why do they teach children that columbus discovered america?

Question

weren't there millions of natives already on the continent when he arrived? didn't the genocide of the natives begin with his journey?

Answer 1

Even the arrival of Columbus is debtable. Several other countries claim to have reached the "new world" first. There are some good findings that the vikings may have been there first.
I suspect that it is continually taught because it is a good, simple story about the founding of the USA.
The good news is that many teachers now have the choice to teach it or not. There are several alternative resources available for people to teach the truth.
I also teach my students that the pilgrims were a bunch of god-fearing fundamentalists that were fleeing persecution, but in time they turned on eachother.

Answer 2

Regardless of the Natives already being there, and the Chinese landing on the West Coast, the claim is that he was the first "European" to arrive in the Americas.
This however is blatanlty not correct. It has been known that it isn't correct for decades, and if school teachers are still teaching it as history, well that is just as bad as claims by Japanese school teachers that the Japanese weren't aggressors in WWII.
Not only have archaeologists discovered and identified the settlement commonly referred to as "Vinland" - the 9th century Scandanavian settlement in North America, but historical records have now been discovered proving that fishermen from the Hanseatic League (Which was at the height of it's trading Empire in the 12th and 13th centuries) were regularly fishing off not just the North American coast, but also off Brazil by the 10 and 11th centuries. They kept it secret because they had a controlling trade monopoly for the Cod trade, which was literally worth it's weight in gold as a staple food product in the middle ages. It was significant for medieval Europeans to eat fish, as Jesus was a fisherman as well as a carpenter, and fish was the obnly meat allowed during Lent. It also led to the creation of salted cod, which became a massive industry, and the backbone of further world exploration due to it's ability to last for long voyages. This foodstuff is still popular in Portugal and Spain. Indeed there are medieval accounts of Giant Cod, over a metre in length which were fished out of existance, so efficient were the medieval cod traders. It is rumoured although not proven, that Columbus even had a map he had bought of a descendant of a Hanseatic cod fisherman when he arrived in the West Indies.
If you think any of this sounds a bit "fishy" (sorry couldn't help it), read the book: "Cod: A Biography of the Fish That Changed the World" by Mark Kurlansky, which has detailed research and history, and proves English and Northern Europeans fished off South America centuries before Columbus....

Answer 3

It seemed the Chinese were there earlier but that's still being verified.

Columbus was actually looking for India but ended up in America (hence the natives being called Indians).

The Native Americans were of course the first to discover the land long before any else did.

Your history books need to include how they were systematically cheated of their gold rich land, how they were systematically slaughtered when they protested and how they are forced to live like dogs in barren areas called 'reservations' and those today are still being outcasted.

For a start, the defeat of Custer was won fair and square by the Natives and not a massacre.

Answer 4

I seem to recall reading that Eric the Red and friends didn't get along too well with the locals when they crossed the North Atlantic... I'm not saying that what happened as a result of Columbus sailing to the New World was right, but that bunch didn't have a monopoly on genocide, either. If you're looking to asign blame, asign it to everyone who deserves it.

Answer 5

It's funny because the government will lie to us from birth about something like this even with blatant proof that it's completely false, yet everyone believes all the other bullsh#t they feed and program us with, no questions asked. Wake up people. Stop being sheep.

Answer 6

As much as everyone would like it to be, and believe me I see a lot of this in the history section here, history is not OBJECTIVE, it is SUBJECTIVE. Ethnocentrism is built into the human brain, and it naturally comes out when we humans sit down and write about the past.

If you want a balanced view of history, then understand that there is bias in everything you read, get some resources from different points of view, and draw your own conclusions.

Now, as a teacher of both high school and college history, I make sure and tell my students that there are multiple views on events (I talk about the Vikings as the true European "discoverers" of America btw). The problem is that there is just not time enough in the day to cover everyone's point of view.

You may not like that answer, but that's just the way it is

Answer 7

they are merely talking about the europeans and their perception of what they 'discovery'. Prior to Columbus the nordic seamen (vikings) also 'discovered' American, but it was not accepted by the populace. Columbus' 'discovery' brought along acceptance that the world was more than just europe -- it also opened up the beginning of globalization. Prior to Columbus the world was mostly europe, asia, africa and the middle east.

Answer 8

1 the "natives" weren't native
2 "white people" were here 1000 thousand years before Columbus
(remains found in the northwest..given to Indians because of stupid laws, and destroed by them)
3 what genocide? Are North American Indians wiped out?

Columbus is a good story that nobody needs to get a job or lose one.

Answer 9

The others were not looking for it. He was. Hence, discovery.
Genocide? How naive! If some revisionists would have their way, they would dictate that the sky is green. Think about things before you go parroting answers from low-life teachers and TV talk shows.

Answer 10

actually columbus didn't thought of discovering US. He took 80 slaves with him to discover INDIA but when he was unable to do this he was returning and he discovered Us