General News Thread

[AsGryffynn]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ...rn_scholarship

bruh

- - - Updated - - -

by all means, continue to talk about things you evidently not only know fuck all about, but clearly have no inclination to do even the tiniest amount of research to rectify said dearth of knowledge

but don't be surprised when people call you a moron

You are one huge idiot...

Some of these accounts may be part of the Black Legend, an intentional defamation of Spain, while others challenge the genocide narrative. Noble David Cook, writing about the Black Legend and the conquest of the Americas wrote, "There were too few Spaniards to have killed the millions who were reported to have died in the first century after Old and New World contact". He instead estimates that the death toll was caused by diseases like smallpox,[174] which according to some estimates had an 80–90% fatality rate in Native American populations. Disease played a significant role in the destruction of the natives. Indirect evidence suggests that some serious illness may have arrived with the 1500 colonists who accompanied Columbus's second expedition in 1493.

Also, sure... let's act like on his second journey he totally wasn't under direct orders from the freaking Queen to enforce the encomienda (serfdom) system.

In 1501 Queen Isabella declared Native Americans as subjects to the crown, and so, as Castilians and legal equals to Spanish Castilians. This implied that enslaving them was illegal except on very specific conditions. It also allowed the establishment of encomiendas, since the encomienda bond was a right reserved to full subjects to the crown. In 1503, the crown began to formally grant encomiendas to conquistadors and officials as rewards for service to the crown. The system of encomiendas was aided by the crown's organizing the indigenous into small harbors known as reducciones, with the intent of establishing new towns and populations.

Well, shall we start tearing down statues of Nappie, Washington and Lincoln as well?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraha...merican_policy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulliv...tion#Aftermath

Go on living off the fairy tale, then...

Columbus was thrown out as governor of Hispaniola because even the Conquistadors thought he was too brutal

they weren't, actually

Well that totally justifies all the atrocities. I guess the next time someone's mean to me I have historical precedent to kill his entire family and burn his house down.

The way Columbus is portrayed in Grand Order? That's historically accurate.

No. He was thrown out because he fell sick and his men actually went apeshit and started pillaging. He was the one keeping them on a leash (they were a raiding crew, what else did you expect?)

By then, he was pretty much even trying to keep some semblance of order among the ranks.

Also, mother of lol if you think GO can be trusted to be historically accurate to any...

- - - Updated - - -

It makes you worthy of appearing in FGO, so why not a statue? Probably more people see the former

That's so cute!

[AAM1232]

It makes you worthy of appearing in FGO, so why not a statue? Probably more people see the former

Being obtuse isn't what I expect from you tbh here.

- - - Updated - - -

You are one huge idiot...



Also, sure... let's act like on his second journey he totally wasn't under direct orders from the freaking Queen to enforce the encomienda (serfdom) system.



Well, shall we start tearing down statues of Nappie, Washington and Lincoln as well?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraha...merican_policy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulliv...tion#Aftermath

Go on living off the fairy tale, then...



No. He was thrown out because he fell sick and his men actually went apeshit and started pillaging. He was the one keeping them on a leash (they were a raiding crew, what else did you expect?)

By then, he was pretty much even trying to keep some semblance of order among the ranks.

Also, mother of lol if you think GO can be trusted to be historically accurate to any...

- - - Updated - - -



That's so cute!

Ah yes keeping them on a leash by making the efforts to loot, pillage and rape more organised. And then citing the "Black Legend", something not conclusively proven at all as an excuse. Not sure why Columbus is the hill to die on for you and others.

[AsGryffynn]

Being obtuse isn't what I expect from you tbh here.

- - - Updated - - -



Ah yes keeping them on a leash by making the efforts to loot, pillage and rape more organised. And then citing the "Black Legend", something not conclusively proven at all as an excuse. Not sure why Columbus is the hill to die on for you and others.

It was either that or allowing said men to go on a rampage across the land, instead of doing stuff like it was done by, well... everyone who came after and before.

Are we forgetting Boudica killed around forty thousand and somehow has an statue still standing?

I oppose removing Columbus statues because it's a race to the bottom: start with Columbus, then realize that plenty of American heroes (and even non American ones) have committed acts of utmost violence and start tearing down their statues to, wipe them from history and public memory, because bringing back iconoclasm and railing against long dead people who lived in a time where this shit was considered normal is somehow going to improve the well being of modern day populations who feel attacked by an statue even though the statue could also educate people if the inscription read the story as it happened.

Seems you want to stop strange gatherings around the statues. It won't work. People have, can and will gather around a place even if there are few remaining structures standing there.

Like, why stop there?

[AAM1232]

I don't know if you can stick to the point unlike some of the others here, but this is about whether Columbus specifically is worth commemorating, and the jury's pretty clear on that. Not sure why you seem so intent on defending rape and genocide for this though.

[AsGryffynn]

I don't know if you can stick to the point unlike some of the others here, but this is about whether Columbus specifically is worth commemorating, and the jury's pretty clear on that. Not sure why you seem so intent on defending rape and genocide for this though.

The man who discovered a continent is not worth ever commemorating?

I am mentioning all this because people think it's a fair reason to bring down the statues, even though those shortcomings are dwarfed by the achievement that led to the creation of one of the states pondering said question at this very hour.

He also dispelled the notion of flat Earth with this.

[asterism42]

The fact that you still think Columbus 'discovered' the Americas tells me all I need to know

[SpoonyViking]

"Discovered" a continent.

- - - Updated - - -

He also dispelled the notion of flat Earth with this.

Oh, for heaven's sake.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth

Seriously, people online have no excuse for not knowing something which can be looked up on frelling *Wikipedia*.

[AAM1232]

The man who discovered a continent is not worth ever commemorating?

I am mentioning all this because people think it's a fair reason to bring down the statues, even though those shortcomings are dwarfed by the achievement that led to the creation of one of the states pondering said question at this very hour.

He also dispelled the notion of flat Earth with this.

Genocide isn't really dwarfed by rediscovering a place. As for remembering stuff, we have handy things like books and museums for that.

And he didn't dispel any flat earth shit. It was well known back then that the Earth was a sphere.

[LegalLoliLover]

For me, the main issue isn't what statue is or is not being displayed. It's that these riotous thugs and communist bandits think that they can vandalize and damage property without legal repercussion because they are doing it for the "right reasons".
For public/government property:
1. If they want it taken down, then that's what voting is for.
2. If the statue is taken down forcibly, then all responsible should be fined and incarcerated to the maximum sentence. If they violently resist arrest, then they should be dealt with in the same manner as any who would violently resist arrest.
For private property:
1. If the private owner wants a particular statue on their property, from Lovecraft to Hitler, from Columbus to Stalin, then that's their right.
2. Vigilantes who would vandalize and destroy private property, who would threaten the private citizen to remove anything from their property, should be punished to the maximum sentence. If they violently resist arrest, then they should be dealt with in the same manner as any who would violently resist arrest. Of course, physically attacking the owner is the bigger crime, and the assailant(s) has no right to complain when they receive even greater force for law enforcement or private security.
Unfortunately, not all rioters are this stupid, though:

[AAM1232]

Pretty easy to ignore your argument when you go for strawmen to be frank. Bye.

[LegalLoliLover]

In what way is it a straw man?

[AAM1232]

In what way is it a straw man?

Ignores the main issue to whine about laws and such, while clearly ignoring anything else that might contradict your worldview. Also practically advocating violence when we've seen the police need far less reasons to attack peaceful protestors. I mean being an idiot isn't an excuse for this little spiel so why bother posting it.

[LegalLoliLover]

And that's just it. You have your own definition of what the "main issue" is, and I have mine. Not a straw man, but rather different values. More like, I don't want others to be legally allowed to push their worldview onto my own, especially with the intent of "salvation", like a goddamn cult. Maybe, but that doesn't change the fact that sometimes force is needed, such as for those resisting arrest (my Skyrim example of a blind uncle being a motive for being a bandit, not a justification):

And how about you don't personally attack me?

[AAM1232]

I mean you're making up random stuff that just gets away from the actual discussion so why should I engage with obvious bullshit? Am I not allowed to call it out and say that you're being dumb about this?

[LegalLoliLover]

While it may be a separate discussion, it's a valid discussion for the sake of the general news thread. I didn't realize that you were this thread's magistrate. Also, by responding, you're engaging. Again, nothing to call out when it doesn't deviate from "general news". So yes, you should stop attacking people.

[Twelveseal]

Gen News does have a tendency to be rather toxic at times...

[AAM1232]

Gen News also has a tendency to cry about meaningless stuff separate from the relevant news (courtesy of a few posters).

[Zurvan]

Gen News does have a tendency to be rather toxic at times...

at times...

at times...

You haven't learned a thing.

[Twelveseal]

You haven't learned a thing.

Shhhhhh...

[LegalLoliLover]

Gen News also has a tendency to cry about meaningless stuff separate from the relevant news (courtesy of a few posters).

Current news is current news, but who determines relevancy?