The Lies of Revisionist History: In Defense of Christopher Columbus
Editor’s Note: This is a reprint of an article originally published Oct 15, 2021 on rubyraymedia.com
This year on Columbus Day, I was aware, as many were, of vulgar memes on social media platforms, symbolizing the inaccuracies and downright lies of the revisionist historians concerning Christopher Columbus.
The left has increasingly characterized Christopher Columbus as a genocidal maniac in an attempt, in my view, to also portray the "white man" as the enemy of all native peoples. This attempt is nothing more than a concerted effort to make Americans hate their country by making them hate the very foundations of our civilization.
Indeed, there were atrocities committed against native people by some white men, and we make no excuses for them. But we must examine our history honestly if we are to move forward in any meaningful way.
Let's begin with Howard Zinn, the infamous author. He has somehow made the garbage he calls history, which he spews in this book, A People's History of the United States, into the American school system over the past several decades. Not only does Howard Zinn attempt, with some success, to make Americans hate their country, but he does so by plagiarizing another author who also bases his theories on complete lies and fallacies.
Howard Zinn has his detractors from both the left and the right. For example, Arthur Schlesinger called Zinn "a polemicist, not a historian."1 Cornell history professor Michael Kammen, in his review in the Washington Post, called Zinn's writing "a scissor and paste pot job" with too much attention on "historians, historiography and historical polemic" which left "precious little space for the substance of history." Kammen called Zinn a "radical academic and social activist."2
Much of Zinn's writing is nothing more than a rewrite and plagiarism of his Dutch friend and fellow socialist Hans Koning, though Koning didn't seem to mind that his friend stole his work. I suppose being friends and having the same political goals worked for them. Both Koning and Zinn intentionally left out passages from Columbus' logs and distorted his words and meanings by doing so. For example, Zinn writes:
"Arawak men and women, naked, tawny, and full of wonder, emerged from their villages onto the island's beaches and swam out to get a closer look at the strange big boat. When Columbus and his sailors came ashore, carrying swords, speaking oddly, the Arawaks ran to greet them, brought them food, water, gifts. He later wrote of this in his log: 'They . . . brought us parrots and balls of cotton, and spears and many other things, which they exchanged for the glass beads and hawks' bells. They willingly traded everything they owned. . . . '"
He leaves out notable passages that clear up the meanings of his writings. For example, Zinn leaves out, as does his friend Koning this passage from Columbus log:
"I saw some who bore marks of wounds on their bodies, and I made signs to them to ask how this came about, and they indicated to me that people came from other islands, which are near, and wished to capture them, and they defended themselves. And I believed and still believe that they come here from the mainland to take them for slaves."
Zinn and Koning actually put together different passages from other paragraphs to make the meaning seem to be what they wanted it to be.
Also left out was a passage in Columbus log on October 12, 1492, where he wrote:
"I warned my men to take nothing from the people without giving them something in exchange."3
Clearly, these are not the words of a genocidal maniac, but instead of someone of high morality and character, who wished no harm to the people he encountered in the Americas.
Who Was Christopher Columbus and Why Does He Deserve a Holiday?
Rob Petrone makes the case for honoring Christopher Columbus
Sources:
1, 2. Debunking Howard Zinn by Mary Grabar, Introduction; xxiii
3. The College Fix