Columbus—Explorer vs. Conqueror // Enrichment vs Destruction
By Ramblin’ Rose

Recently the US championed that after a lengthy hiatus, we again launched a shuttle from our soil to outer space to continue explorations. Humankind has always dreamed of what lies beyond the horizon.

Well, not all, apparently. As the mourning of the wrongful murder of George Floyd morphed into protests into vandalism into anarchy, the focus of the emotional outbursts had changed from white vs. black to the rejection and destruction of anything of this country, its history, its foundation. Rather than following the agenda stated to explore changes to better civilization, the morphed plan seems to be to destroy this country and return to the glory prior to 1492. Or, maybe even prior to 1700 B.C. when slavery was recorded—the domination of one person over another for forced labor.

At the epicenter of the riots and anarchy in the metro area in Minnesota, the indigenous peoples toppled a statue of Christopher Columbus. (Yes, similar destruction occurred in other cities. In fact, monuments commemorating historical leaders and events in many “Western” countries have met similar destruction.) But why Columbus? Why the native Americans? How did the events of May 25th turn to the hatred for Columbus?

Columbus, as the prototypical Western white male, not Columbus the man, epitomizes the perceived prejudices of the Europeans against the native peoples, according to the multiculturalists. Dinesh D’Souza, an Indian-born American author and filmmaker, defines multiculturalism as “a denial of all Western claims to truth.”

Was Columbus an explorer or a conqueror of the New World? Our world?

Columbus sought a shorter trade route to India and sailed west. But he never set foot on the soil of North America in any of his four voyages to the New World. History credits him with calling the indigenous peoples “Indians” because he thought he had discovered the way to India. On his first voyage, he landed on an island in the Caribbean, probably San Salvador.

Yes, initially Columbus expressed his prejudice about the peaceful islanders, the Tainos. He said that the men were handsome and the women beautiful. D’Souza writes “…He praised the generosity and lack of guile among the Tainos, contrasting their virtues with Spanish vices. He insisted that although they were without religion, they were not idolaters; he was confident that their conversion would come through gentle persuasion and not through force.The reason, he noted, is that Indians possess a high natural intelligence. There is no evidence that Columbus thought that Indians were congenitally or racially inferior to Europeans…” Reportedly, other explorers (Pedro Alvares Cabral, Amerigo Vespucci, Ferdinand Magellan, and Walter Raleigh) provided similarly positive impressions about the native peoples.

Later, Columbus found another reality in the islands. The men he left when he returned to Spain were savagely murdered by the Arawak tribes who also inhabited the region. That reality also contradicts the rosy history reported by the indigenous peoples, specifically the American Indian Movement, aka AIM.

While the exact history and origin of those called Native Americans are still under debate, it seems certain that they were not native to the Americas. Nor is the date or the path of their arrival without discussion. What is widely accepted is that they came from somewhere else. Many theorize that they arrived from Asia (some claim Africa) via the Bering Strait…probably in waves. They were not all from one homogeneous people; they identified as members of different tribes, and they fought and conquered one another for land, property, slaves, and power. Their battles were brutal.

By the time that Cortes arrived at the Yucatan Peninsula, the migrations had reached through the Americas. The Mayans had suffered defeat at the hands of the Aztecs who inhabited central Mexico. The Mayans welcomed the Spaniards, thinking that they were gods—armor, horses and weapons, and also allies in battling the Aztecs when they learned that the Spaniards planned to attack the Aztecs for their gold.

But one must also ask, who had extracted the gold from the mines? Could they have been the slaves captured from other indigenous tribes conquered by the Aztecs prior to the arrival of the White Man? Definitively, yes, according to historians.

In a Twitter exchange between Senator Ted Cruz and Ilhan Omar, Cruz schooled Omar with these words: “As an ‘indigenous person’ myself, I am amused by the left’s cherry-picking of history. My people, the Choctaw, were in a constant state of war with other nations, prior to European colonization of North America. My tribe also owned slaves and fought for the Confederacy in the Civil War, and instead of a rebuke, we get cradle-to-grave free health care at the expense of taxpayers. If Columbus hadn’t stumbled across Hispaniola, Cuba and the Americas, someone else would have. Discovery of the region by European nations was inevitable, as were the diseases and innovations they brought with them. My region in Oklahoma was a battlefield before a single European ever set foot on the continent. Some tribes in the area, prior to the Indian Removal Act, beheaded some of their enemies and captured others as slaves.”

Those clear descriptions do not fit the narrative of the Leftists. Maybe even the modern history curricula in our schools do not match history as much as they align with the 1619 project. D’Souza observes “…Columbus has metamorphosed from a grand crusader into a genocidal maniac and a precursor to Hitler. American Indians are now beyond reproach, canonized as moral and ecological saints.”

It appears that the riots are not really about the death of a black man on May 25th. It appears that BLM, Antifa and now AIM found a moment that afforded them an opportunity to attack Western civilization and realize its destruction. What will follow? Anarchy just as with primitive cultures. We are living the dark side of Humanity.

Leave a Reply