Ancestoral blame and moral judgements

Originally posted by cola This doesent make any sense. How can the state of Spain be held accountable for the conquest of south america if most of the spaniards' , living in Spain, ancestors in fact stayed in Spain.  Shouldnt the people who are decendants of the settlers who left to south america be held accountable what happened there. So it would be states like say Chile who should be held accountable what happened there.

Edited by pinguin - 19-Jan-2008 at 18:14

Hey Paul, why do you react that way insulting me? I bet If I did that to you I would be suspended or expelled of this forum. Please, preach with the example.

Paul isn't a Moderator at all, and no penguin, you wouldn't be banned.

Originally posted by Paul ...Ah now we see Pinguin's logic. Everyone in Chile takes a DNA test. The ones that don't fit the bill? Well we can deny them thier property, tell them they're not Chilean enough..... make em were yellow stars to single them out!

Originally posted by pinguin Originally posted by Paul ...Ah now we see Pinguin's logic. Everyone in Chile takes a DNA test. The ones that don't fit the bill? Well we can deny them thier property, tell them they're not Chilean enough..... make em were yellow stars to single them out!       It is not Pinguin's logic but Hispanic American logic. In our culture we don't like racial minorities, particularly from immigrants. In our mentality, people has the "duty" to mix or go. With respect to culture, those people has to addopt ours or leave. So it is very hard to find second or third generations of foreigners in here without mixing.   Simple.   With respect to Amerindians, besides having some of theirs ancestral genetics, we addopted in part theirs culture as well. That's not a mistery. And that's why many Chileans of "European" stock knows Mapuche language. Got it?   In short: those attitude come from nationalism. For us, our land and our people is the most important of all. We don't want collections of minorities but people that contribute to make our countries better

Edited by Paul - 20-Jan-2008 at 03:10

I bet If I did that to you I would be suspended or expelled of this forum. Please, preach with the example.

I'm going to start by saying I'm speaking as a moderator here. First off pinguin this is not a warning towards you, this is more of a general to the assembled masses post. Please everyone refrain from acting as if you know the rules of the forum, because in reality unless you are listed as a moderator you don't. The rules we give are listed as guidelines and we are pretty sure of how we like to apply the rules, not unfairly biased against any poster because believe it or not not all of the mods agree on any one action, however as a community we act unilaterally.

Also listed in our guidelines is that we do not solicit opinions as to how this board should be run and what actions should be taken against the actions of other posters. This is handled under private messaging, even if given as a jest us moderators do not find it funny and we would prefer you either direct it to our attention in a private message.

And Pinguin Paul would not get in trouble for calling you a hypocrite because that isn't a derogatory term in itself. You are not being belittled by being called a hypocrite, you are being challenged. Challenged to express your opinion in a way that does not make you come across as a hypocrite. And it is up to you to prove that without belittling Paul or anyone else. Again your posts are fine at this point you just need to be willing to allow a bit more criticism on your posts.

Originally posted by Paul ...   1. There have been two other Hispanic Americans on this forum. Jalisco Lancer and Hugo, neither have shown any prejudice towards racial minorities or dumb arse nationalism, it's only you who trying to justify it. You seem to be trying to tar others with your brush to excuse your personal bigotry.

 

Originally posted by pinguin � Actually, It makes sense that Bolivia demands Spain because of the robbery of Silver. They took literalily a mountain of silver in Potosi to fuel Spain and European economy. A money that also served the church to build theirs barroque arquitecture. We demand Europeans blew up those churches and ruturn the silver to Bolivia! Or just send them the value in cash that is circa 200 billion dollars of today's money � Now, in the case of Chile, the state is accountable for everything that happened after 1810. Before that, the responsability belongs to Spain.

You master the way of witty humooor.
You really didnt make any more sense. You just gave one single event and didnt eaven try to question the logic of the post. So I will ask again. On what groundsis the�modern state of Spain�held�accountable�for�what�the�monarchs�of�the�Spanish�empire�decided.�
Eaven if you appeal to the ancestorial blame you have to recoqnize that in fact�they�were�the�ancestors�of�modern�day�south�americans�who�were�doing�the�"wrong doings".

Originally posted by pinguin I answer you very clearly. Don't you know the King of Spain was invited by Evo Morales when he took power? � Spain is very beloved by Hispanic peoples, and the King, particularly, is involved in many humanitarian causes with the Amerindians. �

Does it eaven bother you to see how inconsistent and full of double standards your posts have been on this topic?

Let me get this clear.
According to you the modern day south americans are not�to�be�held�accountable� though some of their ancestors treated the natives injustly.
The people who are to be held accountable�for�the�injustices are�of�course�none�other�than the modern day spaniards, whose ancestors did not migrate to south america and did not treat the native americans injustly or rather treat them at all.
And nowadays this lack of injust treatment towards the native americans is forgiven but not forgotten?

I doubt about that theory.

Doubt all you want it is taking hold.

What really matters is that they were in the Western Hemisphere before everybody else.

No the point is who occupied which land first, if that's the case then I'm making a claim on portions of the Indo-European Homeland, and perhaps East Africa, the point is who occupies the land currently is the one with the most legitimate claim, no matter the results of your predecessors actions it is how you conduct yourself that determines the morality of such a claim.

That's the recording of a very specific event that doesn't say much about the whole picture. How many people lived in those villages? There were 4 villages with 300 people each? They moved away? Nobody knows. In shorts it doesn't prove anything about demography.

These were villages that numbered in the thousands, I don't have my source currently (it is on loan) but once I get it back I'll post more exact numbers. And why would a people just "move away" from some of the richest land in all of North America, if they weren't decimated by disease, also the fact is not all "moved away" but the surviving villages were drastically reduced.

In none population dissapeared, and the events were as much destructive as the Black Death in Europe. As you also know, the Black Death in Europe killed 1/3 of that population and took a century for them to recover theirs numbers.

Yes but it wasn't like one black death spread across America, it was a neverending cascade of disease in sequence. Okay so smallpox destroys half the population, five years later measles destroys the remaining half, five years later the flu destroys another half. After running the gamut of Europe's most prolific diseases certainly a lot more Americans died than is normally attested.

My critic with U.S. history, though, is that they are usually pushed at the corner as a minority more, when the study of them and the history of intermarriage should be central to the history of the United States.

No it shouldn't thanks to disease and English colonial practices indians were always seen as the "others" and "those that stand in the way of progress". Important events between indians and Americans are well documented in US history such as the French and Indian Wars and the Trail of Tears, but other than that indians really take a back seat role in American history, there are just many many more Americans of Old World descent that played a larger role in the US's history than indians who did.

I just complain that Americans are not as proud as we are about the Amerindian past.

Every person I've met with "indian blood" is very proud of their native heritage, it's just common sense your proud of the actions of your ancestors as you should be, indians have just been squeezed out by migratory europeans that's all.