"There are countless horrible things happening all over the world and horrible people prospering, but we must never allow them to disturb our equanimity or deflect us from our sacred duty to sabotage and annoy them whenever possible." -Auberon Waugh
I don't know it 16th century Spaniards were an improvement. They killed an awful lot of people for their God. Heck, they killed civilations, both the ones that helped them and the ones they fought.
Of course they were an improvement. Stretch out their influence over a few decades or even centuries, you'll see the improvement. Which was Mel Gibson's point, even with the historical inaccuracy.
It's mentioned in there that the vast army of Aztecs fell into disarray when Cortez managed to seize their sacred banner, even though he was vastly outnumbered. Sounds incredible but fits with what we know.
That was Mel Gibson's point too - they were so isolated that a simple thing like seizing their 'sacred banner' brought them undone - so it was going to happen whether Spaniards or Chinese or whoever arrived there. It was a bubble about to burst after contacting the outside world. Like 'Lord of the Flies' they had created a fragile unreal world which popped when someone grabbed their sacred idol.
It would have happened anyway, also isolation means no resistance to disease.
Huge numbers of healthy young people died in the 'Spanish flu' epidemic in Australia, right after soldiers began returning from WW1 - because even we were so isolated back then we had no resistance to a new strain of a virus from overseas.
Isolation, both physical and mental (and spiritual) was doomed.
When people complain about 'whites' invading the world of Aboriginal people in Australia we say the same thing. If not us then it would have been someone else. Would they rather be ruled by Indonesia? who just sends their military in to deal with rebels in Irian Jaya (New Guinea to our north), bombing villages from the air as I've seen even recently.
While the Europeans were anything but saints, history glosses over similar barbarism amongst the North American natives (a/k/a Indians). That stems from the myth of the Noble Savage.
I wasn't defending stone-age cannibals so much as pointing out they were boned either way Stone-age people with no resistance to disease were not going to hold onto their land no matter who showed up.
Veeshir, if you ever read detailed histories of the American west (say, A.D 1800 to 1910), you will understand when I say that you need not explain yourself. It wasn't just diseases that ravaged the natives throughout North America, although the plagues certainly paved the way.
No, my point is that there were no saints on any side, before and after A.D. 1519 -- a point that the Fish Wrap of Choice™ deliberately ignores. They prefer to worship at the altar of the Noble Savage -- of which there were none.
8 comments:
I don't know it 16th century Spaniards were an improvement.
They killed an awful lot of people for their God. Heck, they killed civilations, both the ones that helped them and the ones they fought.
Of course they were an improvement. Stretch out their influence over a few decades or even centuries, you'll see the improvement. Which was Mel Gibson's point, even with the historical inaccuracy.
It's mentioned in there that the vast army of Aztecs fell into disarray when Cortez managed to seize their sacred banner, even though he was vastly outnumbered. Sounds incredible but fits with what we know.
That was Mel Gibson's point too - they were so isolated that a simple thing like seizing their 'sacred banner' brought them undone - so it was going to happen whether Spaniards or Chinese or whoever arrived there. It was a bubble about to burst after contacting the outside world. Like 'Lord of the Flies' they had created a fragile unreal world which popped when someone grabbed their sacred idol.
It would have happened anyway, also isolation means no resistance to disease.
Huge numbers of healthy young people died in the 'Spanish flu' epidemic in Australia, right after soldiers began returning from WW1 - because even we were so isolated back then we had no resistance to a new strain of a virus from overseas.
Isolation, both physical and mental (and spiritual) was doomed.
When people complain about 'whites' invading the world of Aboriginal people in Australia we say the same thing. If not us then it would have been someone else. Would they rather be ruled by Indonesia? who just sends their military in to deal with rebels in Irian Jaya (New Guinea to our north), bombing villages from the air as I've seen even recently.
Neo-Confederate dumbfuks have commandeered the comments at the Federalist. Good gawd.
I had no idea that the Abolitionists were "leftists" and "traitors".
It isn't so much that these people are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.
While the Europeans were anything but saints, history glosses over similar barbarism amongst the North American natives (a/k/a Indians). That stems from the myth of the Noble Savage.
I wasn't defending stone-age cannibals so much as pointing out they were boned either way
Stone-age people with no resistance to disease were not going to hold onto their land no matter who showed up.
Veeshir, if you ever read detailed histories of the American west (say, A.D 1800 to 1910), you will understand when I say that you need not explain yourself. It wasn't just diseases that ravaged the natives throughout North America, although the plagues certainly paved the way.
No, my point is that there were no saints on any side, before and after A.D. 1519 -- a point that the Fish Wrap of Choice™ deliberately ignores. They prefer to worship at the altar of the Noble Savage -- of which there were none.
Post a Comment