Although Columbus Day is meant to commemorate the discovery of the Americas, many of the holiday’s critics argue that the land was already discovered.
Tens of millions of people were living in the Americas when Christopher Columbus landed in the Bahamas in October 1492, said Patrick Barr-Melej, an Ohio University history professor.
“I think to many people … the notion that Columbus discovered America is insulting,” Barr-Melej said.
Robert Roche, executive director of Cleveland’s American Indian Education Center, opposes Columbus Day because to him it symbolizes the death and exploitation of millions of indigenous people.
Schools contribute to a lack of understanding of Columbus Day, because they depict Columbus as a hero without teaching a complete view of history, Roche said.
Columbus’s arrival put a series of events into motion, leading to the exploitation of the indigenous people of the Americas, Barr-Melej said.
The native population of the Caribbean islands declined by at least 90 percent in the first 20 years after Columbus’ arrival, primarily because of European diseases and the tolls of forced labor, he said.
Max Boecker, a freshman studying physics, said he does not think Columbus Day should be celebrated because of the destruction of the native population, but should be recognized because the discovery added to the understanding of the world.
Although Columbus triggered a destructive chain of events for America’s native population, he is not a universally reviled figure throughout Latin America, Barr-Melej said.
“Many Latin Americans embrace the idea of racial mixing,” he said. “They cannot embrace who they are racially and culturally today without acknowledging the Spanish element in the creation of that hybrid race and hybrid culture.”
In Mexico, Columbus Day is referred to as “El dia de la Raza,” or the day of the race. Although schools teach children
about Columbus and his discovery, the day is more about cultural roots than Columbus himself, said Eloisa Alcocer, a graduate student studying Spanish.
“We (Mexicans) don’t celebrate Columbus; we celebrate us,” Alcocer said.
Instead of symbolizing the isolated event of Columbus’ landing in America, Columbus Day should encourage consideration of all aspects of the conquest it initiated, Barr-Melej said.
“If we think about Columbus Day in terms of what it means as the beginning of something larger, then I think it’s good to think about Columbus Day,” he said.
Reader Comments
Every nation throughout history was either a conqueror or conquered. And history is written by the conquerors. One nation rises on the back of another. End of story. So what is with this whiny article?
konighund, how is this article whiny? I think it's meant to challenge the reader to reconsider what he/she thinks about Columbus and his so-called discovery of the Americas. His arrival was a watershed event for Europeans, but marked a significantly more tragic era for the inhabitants of the Americas. Your statements show that your interpretation of their history is insulting and overly simplistic. You easily dismiss the plight of millions of Columbian-era inhabitants of the Americas. A 90 percent population loss in the Caribbean and your reaction seems to be nothing more than, "Oh, well. That's history." I suppose it's easy to say since our country is one of the "history writers."
You might think that one nation rises on the back of another, but what about those whose backs were trod upon? The descendants of many of those who survived colonization are still fighting the same systems their ancestors fought 400 years ago, and you want to call it the end of the story? Hardly. Latin American culture as it exists today is an often intriguing blend of European and Native American, but the colonial era was overall a depressing time for Native Americans, and life for many of them today is no cake-walk either. History being written by the conquerors is a great cliche, but it's simply not true. Consider the many Americans who were enslaved, exterminated, forcibly removed, killed by disease, or faced other similar ends...they have histories too, and many people remember(ed) and write(/wrote) about them.
RunforGold, konighund is absolutely right. Despite the fact that many people had such terrible histories, they are just that: history. Some nations rise, and some fall. Should we mourn ancient Romans just because the 'barbarians' conquered and killed Roman citizens. As long as we have learned from atrocities committed throughout history then not much else matters. That's just the way life is. That's human history.
Sure, konighund is right that nations either conquer or are conquered, but that's too simplistic, and about the extent of his/her correctness. Calling konighund's statements "absolutely" right is a mistake.
Should you mourn ancient Romans? There's nothing stopping you, but we don't have holidays commemorating the leader of whichever Germanic attack on Rome you may be referring to. Moreover, using Rome is a poor example because Rome was the imperial power. If you're referring specifically to the fall of Rome, it was not a case of a foreign power exploiting and nearly annihilating other peoples. Rather, it was powerful internal elements taking advantage of a decaying central authority. Completely different than the colonization of Latin America.
Also, how do you explain your statement that 'terrible histories' are just 'history'? Again, throwing out cliches like that or "that's just the way life is" ultimately explains nothing. History is far more complex and important than simply learning from past atrocities. Don't we rely on the past for far more than, "Oh, well that Holocaust thing sure got out of hand...let's not let that happen again"? I think so. Besides, have humans really begun to learn from all of their past atrocities?
History is far more complex than simply being winners and losers, and writing off historical processes so casually hinders one's ability to fully understand the present.
I'm not asking that everybody mourn every civilization that has ever suffered under another civilization. Rather, I think it's important that people understand the complexity of history: there is no "end of story," there is no definition of human history, and asking people to consider Columbus Day in a larger context than "Nina, Pinta, Santa Maria" isn't whining.
The point is this: if you are going to complain about the expanse and growth of the U.S. over other indigenous groups, then how about bringing in the other European nations who used the Native Americans against each other with false promises. Or how about the different tribes that fought and conquered each other pre-1400's?
The point is that on Columbus day we get an article discussing how bad the U.S. is for 'discovering' America.
Sure, various tribes fell with the arrival of the Conquistadores.... but news flash!
That has been happening around the world for all of recorded history.
The comparison of the Holocaust to westward expansionism is a poor one at best. That was a pure example of selecting a person based on race without any self-defense mechanism to be systematically wiped off the face of the earth.
The 'cowboys vs indians' was a perfect example of two groups initially trying to figure out how to exploit the other. The Europeans just happened to figure it out first. And there was a certain tipping point that prior to reaching it, the native Americans could have triumphed over the invaders. But that's not what happened.
I don't follow the two points you made about the U.S. I never mentioned the U.S., nor did the original article. The U.S. didn't discover America as you wrote, and I can't recall any mention of the U.S.'s relations with American Indians or of Manifest Destiny. I'm afraid I just don't understand what you're trying to say.
However, you're absolutely right that we can raise the issue of indigenous groups fighting one another. Actually, that's how Cortes was able to overthrow the Aztec Empire: by exploiting internal divisions as he moved towards Tenochtitlan. The Americas were not a paradise before Columbus arrived, but that's not the argument at hand. And sure, you can bring up every other country's actions, but to what end? I'm not playing a blame game. Let me say again that I'm suggesting that people
should consider Columbus Day in a larger context before blindly praising Columbus or writing off hundreds of years of overall tragic history as "the way life is."
Finally, if you reread my post, you'll see that my statement about the Holocaust was in response to bobcatgreen's notion that history is only useful for learning from past atrocities. I did not compare the Holocaust to colonialism or expansionism. But if you look at historic events in Argentina and Guatemala, for example, you'll find precisely what you just defined the Holocaust to be.
Who cares guys? Columbus day is over with! We can look forward to a similar article around Thanksgiving saying how horrible the Pilgrims were for exploiting Native Americans. Yeah the Native Americans got a raw deal under European rule and under American rule. I get it. We all get it. Guess what none of us were alive then and if we were maybe we would have said something, but we weren't. It's great to remember that history has more than one side, but in the end you didn't do anything wrong and I grow tired of every holiday being another chance for someone to slag on western society as a whole. If you are so troubled by the plight of the peoples of the Americas before white settlers came then give your house to a native reservation or go gamble all your money away in one of their casinos and clear your conscience.
Submit a comment to The Post