I don't really care about the actual issue, but the objections raised to Columbus Day are absurd to me.
Why is euro-centrism bad? I am not of European descent, but historically speaking, contributions made by Europeans are undeniably tremendous. I don't think there's anything controversial about acknowledging that Europeans had a pretty remarkable run in recent centuries. Does euro-centrism have a bad name because of colonialism?
Anything-centrism is "bad" in that it clouds one's ability to be objective. It also impedes empathy.
It's sort of tied to identity. If you do not cling to a specific identity, then it frees you to empathize with a wide range of people. If you say "I am white/asian/tall/rich", then it forms an in-group vs out-group mentality, and obstructs empathy.
For example, does it strike you odd that any land should be deemed "discovered" when there are already inhabiting humans there?
I'm normally pretty skeptical of anti-european sentiments, but in this case I'd be fine with changing the name of the holiday.
Whatever your viewpoint, the exploration of America was pretty complicated and complex, and even just the story of discovery alone is more than Columbus. So open it up, celebrate all the explorers involved. If you've got a story to tell about the first people across the land bridge and down into the continent, let's add that too.
I'd be fine with celebrating the entire story of the exploration of the continent.
Anything-centrism is a cognitive bias, it reduces complex issues to simple ones designed to suit your world view. It's a pretty nasty ignorance promoting concept.
Early explorers did things that wouldn't fit into our view of acceptable behavior. You are hoping to replace Columbus with multiple Columbuses each with the same track record as the one you hope to replace.
Personally, I like Columbus day, I like the discussion, and the critical thinking it brings.
Its important to note that many celebrated foundations of our civilization would be despicable in modern standards. For example, the Romans were the original fascists despite the cultural hegemony they imposed upon Europe.
He was despicable by the standards of the day, too. It's not like morality is a modern invention, as apologists claim. ("Oh, thou shalt NOT kill?")
Columbus was such a terrorist, he and his brothers were chained, shipped back to Spain and imprisoned for his crimes as governor. Even after the monarchy overruled the Court of Spain, he was stripped of his governorship. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Columbus#Governorsh...)
Las Casas wrote, "Yet into this sheepfold, into this land of meek outcasts there came some Spaniards who immediately behaved like ravening wild beasts, wolves, tigers, or lions that had been starved for many days. And Spaniards have behaved in no other way during the past forty years, down to the present time, for they are still acting like ravening beasts, killing, terrorizing, afflicting, torturing, and destroying the native peoples, doing all this with the strangest and most varied new methods of cruelty, never seen or heard of before, and to such a degree that this Island of Hispaniola once so populous (having a population that I estimated to be more than three million), has now a population of barely two hundred persons."
Of course, none of this made for great propaganda. So in Adam Smith's _Wealth of Nations_, the story of Columbus changed to, "and in all the other parts of the new world which he ever visited, nothing but a country quite covered with wood, uncultivated, and inhabited only by some tribes of naked and miserable savages."
If there's anything for us to do in the modern day, it's to be more aware of the atrocities we commit, which we glibly accept as the "standard of the day", even though many fight against them. (For example, against war, massive imprisonment and wage slavery).
Personally, I think it should be "Genocide Day". Not every holiday should be upbeat. A time of reflection and introspection.
This will never happen for a variety of reasons -- but I have always lobbied to remove Columbus Day as a holiday and replace it with Election Day, hopefully encouraging a larger number of people to vote.
Is this really a big problem in the States? It just seems a little strange that you appear to take your elections very seriously, and have these huge campaigns etc, but then voter turnout is still considered low?
One solution that occurs to me, simply because this is what used to happen in New Zealand and seemed to work okay, is to hold the election on a Saturday.
We have vote-by-mail all over the place now, so there's not much excuse beyond laziness.
In my opinion, if you can't be bothered to put in the minimal effort required now, I'd prefer you didn't vote anyway. I find it difficult to believe you'd be making anything resembling an informed decision.
The irony always being that voting for president has arguably less DIRECT impact on our lives than voting for local government, but people get far more worked up over the big stuff
But Columbus is an legend precisely because he didn't just explore, he created a beachhead which is more important historically than plain exploration.
I think it's a fantastic idea for a variety of reasons:
1) It's a great political compromise.
2) It makes the day a celebration of the best part of our past.
3) It makes the day aspirational by encouraging exploration in the future.
Sure. If you apply our standards, though, you might want to decry many of your founding fathers as well: Washington, Madison, Jefferson ("All men are created equal"), John Hancock, Benjamin Franklin - they all held slaves at some point.
So, should you rename the capital, the state, and all the avenues and parks that are named after these people?
Did Washington cut off the noses and ears of those natives that tried to stop him raping their wives as punishment. Did Jefferson cut off the hands of those natives who did not mine enough gold that month in forced labour camps while also creating the encomienda system? Did Franklin reduce the population of Haiti from ~3m to 12,000 in just 20 years? Does John Hancock hold the record for transporting more slaves into slavery than any other person in history?
I think Columbus set himself well apart from the founding fathers on any number of scores and even in his own time and with his own supporters (Queen Isabella of Spain for instance) they thought he had gone too far
Why is euro-centrism bad? I am not of European descent, but historically speaking, contributions made by Europeans are undeniably tremendous. I don't think there's anything controversial about acknowledging that Europeans had a pretty remarkable run in recent centuries. Does euro-centrism have a bad name because of colonialism?