Ignoring History
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-09-2013, 01:50 PM
Ignoring History
Why does America like ignoring historical facts and pulling shit out of their ass?

Hitler wasn't an atheist, he was Roman Catholic

MLK wasn't a republican, he didn't side with either party

Jane Goodall wasn't a lesbian, she was married for 12 years

Marie Antoinette never said "Let them eat cake!"
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-09-2013, 02:07 PM
RE: Ignoring History
(02-09-2013 01:50 PM)BrokenQuill92 Wrote:  Why does America like ignoring historical facts and pulling shit out of their ass?

Hitler wasn't an atheist, he was Roman Catholic

MLK wasn't a republican, he didn't side with either party

Jane Goodall wasn't a lesbian, she was married for 12 years

Marie Antoinette never said "Let them eat cake!"




(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-09-2013, 02:21 PM
RE: Ignoring History
Because ignoring facts is a lot easier than accepting them and changing your worldview.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like ghostexorcist's post
02-09-2013, 07:35 PM
Re: Ignoring History
Marie supposedly actually apologized to the executioner for stepping on his foot. (the let them eat cake quote was written about a unnamed French princess before the revolution but sounds cool)

I suppose history that affirms stereotypes is more fun

"Love is hot, Truth is molten!"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-09-2013, 08:37 PM
RE: Ignoring History
...and Columbus wasn't the first to discover the western world. In fact, he was centuries too late for that claim.

I'd love to see the look on the natives faces... "You discovered this land??? The Fuck you talking about? We've been here the whole time."

[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRcmPL4codsbtiJhpFav3r...-w_49ttW6a]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Jeffasaurus's post
02-09-2013, 09:09 PM
RE: Ignoring History
(02-09-2013 08:37 PM)Jeffasaurus Wrote:  ...and Columbus wasn't the first to discover the western world. In fact, he was centuries too late for that claim.

I'd love to see the look on the natives faces... "You discovered this land??? The Fuck you talking about? We've been here the whole time."

Okay, but that one at least has some merit.

He certainly discovered it from the point of view of the hundreds of millions of people in Eurasia and Africa who were previously unaware of the Americas.

Related?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-09-2013, 10:01 PM
RE: Ignoring History
(02-09-2013 09:09 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(02-09-2013 08:37 PM)Jeffasaurus Wrote:  ...and Columbus wasn't the first to discover the western world. In fact, he was centuries too late for that claim.

I'd love to see the look on the natives faces... "You discovered this land??? The Fuck you talking about? We've been here the whole time."

Okay, but that one at least has some merit.

He certainly discovered it from the point of view of the hundreds of millions of people in Eurasia and Africa who were previously unaware of the Americas.

Related?

Sure he may have discovered it for people who weren't aware of its existence, but how would we feel if an alien spaceship landed, a stringy green dude steps out and proclaims that he discovers Earth in the name of his planet, Blrgghshloop. I, for one, would feel imposed upon.

[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRcmPL4codsbtiJhpFav3r...-w_49ttW6a]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Jeffasaurus's post
02-09-2013, 10:09 PM
RE: Ignoring History
(02-09-2013 10:01 PM)Jeffasaurus Wrote:  Sure he may have discovered it for people who weren't aware of its existence, but how would we feel if an alien spaceship landed, a stringy green dude steps out and proclaims that he discovers Earth in the name of his planet, Blrgghshloop. I, for one, would feel imposed upon.

Alien can call it whatever he likes. He can mark it on his map as whatever he likes. If 80% of us die from the diseases he brings and we subsequently adopt his name through overwhelming cultural force, I'd feel imposed upon Tongue .

But no, seriously, from the perspective of people who don't know about a thing, finding out about a thing is discovering a thing; the people who already know about the thing are as unknown as the thing itself, and are themselves ignorant of the finders-to-be; that the people already aware of the thing did know about the thing is immaterial. If you follow me.

I might as well complain when people refer to the 'discovery' or 'invention' of, say, penicillin, or insulin. Those things already existed...

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2013, 02:33 PM
RE: Ignoring History
(02-09-2013 10:09 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(02-09-2013 10:01 PM)Jeffasaurus Wrote:  Sure he may have discovered it for people who weren't aware of its existence, but how would we feel if an alien spaceship landed, a stringy green dude steps out and proclaims that he discovers Earth in the name of his planet, Blrgghshloop. I, for one, would feel imposed upon.

Alien can call it whatever he likes. He can mark it on his map as whatever he likes. If 80% of us die from the diseases he brings and we subsequently adopt his name through overwhelming cultural force, I'd feel imposed upon Tongue .

But no, seriously, from the perspective of people who don't know about a thing, finding out about a thing is discovering a thing; the people who already know about the thing are as unknown as the thing itself, and are themselves ignorant of the finders-to-be; that the people already aware of the thing did know about the thing is immaterial. If you follow me.

I might as well complain when people refer to the 'discovery' or 'invention' of, say, penicillin, or insulin. Those things already existed...

So, perhaps it's just political. The Vikings discovered North America in the 980s, but we don't have a holiday to celebrate them. I guess ol' Christopher just had much better p.r..

Maybe it's about scope. Let's say there's an aborigine tribe that is so isolated that they haven't had any contact with outsiders. One day, ...um... Carl decides that he wants to see what's beyond the horizon. He builds a rafty/canoey thing and he eventually bumps into Asia. From Carl's perspective, he discovered it, but he won't be mentioned in any history book. Perhaps just an honorable petroglyph back home.

So, a "thing" can be discovered innumerable times by different entities until the knowledge reaches full population saturation? Yes? No? Maybe so?

[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRcmPL4codsbtiJhpFav3r...-w_49ttW6a]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2013, 02:57 PM
RE: Ignoring History
(03-09-2013 02:33 PM)Jeffasaurus Wrote:  
(02-09-2013 10:09 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Alien can call it whatever he likes. He can mark it on his map as whatever he likes. If 80% of us die from the diseases he brings and we subsequently adopt his name through overwhelming cultural force, I'd feel imposed upon Tongue .

But no, seriously, from the perspective of people who don't know about a thing, finding out about a thing is discovering a thing; the people who already know about the thing are as unknown as the thing itself, and are themselves ignorant of the finders-to-be; that the people already aware of the thing did know about the thing is immaterial. If you follow me.

I might as well complain when people refer to the 'discovery' or 'invention' of, say, penicillin, or insulin. Those things already existed...

So, perhaps it's just political. The Vikings discovered North America in the 980s, but we don't have a holiday to celebrate them. I guess ol' Christopher just had much better p.r..

Maybe it's about scope. Let's say there's an aborigine tribe that is so isolated that they haven't had any contact with outsiders. One day, ...um... Carl decides that he wants to see what's beyond the horizon. He builds a rafty/canoey thing and he eventually bumps into Asia. From Carl's perspective, he discovered it, but he won't be mentioned in any history book. Perhaps just an honorable petroglyph back home.

So, a "thing" can be discovered innumerable times by different entities until the knowledge reaches full population saturation? Yes? No? Maybe so?

Well if nothing else Columbus did establish permanent European contact with the Americas. The Vikings didn't stick around very long and the Clovis peoples disappeared. The Asian descendant peoples of the Americas aka the natives has lost all contact with their former place of residence. Add to that the fact that western history is Eurocentric and this is why Columbus is famous for discovering the Americas.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: