the rum soaked fist: internal martial arts forum

we'd have to take down all these statues because who among these "great" people wasn't a racist, slave owner, slave trader, a person forcibly taking land from the indigenous people, etc.? I'm sure they were all "great" and accomplished in part due to this kind of terrible system of forced labor or forced theft of land that didn't belong to them.

hmm. not a bad idea really.

Afa statues of racists, they'd be hard to find if they were built before the 70s. Washington, Jefferson, etc., all fought FOR the US: i.e., the side we pledge allegiance to.

But, statues of confederates commemorate traitors. They're not role models for patriots. They belong in a museum. That is, unless those who display them have confederate principles.

There are more than enough people from the South who deserve statues who weren't Confederates.

. I hear some in the Swedish media also praise Trump

that must be on the so called social media, which I wouldn’t know about. The so called mainstream media that i daily visit one hardly hear or read any praise for trump.

I was reading some on Churchill and it sounds like he had the thinking of what would have been typical for an colonial Englishman of his time.

I spent some time on a former English colony in the islands and as expected those of English descent thought much the same as their grandparents did. I suppose the South here is probably similar among some land owning families.

Not sure why they would want his statues removed but obviously Churchill symbolizes something to some people that I was not aware of.

Perhaps, as pointed out, we should have no more statues.

The irony is it used to be said that history is written by the winners yet we can see that you can only silence history for so long. Eventually most of it will come out.

About the rapist, murderer and terrorist Columbus...:

Letter from C:
“As soon as I arrived in the Indies, on the first Island which I found, I took some of the natives by force in order that they might learn and might give me information of whatever there is in these parts...
...They would make fine servants… With fifty men we could subjugate them all and make them do whatever we want.”

Here's the whole letter:
https://liberalarts.utexas.edu/coretext ... RQFUsYtdqw

Michele de Cuneo, close friend to C:
“While I was in the boat I captured a very beautiful Carib woman, whom the said Lord Admiral gave to me, and with whom, having taken her into my cabin, she being naked according to their custom, I conceived desire to take pleasure. I wanted to put my desire into execution but she did not want it and treated me with her finger nails in such a manner that I wished I had never begun. But seeing that (to tell you the end of it all), I took a rope and thrashed her well, for which she raised such unheard of screams that you would not have believed your ears. Finally we came to an agreement in such manner that I can tell you that she seemed to have been brought up in a school of harlots.”

grzegorz wrote:

Bao wrote:Excellent article from 2015, Chomsky is not afraid to say the truth. Though he is maybe too kind and modest and just give a glimpse of it. Well worth reading.

Chomsky says US is the world's biggest terrorist

Chomsky explains everything anyone ever needs to know about the US.

Exactly.

Steve James wrote:Look it up.

Another possible origin of the name America ? Closely linked to Brittany(Britannia?) https://www.britannica.com/place/Armorica

Steve James wrote:, if the UK is given physical embodiment, it's called Britannia. (Common knowledge for Brits).

. She is the personification and patron deity of the British Isles. No sooner did the Romans invade Britain than they had to invent a goddess of the place to apologize to. The locals probably found this very strange behavior.

Britannia found a new lease of life during Victorian times when she became a symbol of stiff-upper-lipped Empire-building. Somehow the Victorians never managed to invade Rome so she is still waiting for a chance to get her own back.

https://www.godchecker.com/roman-mythology/BRITANNIA/

Trick wrote:

Steve James wrote:Look it up.

Another possible origin of the name America ? Closely linked to Brittany(Britannia?) https://www.britannica.com/place/Armorica

No. America was named on the map after Amerigo Vespucci.

Britannia was the Roman name for what's now Britain. Gallia was the Roman name for what's now France. Hispania was the Roman name for Spain. In Britain, the name was personified as a woman.

New York is not Old York. The same way New England and New Jersey are named after English places because they were named by Englishmen. America was named by Italian map makers.

Old York in England was named by Danes or Vikings. The meaning of York has nothing at all to do with New York in America.

grzegorz wrote:I was reading some on Churchill and it sounds like he had the thinking of what would have been typical for an colonial Englishman of his time.

I spent some time on a former English colony in the islands and as expected those of English descent thought much the same as their grandparents did. I suppose the South here is probably similar among some land owning families.

Not sure why they would want his statues removed but obviously Churchill symbolizes something to some people that I was not aware of.

Perhaps, as pointed out, we should have no more statues.

The irony is it used to be said that history is written by the winners yet we can see that you can only silence history for so long. Eventually most of it will come out.

I listened to a speaker yesterday who was horrified to find her ancestors had a plantation and owned 5 slaves. Her more recent ancestry was super poor but that doesn't make up for or change anything.

Steve James wrote:

Trick wrote:

Steve James wrote:Look it up.

Another possible origin of the name America ? Closely linked to Brittany(Britannia?) https://www.britannica.com/place/Armorica

No. America was named on the map after Amerigo Vespucci.

Britannia was the Roman name for what's now Britain. Gallia was the Roman name for what's now France. Hispania was the Roman name for Spain. In Britain, the name was personified as a woman.

New York is not Old York. The same way New England and New Jersey are named after English places because they were named by Englishmen. America was named by Italian map makers.

Old York in England was named by Danes or Vikings. The meaning of York has nothing at all to do with New York in America.

and i worry about unitentionally twisting things around by sugesting possibillities...but man, how you intentionally twist around things....where did the "new york is not old york" come from ?? and yes i gave the explaination on how norwegian vikings established a settlement in england and named it jorvik after a place in norway with that name. jorvik later evolved into York(jorvik supposedly mean somthing as cattle/livestock or even pig-bay...but of course when it had evolved into York that meaning was probably lost...and into new york compleatly lost)........Amerigo Vespucci. i already mentioned a couple of posts back.....Britannia i, already in mynprevious post i linked info that romans brought along that name ........i gues you are in the field of history, so of course must(at all cost?)try to trumf simple googling...although you referred to wikipedia previously.................

Not Wikipedia knowledge, I've taught American history for 30 years.

Steve James wrote: Britannia was the Roman name for what's now Britain.

True, but the Romans didn't invent the name. It was first referred to under this name, more or less, by a Greek writer almost four hundred years before Caesar came along to the island to adminster a spot of forced civilizing. The root name was probably Pretani or Priteni (emphasis on last syllable): "a Celtic word that probably means "the painted ones" or "the tattooed folk", referring to body decoration." So it's what the Celtish peoples living there ('Britons') called themselves.

As Steve certainly knows, if the Dutch hadn't lost the settlement on the Hudson to the British in 1664, then the Big Apple would now still be NA / New Amsterdam.

All very off-topic, but maybe we need something lighter after all the heavy themes recently.

Well, the Celtic name for "Britain" is speculative. The Welsh name for the island is Prydain (or some variant), but hard to say if it was the common Celtic name. But, there's no reason to deny it. You're right that the Romans didn't invent names. They gave places the names of the people who live there. When the Romans met the Angles, they called their land Anglia, and that goes for Saxony, Frisia, etc.

Right, all off topic, somewhat. But, it sure has something to do with America. I ask my students what language people speak in France, obvious, then Italy, Spain, England, etc. Then I ask them what language they speak. None of them say American.

My field was English and American literature and language. I did Anglo-Saxon Old English (my teacher was William Alfred, what a name). However, I have no experience with the Celtic languages at all. The Royal Hibernian Society sometimes sends me an invitation to a grand family reunion in Kilkenny.

Bao wrote:About the rapist, murderer and terrorist Columbus...:

Letter from C:
“As soon as I arrived in the Indies, on the first Island which I found, I took some of the natives by force in order that they might learn and might give me information of whatever there is in these parts...
...They would make fine servants… With fifty men we could subjugate them all and make them do whatever we want.”

Here's the whole letter:
https://liberalarts.utexas.edu/coretext ... RQFUsYtdqw

Michele de Cuneo, close friend to C:
“While I was in the boat I captured a very beautiful Carib woman, whom the said Lord Admiral gave to me, and with whom, having taken her into my cabin, she being naked according to their custom, I conceived desire to take pleasure. I wanted to put my desire into execution but she did not want it and treated me with her finger nails in such a manner that I wished I had never begun. But seeing that (to tell you the end of it all), I took a rope and thrashed her well, for which she raised such unheard of screams that you would not have believed your ears. Finally we came to an agreement in such manner that I can tell you that she seemed to have been brought up in a school of harlots.”

Cortes also kept a journal of what he did to the Aztecs and it shows you the misery those people went through.