[Reznov]

So suppose hypothetically global socialism is constructed by white workers genocidally slaughtering every single non-white people and then on this basis create a genuinely democratic worker's state, would that be real socialism and acceptable for you? Is your socialism so narrow-minded as to only include narrow class-reductionist economist elements and no wider social and political elements at all?

Is there a reason why you use "white" people as the aggressors against every body else that is not "white"? I mean, I don't mind that you generalize entire Europeans as a whole with no regard for their history's, cultures and respective identity's. But who are these "White" people that you talk about?

[4 Leaf Clover]

uhhhh , fuck columbus what ? what are you moaning about , his discovery , or what he did when he settled ?

[Agnapostate]

His role in the "discovery" itself is somewhat inconsequential, since America would have been "discovered" by Europeans in a few years anyway, with Pedro Alvares Cabral's voyage. While he's best known as the "discoverer" of America, what should be better known is the fact that as governor of Hispaniola, Columbus at best turned a blind eye to and at worst deliberately orchestrated the genocide of the native population.

http://i357.photobucket.com/albums/oo18/Dolgoff/Spaniards4.jpg

http://i357.photobucket.com/albums/oo18/Dolgoff/Spaniards5.jpg

http://i357.photobucket.com/albums/oo18/Dolgoff/Spaniards6.jpg

[brigadista]

TmjLj1Trg50

[4 Leaf Clover]

His role in the "discovery" itself is somewhat inconsequential, since America would have been "discovered" by Europeans in a few years anyway, with Pedro Alvares Cabral's voyage. While he's best known as the "discoverer" of America, what should be better known is the fact that as governor of Hispaniola, Columbus at best turned a blind eye to and at worst deliberately orchestrated the genocide of the native population.

http://i357.photobucket.com/albums/oo18/Dolgoff/Spaniards4.jpg

http://i357.photobucket.com/albums/oo18/Dolgoff/Spaniards5.jpg

http://i357.photobucket.com/albums/oo18/Dolgoff/Spaniards6.jpg

hmmm i see

[Black Sheep]

US's present day bullying is colombus's fault .
When i was in junior high, around US's invasion to Iraq, my friend spraypainted on my school's wall
"Columbus, to hell with your curiosity"
In greek it sounds way cooler.
"Γαμω την περιεργεια σου, Κολομβε!"

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

I personally have no real issue with columbus day and think there should be more federal holidays.

I honestly think its funny that columbus is held up at all. Kids are taught he discovered the new world, but in reality people were already there. He didnt discover shit.


That said, what europe and then the western hemisphere govts did to the natives was most fucked up, but im not going to start burning $20 bills.

actually, I just thought of that. To be cherokee and have to see Jackson on every 20 would be insulting.

[Agnapostate]

Or of the Six Nations, and the even more widespread Washington.

[People's War]

We don't have a Hitler Day, why have a Colombus Day?

[Albania]

Commenting on if Central America is part of North America the answer, geologically speaking, is NO. :D


In Central America only Belize and the Northern part of Guatemala are part of the North American Plate. From Southern Guatemala to Panama including the Caribbean islands (except Cuba)are all part of the Caribbean Plate. So the Americas are made up of the North American Plate, Caribbean Plate which includes most of Central America and the Caribbean, and the South American plate.

So Cuba is part of the North American Plate alongside with the Bahamas.

For a map just search for Caribbean Plate.