he had shitty boats and sailors?

doesn't seem to excuse his behavior really, he could have just stayed home

Lawl.

Amen.

Your disliking for Mr. Columbus is more than a little overblown. If you want to spit bile at someone for genocide and the like, I would recommend someone who actively contributed to such an event like Hernándo Cortés.

If I may amuse your warped sense of history with a little learning, I should point out that Columbus did get arrested after his third voyage for various charges that generally pointed towards gross mismanagement of his lands. By this time, he was an arthritic man with an eye infection.

In other news: Where's Ericson Day, damnit?

my disliking for mr. columbus is overblown because it amuses me and my bestest buddies. but also there is no hernando cortes day, so we can forget about him real easy like, see. columbus has his own day, so i need to hate him until he doesn't anymore, then i can forget about him too.

would you rather be hated by some or forgotten about by everyone?

and i'm aware columbus's adventures didn't sit too well with the folks back home. i'm not convinced that wasn't because he just didn't rape the continent efficiently enough :P

ericson day would probably be a lot better

Interesting way of looking at it. And you make a very valid point. Hated by some or forgotten by all? I'd rather be hated by some if that meant people remembered me. I'm under no illusions that my life would be revered by everyone in the event I became famous (heaven forbid.)

I find it most strange that people complain that Columbus was a genocidal maniac and a slaver of the worst sort as I would have thought the two titles would be mutually exclusive. You can't take slaves if you've killed everyone, right? If you say to that "well, obviously he didn't have EVERYONE killed," then I would have to say that you shouldn't be throwing around such big words with such big definitions if you don't really mean them.

As for his disgruntled Spaniards being governed by him, I could go on about weighing pros and cons of actions on a governing level, but you probably don't want to have something like that lurking in your comments.

Don't get me wrong, I am by far no fan of Columbus, and I do find it somewhat odd that Columbus has a day dedicated to him for doing something that wasn't all that special. I just tend to keep a level head when learning and I remember that no matter how much I like or dislike a historic figure, it won't change history.

true true

although the term genocide doesn't necessarily mean EVERYONE is killed (except to the clinton administration :D)

way to accidentally capitalize the same word and look like like a douchebag, spinal

WAY TO DO THAT

lol You fell into my cunning trap! XD Just kidding.

Good point about the word genocide, and that is my bad. I do tend to simplify in shorthand explanations like these, hoping it'll serve its purpose without creating too much confusion. The exact definition of genocide is a methodical extermination of a specific demographic (which could range from something very specific like 60+ year olds living in the Borough of Guildford, to something broad like Christians.) This implies that the instigator has thought about it in great depth in order to efficiently do away with such people, and such an undertaking is bound to incur significant costs. That "significant cost" rings alarm bells to me as that's something that would not be in Columbus's interests.

As for the slavery thing, I don't have enough information about that to go one way or another, but it's possible as he was recorded saying that the natives were godless and would likely be willing to convert. Those deemed godless by the Catholic followers at the time were treated with fewer human rights than other religious types. Slavery was deemed okay if the slave originated for a non-catholic nation.

Learning is fun. :3

Fat dick?! Where? :/

':I