Not All States Will Celebrate Christopher Columbus

K.C. Dermody
COMMENTARY | Columbus Day has become a rather controversial holiday, and although there will be no mail delivery with post offices and other government offices closed on Monday and some cities celebrating the day with parades, in two states there will be no Columbus Day at all.

For the last 21 years, the people who live in South Dakota have celebrated Native American Day instead of Columbus. In 1990, when the legislation was passed, the year became known as the "Year of Reconciliation."

South Dakota has a rich background of Native American heritage and celebrates the people who were the first to live in America as a sign of respect and recognition. Today, there are nine federally recognized Native American tribes in the Mount Rushmore state. The purpose of the holiday is to help inform the public about Indian heritage, rather than to continue to perpetuate the myths of Christopher Columbus.

In Hawaii, the holiday is known as Discover's Day, or Landing Day.

Christopher Columbus was not the first to discover America, as many of our schools taught us as we were growing up. The honor should most likely be given to the vikings, who were known to sail across treacherous seas, and reached the shores of American some 500 years before Columbus was said to have arrived in 1492.

Christopher Columbus was the exterminator of Native Americans. He brought the population of Taino Indians from 8 million down to 3 million in just four years, appointing himself the governor of the land. By the time Columbus left that position, there were only 100,000 natives left. The policies of Columbus remained, and in 1514, the population was down to 22,000.

Columbus' explorations and genocide of a people became the beginning of the destruction and elimination of the Native American culture. A culture that Europeans and others arriving to the continent could have learned a lot from, but instead, in their ignorance, deemed themselves superior to those who knew how to live in harmony with the land.

Isn't it time the day becomes a celebration of the Native American culture in all states instead of celebrating a man who was bent on its destruction? Teaching our children the true stories of a people who walked the nation in peace and in balance with Mother Nature, instead of celebrating genocide, can only mean a better future for America, and the planet we live on.

Published by K.C. Dermody - Featured Contributor in Travel

K.C. Dermody is a freelance writer, writing for YCN, Yahoo! News, Yahoo! Sports, and OMG! Yahoo as well as other web content projects, and working on a historical fiction novel based in ancient Ireland. She...  View profile

4 Comments

Post a Comment
  • anirb2/6/2012

    This may sound controversial, but while the Whites did bad things & I'm not White, what happened to the American Indians is the lesser of 2 bads. See John T. Reed's article which is copied & pasted below. Columbus as the late Dr. Warren H. Carroll mentioned was not interested in administrator job-he was mainly interested in being an explorer. He didn't do a good job, but keep in mind that he couldn't control the conduct of those on the islands esp. as he was foreign-an Italian. He wanted Spain to send good Catholics-he got Hidalgos who were good Catholics, but he also got convicted criminals. Both the Tainos & Canibs practiced cannibalism, so they weren't Noble Savages. see this below BY John T. Reed.November 24th, 2010 by John T. ReedIt has become fashionable and politically correct for whites to beat themselves up for having stolen the land of Native Americans when we arrived in the Western hemisphere. In ultra liberal places like Berkeley, CA—about 20 miles from my house, they call Columbus Day Indigenous Peoples Day and we are supposed to feel bad on Thanksgiving because the Indians were so nice to the Pilgrims, then we stole their land.Excuse me.‘Not their way’The Native Americans did not have deeds to any land in North America. Readers will say well, that was not “their way.”Oh, and what, pray tell, was “their way?”Violent conquestIn fact, “their way” was violent conquest. In other words, they operated almost exactly like modern-day street gangs. They had their territory. They sought to expand it and did so by murdering neighboring (streetless at the time) street gangs—bashing heads with tomahawks, stabbing, shooting arrows into vital organs. They were also into kidnapping. Just a lovely group of innocent primitives before the evil white man arrived and corrupted them.That was also the way of our European ancestors. It was “their way” for everybody on earth thousands of years ago when there were no countries, only tribes. Then there became two ways: violent conquest of nations by other nations coinciding with deeds supported by the rule of law within each country.And that was the situation in the 1400s, 1500s, 1600s, 1700s and 1800s in the whole world.In other words, the Native American way, violent conquest by tribes, was everybody’s “way” thousands of years ago. And it was their way AND partially our way between when Columbus discovered America in 1492 and around 1900.When we arrived in the western hemisphere, the only way of acquiring land was violent conquest. That was the Native American way everywhere in the hemisphere. There was no rule of law.And to the early European visitors to America, that was also their way with regard to foreign lands. When an Indian tribe wanted land, they just took it from another Indian tribe, or tried to. Europeans did the same with regard to land outside the borders of their own rule-of-law country.So Native Americans have no complaint about how whites took their land before 1900. Those whites were just following the “When in Rome, do as the Romans do” rule.We wonThe real complaint of the American Indians is not that we used violent conquest to take their land, but that we won. Hell, winning is how they got it before we got here.As soon as they saw we were winning, they suddenly wanted to do things our way, that is, get deeds.And so they did, to reservations. They still have them.Seems like the whites could have said, “No. You guys were OK with violent conquest before we started winning the battles. We are OK with violent conquest as a way of acquiring foreign lands like America. “We’re happy with your violent conquest approach, thank you. If you want a deed, join our side, get a job or otherwise earn some money then buy some land like we do.”The Civilized TribesHere is a quote from Wikipedia about the Five Civilized tribes:The Five Civilized Tribes were the five Native American nations: the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek, and Seminole, which were considered civilized by Anglo-European settlers during the colonial and early federal period because they adopted many of the colonists’ customs and had generally good relations with their neighbors.Isn’t that a nice story? You would think a liberal would like it. Among the customs they adopted were working at jobs and buying farms and businesses. In other words, they got deeds. Trail of TearsTrue, the Cherokees had their deeds taken away and were forced to leave the East Coast and walk to Oklahoma in the Trail of Tears—even though they sued (very liberal) and won at the U.S. Supreme Court level. But generally, the Indians who switched to the rule of law, rather than the rule of ancient conquest, got to keep their deeded land.The deeds to reservations essentially recognize, and convert to rule of law, successful violent conquests by American Indians from before the white-man days. Arguably, the various Indian tribes could claim that their lands were stolen from them by other Indian tribes before the White man arrive. Why don’t they? Double standard. We white men know that well. Basically, everyone wants the rule that maximizes their amount of land, e.g., first come first served; high-water mark of their group’s conquests; tribal territory the day before the white men took some of it; etc.That’s a bunch of pure selfishness and the notion that it is morally superior is equally pure liberal #$%$By the way, I am part Cherokee.Happy Thanksgiving.

  • anirb10/19/2011

    If people want to celebrate Columbus day, then let them. But the late Dr. WH Carrol wrote about Columbus & the fact is that Christopher Columbus was treated with disrespect because he was Italian. He was mainly interested in exploring & spreading Catholicism. Slavery @ that time was the way of the world. The American Indians weren't Noble Savages-they were primitive barbarians & to say otherwise is bunk. That said, the fact is that what happened to the American Indians in the long run is the lesser of 2 evils. The American Indians in pre-Columbian times lived like street gangs. They killed eachother for territory, did human sacrifices, among other things.

    John T. Reed who is part American Indian says that the American Indians need to stop complaining because they got the land by wars before the Europeans won it. The Europeans treated the American Indians better or @ worst no worse than the way American Indians treated eachother. Los conquistadores of Spain in the end are better than the Amerindian tribes which were there before. I don't agree with everything the Euroepans did-I don't agree with slavery but what's history is history. There were some bad things that happened but defeating the American Indians is in the end the lesser of 2 evils. I don't subscribe to the politically safe views that all cultures are the same & most American Indian cultures were 1 of violence. Finally, there's dispute as to how many American Indians there were before Columbus's discovery.

  • K.C. Dermody10/9/2011

    I'm sorry, but I disagree. You might be interested to read the sources in which this information came from, which are linked in the above article. Columbus is not a man who deserves a holiday in his honor.

  • Jeb10/9/2011

    You clearly know very little about Christopher Columbus nor the time that he lived. If you are going to comment about history at least know a little about it - or is that asking too much. "A man bent on destruction"? "A exterminator of Native Americans"? Please if you are going to offer banal repetition of generalities perpetuated by an ill informed populace you are not really adding anything to what could be a important conversation.

Displaying Comments

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.