USS Cortez? Really?

[Vance]

Pick up a copy of Lies My Teacher Told Me.

You mean the book from a black-supremist marxist hyper-revisionist hack that makes claims such as "there were no non-whites in Europe before 1492" and that the American Military salute is based on the Nazi standard? You mean that book?

Explains an awful lot that you would cite that piece of Soviet-purchased garbage, though.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Hitler was abborent even in his time.

Only because he lost. He was actually quite well revered by the German People until the moment Soviet troops marched on Berlin. Same case with Stalin, Mao, and even Cortez: they were all but worshipped by their own people and despised by their enemies.

So yeah, "product of the times" isn't much of an excuse. The times can and did produce individuals of better conscience and decency who are undoubtedly worthy of recognition. If you're going to name ships after anyone, it should be characters who exemplify the kind of moral, scientific and political values your government wants to represent. That essentially rules out anyone whose historical accomplishments would include violent conquest of another civilization; saying "that's just what people did in those days" doesn't really justify such behavior.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Pick up a copy of Lies My Teacher Told Me.

You mean the book from a black-supremist marxist hyper-revisionist hack that makes claims such as "there were no non-whites in Europe before 1492" and that the American Military salute is based on the Nazi standard? You mean that book?

No, the book written by this guy.

But since any discussion about naming starships after historical figures inevitably boils down to this, it begs the inevitable question: whose historical viewpoint is the dominant one in the Federation? The tendency to denounce black liberals as "black supremacists" is a uniquely American and South African phenomenon, so a diplomatic transport named "USS Martin Luther King" might not be out of the question despite his openly socialist philosophy. OTOH, if the Federation is--as many trek fans seem to imagine--little more than a rebranding of the USA with 180 off-world states, MLK gets a street on Deneva and a page in the history book as "The guy who had a dream" excluding any of his moral and political views.

Same issue: if you're going to honor someone's contributions to history, it needs to reflect the Federation's interpretation of itself and its own values. OTOH, it would probably be simpler to name starships after places and things than people, especially since there are plenty of humans right here on Earth who probably wouldn't grasp the significance of half of those historical references (much as many Americans don't know who the Tolstoy is named after, but most Russians do).

 

[Sci]

Pick up a copy of Lies My Teacher Told Me.

You mean the book from a black-supremist marxist hyper-revisionist hack that makes claims such as "there were no non-whites in Europe before 1492" and that the American Military salute is based on the Nazi standard? You mean that book?

I mean Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong by James W. Loewen, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at the University of Virginia.

And having read that book cover to cover, I can assure you that it at no point claims that there were no non-whites in Europe prior to 1492 nor that the U.S. military salute is based on the Nazi standard. I can also assure you that at no point does it advocate black supremacy or Marxism. (In fact, in covering Hellen Keller's admiration for the U.S.S.R., Loewen is critical of her naiveté.)

But, hey, don't let something as minor as facts get in the way of hysterical lies and ad hominem attacks.

 

[USS KG5]

So was Cortez. The point is? If we want to use the 'by his time' excuse we can get away with a lot, and even that can be contested - my point about hangings is that this was a rather extreme stance to take at the time. Which is why it wasn't done.

But again I'm not particularly bothered by it, though I do find this argument interesting.

I agree with you, an extreme approach for its time is worthy of comment many years later, but all actions must be taken in context.

Cortez was a product of his time, and sadly there was little respect for other human beings back then. The past is full of nasty, and modern liberal attitudes cannot be applied to it.

Everybody is a product of their time. Hitler was, too, so why not have a USS Hitler? Had he not lost the war, he might have ended up as a celebrated German historical figure, most of the Nazi crimes would have been swept under the carpet of history, and 400 years later few would care...

Hitler was bad FOR HIS TIME, it was actually fairly rare for people in the 1930s to try to conquer Europe and wipe out it's Jewish population. He also had no redeeming qualities whatsoever, Churchill most certainly did.

Most people in history to have equalled Hitler's level of evil are justly remembered as such, Genghis Khan for example, or his contemporary Stalin.

It is also worth remembering that Stalin did win, but is still remembered as a brutal mass-murderer, and is not popular even in Russia, where his brutality was considered very excessive.

Humanity has tended to progress, and while we can look back and venerate the great and good of ancient history (like Pythagoras, or Aristotle) we cannot say "Cortez was a killer and was therefore without redemption" - he was who he was and that was not AS bad at the time.

 

[Vance]

Sci, in the 2006 version, page 62. The man has been thoroughly debunked numerous times for his extreme left-wing and revisionist views. You talk about 'whitewashing' history, yet you show your own profound ignorance on this thread, as well as put forward a man whose entire 'tag line' is that history isn't taught as left wing enough.

Seriously, I'm supposed to take your arguments seriously?

Anyway, the thread's really done, as the arguments for Cortez and a more accurate account of who and what he was (which you did NOT respond to) is already present herein. It's Thankgiving weekend, and it's probably not healthy for me to argue moral relativity to you on TrekBBS.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Sci, in the 2006 version, page 62.

Page 62 reads as follows:

From the beginning America was perceived as an "opposite" of Europe in ways even Africa had never been. In a sense, there was no "Europe" before 1492. People were simply Tuscan, French, and the like. Now, Europeans began to see similarities among themselves, at least as contrasted with Native Americans. For that matter, there were no "white" people in Europe before 1492. With the transatlantic slave trade, the first Indian, then African Europeans increasingly saw "white" as a race and race as an important human characteristic.

It would take an extremely sloppy reading of the book to miss the plain meaning here, that the discovery of the Americas by Europeans fundamentally changed the nature of European self identity, just as the transatlantic slave trade lead to a fundamental change in their racial self-identity. Which is, if I'm not mistaken, exactly what Trekkies have always predicted about first contact with alien life would do to humanity.

 

[Sci]

Sci, in the 2006 version, page 62.

Page 62 reads as follows:

From the beginning America was perceived as an "opposite" of Europe in ways even Africa had never been. In a sense, there was no "Europe" before 1492. People were simply Tuscan, French, and the like. Now, Europeans began to see similarities among themselves, at least as contrasted with Native Americans. For that matter, there were no "white" people in Europe before 1492. With the transatlantic slave trade, the first Indian, then African Europeans increasingly saw "white" as a race and race as an important human characteristic.

It would take an extremely sloppy reading of the book to miss the plain meaning here, that the discovery of the Americas by Europeans fundamentally changed the nature of European self identity, just as the transatlantic slave trade lead to a fundamental change in their racial self-identity. Which is, if I'm not mistaken, exactly what Trekkies have always predicted about first contact with alien life would do to humanity.

My copy is the 2007 hardback edition, and page 62 is devoted mostly to an extensive set of quotations from Columbus contrasting two seemingly contradictory sets of descriptions he made of the Native inhabitants of the Americas -- one wherein he describes them in positive terms initially after meeting them, and one wherein he describes them in negative terms; Loewen argues that the shift occurs because Columbus had decided to undertake an imperial project the second time around and was justifying his behavior to himself. The remainder of the page is dedicated to describing the impact of the importation of crops native to the Americas to Eurasia and Africa on European and African population levels.

Nothing terribly scandalous, I'm afraid.

Sci, in the 2006 version, page 62. The man has been thoroughly debunked numerous times for his extreme left-wing and revisionist views. You talk about 'whitewashing' history, yet you show your own profound ignorance on this thread, as well as put forward a man whose entire 'tag line' is that history isn't taught as left wing enough.

Seriously, I'm supposed to take your arguments seriously?

I am not the least bit concerned whether you take me seriously or not.

 

[Kegg]

Cortez was a product of his time, and sadly there was little respect for other human beings back then. The past is full of nasty, and modern liberal attitudes cannot be applied to it.

The question is whether or not we honour those people, however, which a ship in Cortez's name is presumably doing. Excusing for context Cortez's behaviour is one thing, but is that enough to give him a gold star?

Most people in history to have equalled Hitler's level of evil are justly remembered as such, Genghis Khan for example, or his contemporary Stalin.

I've heard that Genghis Khan is something of a national hero in Mongolia - moreso, anyway, than Cortez is to the Mexicans/Spanish to the best of my knowledge.

 

[6079SmithW]

What about a USS Shaka Zulu? Was he a uniter or a dictator? I have heard he is a hero to the various tribes living in South Africa, even for non-Zulus.

 

[Vance]

We tend to forget that the Federaiton is multi-cultural in a true sense of the word. Cortez is a Latin America hero.. Shaka Zulu is an African hero. So, yes, in honor of the cultures that represent Earth, then both make sense.

 

[DevilEyes]

I agree with you, an extreme approach for its time is worthy of comment many years later, but all actions must be taken in context.

Cortez was a product of his time, and sadly there was little respect for other human beings back then. The past is full of nasty, and modern liberal attitudes cannot be applied to it.

Everybody is a product of their time. Hitler was, too, so why not have a USS Hitler? Had he not lost the war, he might have ended up as a celebrated German historical figure, most of the Nazi crimes would have been swept under the carpet of history, and 400 years later few would care...

Hitler was bad FOR HIS TIME, it was actually fairly rare for people in the 1930s to try to conquer Europe and wipe out it's Jewish population.

Trying to conquer another country/territory or wipe out an entire population wasn't that rare for 20th century at all, even though nobody did it on such a massive scale.

It is also worth remembering that Stalin did win, but is still remembered as a brutal mass-murderer, and is not popular even in Russia, where his brutality was considered very excessive.

USSR did win WW2, but that was a war against fascism and nazism, not the war of communism vs capitalism, so that's an entirely different matter. Of course, communism eventually collapsed, and even before that, Stalinism was criticized even in USSR - after Stalin's death. When someone is not in power anymore, it becomes much easier for the truth about their crimes to come out.

And what exactly does Stalin's lack of popularity today prove? Can you show me evidence that Cortez is popular today? Or that people don't think of him as a mass murderer? Obviously, some do. The so-called "judgment of history" is a pretty tricky thing, since attitudes towards historical figures and events change quite a bit depending on the times.

Humanity has tended to progress, and while we can look back and venerate the great and good of ancient history (like Pythagoras, or Aristotle) we cannot say "Cortez was a killer and was therefore without redemption" - he was who he was and that was not AS bad at the time.

Actually, we can. Watch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSj5yOK_mt4

 

[Vance]

Because something screams 'historical factual accuracy' like a drug-addled Communist-sympathizing mass-murdering-regieme-apologizing Canadian hippie!

 

[DevilEyes]

^ Eh, I said "Yes, we can", not "Yes, we can, without being called names by those that it rubs the wrong way".

 

[Kegg]

We tend to forget that the Federaiton is multi-cultural in a true sense of the word. Cortez is a Latin America hero..

Is he? I mean, I knew this:

Shaka Zulu is an African hero.

But I'd never heard of Cortez being revered in Latin America. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm not exactly an expert on this (I've never been), though I've certainly never heard of any contemporary Spainards speaking that highly of the guy.

 

[Vance]

^ Eh, I said "Yes, we can", not "Yes, we can, without being called names by those that it rubs the wrong way".

Well, considering that Neil Young has admitted to every last bit of that, how about I chalk that up to 'historical accuracy' and have done with it?

But I'd never heard of Cortez being revered in Latin America. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm not exactly an expert on this (I've never been), though I've certainly never heard of any contemporary Spainards speaking that highly of the guy.

I didn't know much of that either until I started doing some research on the conquistadors for my daughter's history classes. Much of the demonization of Cortez was done by ... drumroll please.. the United States as part of the 'anti-Imperial-Spain' march at the turn of the last century. (That, in turn, isn't exactly a fact lost on most of Latin American even these days)

 

[NIUPonyBoy]

Because something screams 'historical factual accuracy' like a drug-addled Communist-sympathizing mass-murdering-regieme-apologizing Kenyan hippie!

corrected.

 

[Dusty Ayres]

Yes, it had -- by the Vikings, and by numerous isolated groups that managed to make it to the New World. (There's a reason they keep finding Roman boats off the shores of South America.) What Columbus did that was new was, he managed to spread word of his journey throughout all of Europe and thereby inspire other Europeans to follow.

I was aware of the vikings, they crosses the North Atlantic via Iceland which was why I specified the part of the Atlantic that Columbus crossed. However the Romans in South America is completely new information to me. After some quick Googling, you have a link to those roman shipwrecks? The evidence sounds a bit less conclusive to me.

Pick up a copy of Lies My Teacher Told Me.

To that, I'd also add How Europe Underdeveloped Africa and a ton of other books in the same vein as Lies My Teacher Told Me. Most North Americans WASP's really need to truly study history and herstory, instead of the bullshit they learn in school, or better yet, leave school and learn by themselves (turning off the TV will help.) That way, stupidities like naming ships after Malinche and her lover Cortez won't be happening again, nor would stupidities like letting Reagan, Bush & Clinton off of the hook for the economic and social policies that caused the Sanctuary Districts to happen and flourish in the mid 21st century wouldn't occur again either (this forgetting of history is why TNG, DS9, and VOY suffers in comparison to the new Battlestar Galactica as far as talking about socioeconomic policies and current events is concerned.)

 

[Myasishchev]

Yeah, the Cylon genocide of the Colonials is too often forgotten nowadays...

 

[Dusty Ayres]

I was using that as an example of how the later three shows haven't really done what they should have in terms of criticism and commentary on today's social issues (Enterprise excepted.)

But what I and Sci said above still applies; WASP's do need to learn the real truths about American and European (Western) history, and not the rah-rah American exceptionalist bullshit that passes for history in schools, colleges, and universities nationwide that has led to the problem that we are discussing.