Is bringing up the brutality of the Conquest of the New World on Columbus Day an attack on White Culture or just learning from history?

@ChipmunkErnie But either you’re relating what actually happened, or you’re not. It’s like those weird laws DeSantis and other conservatives have authored, that prohibit teaching any history that makes white students uncomfortable. In some states that’s meant you can’t discuss Martin Luther King, Jr. You can’t discuss why he was inspirational without revealing the injustices he was trying to correct.
More contradictions from “the facts don’t care about your feelings" crowd.

@bijouxbroussard It's not relating "what actually happened" so much as the spin put on it by both sides to create a narrative they want to portray that gets to me. What it amounted to historically was a pretty standard war -- actually series of wars -- between expanding cultures and established cultures, something that's happened all through history and keeps happening even today. :( Native tribes routinely displaced earlier tribes for thousands of years before Europeans showed up en masse.

@ChipmunkErnie That is comparable to the argument that tries to justify slavery in the U.S. by discussing intertribal slave trading. The Europeans took it to another level by doing it to the people indigenous to the land and justifying it by claiming supremacy.

@bijouxbroussard If you say so. The fact that African blacks were major slave-owners and dealers does NOT justify slavery in America but it is a simple fact of history and to ignore it is disingenuous; and calling African nations of the 1700 and 1800s "tribes" is to insult them. As is the fact there were black slave-owners in America, Native American slave-owners in America (slave ownership was one of the main reason the "Indian Territories" declared for the Comnfederacy), etc.

@ChipmunkErnie How is it an "insult” to call them tribes ? Within nations there were intertribal (or inter ethnic) wars, slaves taken from among those who lost. It’s more of an insult to assume there were no ethnic or tribal differences within nations or countries.

And simply in term of numbers, what do you imagine the percentage of black slave owners were as compared to whites, especially after legislation like various Fugitive Slave acts and the Dred Scott Decision made sure no black person’s continued freedom was guaranteed, until the Emancipation Proclamation ?

@bijouxbroussard "Tribal" as opposed to "nations" -- "tribal" generally carries connotations of a primativeness as compared to nationhood.

As to percentages, it's got nothing to do with the discussion since it focuses SOLELY on what happened in the US, not worldwide. Plus this was a post about Columbus Day and native peoples, not slavery in the US.

@ChipmunkErnie Tribal has to be primitive ? That’s not how it’s defined in other situations.
(Yes, I know what the post was about: the possibility of an "attack on white culture" which smacks of defensiveness. And was very familiar.)