Native Americans On Christopher Columbus

[SaintOfVirtue]

.deleted.

Edited November 25, 2015 by SaintOfVirtue

[Lilllabettt]

Oh look, I googled and found a wikipedia article describing why the Knights of Columbus are called the Knights of Columbus:

The Order was intended as a mutual benefit society. As a parish priest in an immigrant community, McGivney saw what could happen to a family when the main income earner died, and wanted to provide insurance to care for the widows and orphans left behind. He also had to temporarily leave his seminary studies to care for his family when his father died.^[12] While Roman Catholics In the late 19th century were regularly excluded from labor unions, popular fraternal organizations and other organized groups that provided social services,^[13] papal encyclicals issued by the Holy See prohibited Roman Catholics participating as lodge members withinFreemasonry. McGivney wished to provide them an alternative. He also believed that Catholicism and fraternalism were not incompatible and wanted to found a society to encourage men to be proud of their American-Catholic heritage.^[14]

McGivney traveled to Boston to examine the Massachusetts Catholic Order of Foresters and to Brooklyn to learn about the recently established Catholic Benevolent League, both of which offered insurance benefits. He found the latter to be lacking the excitement he thought was needed if his organization were to compete with the secret societies of the day. He expressed an interest in establishing a New Haven Court of the Foresters, but the charter of Massachusetts Foresters prevented them from operating outside their Commonwealth. McGivney's committee of St. Mary's parishioners decided to form a club that was entirely original.^[15]

The name of Columbus was also partially intended as a mild rebuke to Anglo-Saxon Protestantleaders, who upheld the explorer (a Catholic Genovese Italian working for Catholic Spain) as an American hero, yet simultaneously sought to marginalize recent Catholic immigrants. In taking Columbus as their patron, they were expressing their belief that not only could Catholics be full members of American society, but were instrumental in its foundation.^[16] McGivney had originally conceived of the name "Sons of Columbus", but James T. Mullen, who would become the firstSupreme Knight, successfully suggested that "Knights of Columbus" would better capture the ritualistic nature of the new organization.^[17
 

 

[Peace]

9 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

But that didn't stop you from busting out the  "racist" slur, confident that any group of mostly white Europeans must be at least vaguely racist - so why not.

LOL. Europeans are pretty racist though. At least in comparison to Americans, IMHO.

[Lilllabettt]

1 minute ago, Lilllabettt said:

Oh look, I googled and found a wikipedia article describing why the Knights of Columbus are called the Knights of Columbus:

The Order was intended as a mutual benefit society. As a parish priest in an immigrant community, McGivney saw what could happen to a family when the main income earner died, and wanted to provide insurance to care for the widows and orphans left behind. He also had to temporarily leave his seminary studies to care for his family when his father died.^[12] While Roman Catholics In the late 19th century were regularly excluded from labor unions, popular fraternal organizations and other organized groups that provided social services,^[13] papal encyclicals issued by the Holy See prohibited Roman Catholics participating as lodge members withinFreemasonry. McGivney wished to provide them an alternative. He also believed that Catholicism and fraternalism were not incompatible and wanted to found a society to encourage men to be proud of their American-Catholic heritage.^[14]

McGivney traveled to Boston to examine the Massachusetts Catholic Order of Foresters and to Brooklyn to learn about the recently established Catholic Benevolent League, both of which offered insurance benefits. He found the latter to be lacking the excitement he thought was needed if his organization were to compete with the secret societies of the day. He expressed an interest in establishing a New Haven Court of the Foresters, but the charter of Massachusetts Foresters prevented them from operating outside their Commonwealth. McGivney's committee of St. Mary's parishioners decided to form a club that was entirely original.^[15]

The name of Columbus was also partially intended as a mild rebuke to Anglo-Saxon Protestantleaders, who upheld the explorer (a Catholic Genovese Italian working for Catholic Spain) as an American hero, yet simultaneously sought to marginalize recent Catholic immigrants. In taking Columbus as their patron, they were expressing their belief that not only could Catholics be full members of American society, but were instrumental in its foundation.^[16] McGivney had originally conceived of the name "Sons of Columbus", but James T. Mullen, who would become the firstSupreme Knight, successfully suggested that "Knights of Columbus" would better capture the ritualistic nature of the new organization.^[17
 

 

The above is basic information for people who are even a tiny bit familiar with the history of Catholic people in the United States. You know, if you call everything racist without anything to back it up, eventually people stop taking the accusation seriously.

[Peace]

5 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

The above is basic information for people who are even a tiny bit familiar with the history of Catholic people in the United States. You know, if you call everything racist without anything to back it up, eventually people stop taking the accusation seriously.

Hmm. The quote says "partially intended." That would seem to imply other reasons. What were the other reasons?

If I created a group called "Knights of Obama" most people are probably going to think that I intend to honor him in some sense by choosing that name. . . is that unreasonable?

[Lilllabettt]

2 minutes ago, Peace said:

Hmm. The quote says "partially intended." That would seem to imply other reasons. What were the other reasons?

If I created a group called "Knights of Obama" most people are probably going to think that I intend to honor him in some sense by choosing that name. . . is that unreasonable?

Its referring to the first paragraph. The other reason was that the priest wanted them to be proud Americans, know they can be Americans and Catholic etc.

The Knights of Columbus were founded as a result of anti-Catholic xenophobia, and the name was chosen specifically for that reason. Racist  sentiment against "natives" had nothing to do with it.

Edited November 26, 2015 by Lilllabettt

[Ice_nine]

15 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

Nice try, that's them lobbying for Columbus Day.

Look up why they named themselves Columbus. Use those crack research skills kids have nowadays. 

Lets see. So I'm the one whose "quick to accuse," right? But you accused the Knights of Columbus of choosing their name because they were founded by racist bigots. You were completely ignorant of the actual reason why they chose their name. But that didn't stop you from busting out the  "racist" slur, confident that any group of mostly white Europeans must be at least vaguely racist - so why not.

You need to do some research before accusing people of racism. that's a serious charge. You seem to accuse people of being racist a LOT. is that how you get your fix?

Ok Lilla, where did I say that the Knights of Columbus chose their name because of Christopher Columbus? You will see that I said that nowhere. I said they honored him [by instituting Columbus day as a national holiday]. I didn't say the last part, but that's exactly what I had in mind when I wrote it. You can believe me on that count or not, that's your perogative, and I don't really care. But again, I never said they chose their name because of good ole Chris.

Nor is saying, "would you consider that some of the members were racist" synonymous with saying "ermagerd The Knights of Columbus were so racist!" I think a lot of people back in the day probably held racist sentiments. My late grampy, God rest his soul, said lots of racist carp. Doesn't mean he was a bad person. Hell I've held racist sentiments. Maybe you use "racist" to be synonymous with "horrible evil monster" but I don't. People can be a little racist, or prejudiced, and still be not bad decent people.

Can't you admit when you are wrong and you're being an arse? I did it not even a few hours ago, in this very thread I believe.

[Peace]

18 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

Its referring to the first paragraph. The other reason was that the priest wanted them to be proud Americans, know they can be Americans and Catholic etc.

The Knights of Columbus were founded as a result of anti-Catholic xenophobia, and the name was chosen specifically for that reason. Racist  sentiment against "natives" had nothing to do with it.

I had read that paragraph as giving the reason why the Order was established, but not specifically relating to the reason why they called it "Knights of Columbus" as opposed to "Knights of Cortez" or some other name.

This seems to be the article that your quotes comes from:

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

The top of the article states:

The Knights of Columbus is the world's largest Catholic fraternal service organization. Founded by Father Michael J. McGivney in New Haven, Connecticut, in 1882, it was named in honor of the mariner Christopher Columbus. Originally serving as a mutual benefit society to low-income immigrant Catholics, it developed into a fraternal benefit society dedicated to providing charitable services, promoting Catholic education and actively defending Roman Catholicism in various nations.^[1][2]

That seems to suggest that the name was chosen to honor Christopher Columbus, does it not? Do you think that when the article states "partially intended" it is making reference to this other reason (honoring Columbus)?

I don't doubt that the name was not explicitly chosen as a sign of racist hate towards Native Americans. I think the point that Ice9 was attempting to make was that perhaps the choice of that name, as opposed to another name, could indicate racism in another form - a disregard for the things that Columbus did to Native Americans. I don't know if I totally agree with her, but I don't think she is being all that unreasonable, do you?

Edited November 26, 2015 by Peace

[Lilllabettt]

1 minute ago, Ice_nine said:

Ok Lilla, where did I say that the Knights of Columbus chose their name because of Christopher Columbus? You will see that I said that nowhere. I said they honored him [by instituting Columbus day as a national holiday]. I didn't say the last part, but that's exactly what I had in mind when I wrote it. You can believe me on that count or not, that's your perogative, and I don't really care. But again, I never said they chose their name because of good ole Chris.

Nor is saying, "would you consider that some of the members were racist" synonymous with saying "ermagerd The Knights of Columbus were so racist!" I think a lot of people back in the day probably held racist sentiments. My late grampy, God rest his soul, said lots of racist carp. Doesn't mean he was a bad person. Hell I've held racist sentiments. Maybe you use "racist" to be synonymous with "horrible evil monster" but I don't. People can be a little racist, or prejudiced, and still be not bad decent people.

I will admit I have some trouble buying what you're selling, because you didn't correct my "misunderstanding" until I had you up a crick. I guess I have to give you the benefit of the doubt.

But it doesn't actually matter whether you were referring to them lobbying for the day or for how they chose their name. The Knights of Columbus lobbied for Columbus Day, and named themselves after Columbus, because of anti-Catholic xenophobia. The organization was created to prove that Catholics can be Americans. They picked the name to tell people that they could be Americans. They lobbied for the day to prove that they could be Americans. Racism against American Indians did not figure into it. At All.  

So you feel confident calling people racist as a kind of casual aside, speaking directly out of your bottom as you do so. That's kind of appalling don't you think?

 

 

[dominicansoul]

dang....I ran out of props.  :sad2:

[Lilllabettt]

8 minutes ago, Peace said:

I had read that paragraph as giving the reason why the Order was established, but not specifically relating to the reason why they called it "Knights of Columbus" as opposed to "Knights of Cortez" or some other name.

This seems to be the article that your quotes comes from:

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

The top of the article states:

The Knights of Columbus is the world's largest Catholic fraternal service organization. Founded by Father Michael J. McGivney in New Haven, Connecticut, in 1882, it was named in honor of the mariner Christopher Columbus. Originally serving as a mutual benefit society to low-income immigrant Catholics, it developed into a fraternal benefit society dedicated to providing charitable services, promoting Catholic education and actively defending Roman Catholicism in various nations.^[1][2]

That seems to suggest that the name was chosen to honor Christopher Columbus, does it not? Do you think that when the article states "partially intended" it is making reference to this other reason (honoring Columbus)?

I don't doubt that the name was not explicitly chosen as a sign of racist hate towards Native Americans. I think the point that Ice9 was attempting to make was that perhaps the choice of that name, as opposed to another name, could indicate racism in another form - a disregard for the things that Columbus did to Native Americans. I don't know if I totally agree with her, but I don't think she is being all that unreasonable, do you?

see my 2nd paragraph above on the Knights of Columbus' motive for "honoring" Christopher Columbus.

I do think its unreasonable to accuse people of racism willy nilly. Especially since establishing that someone is racist is a first step to depriving them of their freedom or their living. It's a serious charge.

[little2add]

Squanto  - thanksgiving hero -

" In the fall of 1621, the Pilgrims and Wampanoags celebrated the first Thanksgiving after reaping a successful crop."

Squanto was born circa 1580 near Plymouth, Massachusetts. Little is known about his early life. In 1614, he was kidnapped by English explorer Thomas Hunt, who brought him to Spain where he was sold into slavery. Squanto escaped, eventually returning to North America in 1619. He then returned to the Patuxet region, where he became an interpreter and guide for the Pilgrim settlers at Plymouth in the 1620s. He died circa November 1622 in Chatham, Massachusetts.

 

 

Interpreter and Guide for the Pilgrims

Now fluent in English, Squanto returned to his homeland in 1614 with English explorer John Smith, possibly acting as a guide, but was captured again by another British explorer, Thomas Hunt, and sold into slavery in Spain. Squanto escaped, lived with monks for a few years, and eventually returned to North America in 1619, only to find his entire Patuxet tribe dead from smallpox. He went to live with the nearby Wampanoags.

In 1621, Squanto was introduced to the Pilgrims at Plymouth, and subsequently acted as an interpreter between Pilgrim representatives and Wampanoag Chief Massasoit. In the fall of 1621, the Pilgrims and Wampanoags celebrated the first Thanksgiving after reaping a successful crop. The following year, Squanto deepened the Pilgrims' trust by helping them find a lost boy, and assisted them with planting and fishing.

Squanto's unique knowledge of the English language and English ways gave him power. He sought to increase his status among other native groups by exaggerating his influence with the colonists and even going so far as to tell them that the English had storage pits containing the plague and would release it if they didn’t do what he wanted.

Death

Embroiled in the politics emerging between the settlers and the local tribes, Squanto died of a fever in Chatham, Massachusetts, circa November 1622, while acting as a guide for Governor William Bradford.

[Peace]

2 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

see my 2nd paragraph above on the Knights of Columbus' motive for "honoring" Christopher Columbus.

I do think its unreasonable to accuse people of racism willy nilly. Especially since establishing that someone is racist is a first step to depriving them of their freedom or their living. It's a serious charge.

Fair enough. I think it is a valid question to ask - why do we honor a person who did those things? If we honor him (albeit for other reasons) does it not show an indifference to the people that he harmed?

I mean, I bet that if you read a history book you can find at least one good act committed by Hitler. If we decided to have a ceremony honoring Hitler for that one good act without intentionally meaning to say "we support the killing of Jewish people", I don't think that anyone would care what our intention was. People would call us racist regardless of what our intentions were, because we were indifferent.

I had thought Ice9 to be making a similar argument with Columbus.

[Lilllabettt]

 

12 minutes ago, little2add said:

Squanto  - thanksgiving hero -

" In the fall of 1621, the Pilgrims and Wampanoags celebrated the first Thanksgiving after reaping a successful crop."

Squanto was born circa 1580 near Plymouth, Massachusetts. Little is known about his early life. In 1614, he was kidnapped by English explorer Thomas Hunt, who brought him to Spain where he was sold into slavery. Squanto escaped, eventually returning to North America in 1619. He then returned to the Patuxet region, where he became an interpreter and guide for the Pilgrim settlers at Plymouth in the 1620s. He died circa November 1622 in Chatham, Massachusetts.

 

 

Interpreter and Guide for the Pilgrims

Now fluent in English, Squanto returned to his homeland in 1614 with English explorer John Smith, possibly acting as a guide, but was captured again by another British explorer, Thomas Hunt, and sold into slavery in Spain. Squanto escaped, lived with monks for a few years, and eventually returned to North America in 1619, only to find his entire Patuxet tribe dead from smallpox. He went to live with the nearby Wampanoags.

In 1621, Squanto was introduced to the Pilgrims at Plymouth, and subsequently acted as an interpreter between Pilgrim representatives and Wampanoag Chief Massasoit. In the fall of 1621, the Pilgrims and Wampanoags celebrated the first Thanksgiving after reaping a successful crop. The following year, Squanto deepened the Pilgrims' trust by helping them find a lost boy, and assisted them with planting and fishing.

Squanto's unique knowledge of the English language and English ways gave him power. He sought to increase his status among other native groups by exaggerating his influence with the colonists and even going so far as to tell them that the English had storage pits containing the plague and would release it if they didn’t do what he wanted.

Death

Embroiled in the politics emerging between the settlers and the local tribes, Squanto died of a fever in Chatham, Massachusetts, circa November 1622, while acting as a guide for Governor William Bradford.

Squanto sounds like a bad-arse but that was not the 1st Thanksgiving. That was a harvest meal. All cultures, secular and not, have harvest meals. Puritans hated holidays and festivals especially religious ones, which our Thanksgiving is.

The first Thanksgiving was held during 1863. It was established by Abraham Lincoln to thank God for seeing the Union through the war. That's another "racist" thing that doesn't actually have anything to do with racism. Other than it came into being because the Union could no longer abide with racism as embodied in slavery. 

9 minutes ago, Peace said:

Fair enough. I think it is a valid question to ask - why do we honor a person who did those things? 

WELLLL  as has been established, if you ask the Irish priest who founded The Knights of Columbus, he would say his motive was fighting anti-Catholic xenophobia. 

Being ignorant of history lets us easily turn things on their head. Thus an organization that chooses an identity to fight prejudice is accused of being prejudiced because of that choice. The world is nuts, my friend. NUTS.

[little2add]

Harvest meal / thanksgiving meal , pretty much the same thing