Mandela and Columbus: It's Complicated

So my degree says History, but really I studied the phrase “it’s complicated.” What caused The Great War? Did it make WWII inevitable? Were the European missionaries in colonial Africa a force for good or bad? Was daily life better in Athens or Sparta?

Recently, I’ve been a little overwhelmed with the response to the passing of Nelson Mandela. A lot of deifying. And a little hate. And I find it all frustrating. People are complicated. There are bad habits in heroes, and virtues inside of villains.

There is so much to admire in the life of Nelson Mandela. Honestly, there are few people who have ever been born that have influenced as many as he did. He had passion, dedication, and a singular focus on the goal of equality. It is easy for me to say that history will mark him as a force for good.  

Source

But he was just a guy. And I say that in the most respectful way possible. Because it is good to have role models and it's bad to have pedestals. He made mistakes. Shoot, he led a guerrilla group that planted bombs and killed civilians. And the reason those mistakes are important is because imperfect people are attainable role models. In effect Nelson Mandela chose to be Nelson Mandela. There was nothing supernatural about him. He was violent in his middle-age, but committed himself to peacemaking and reconciliation in the evening of his life.  It's within our capacity to have the same dedication and drive as Nelson Mandela. To be passionate and forgiving. To be eloquent and frank. And most importantly to change for the better. We can choose to be like Nelson Mandela too. We're made out of the same stuff, Mandela just did one heck of a job with it.

Similarly, Christopher Columbus wasn't the spawn of Satan. I’m a little passionate about this, so just bear with me for a  moment. Yes, Christopher Columbus did some super scumbaggy things, but  Christopher Columbus didn’t think he was a scumbag. Honestly Columbus thought he was a good, God-fearing man. And a lot of people think that makes him a bigger scumbag, but what that really makes him is a cautionary tale.

Relief of Columbus and Queen Isabella in Madrid (Source)

See, Christopher Columbus grew up on the Italian peninsula, but he wasn’t Italian because that concept hadn’t been invented yet.  He was Genoese, and he grew up inheriting a blood-feud against the Venetians (who had trashed the Genoese in a series of wars). Seriously.  The Genoese and the Venetians were dyed in the wool enemies--in the space about the size of Wyoming. These are people that look just like Columbus, have essentially the same culture as Columbus, and speak essentially the same language as Columbus.

Also, at this point in time it is legal to neglect and abuse children up until the point of death under the apprenticeship system.  The streets were filled with human excrement. The chicken for your dinner was most likely bled out in front of you. And serfdom was still a thing.  

Columbus’s sense of morality is not the same as yours. He didn’t have circle time at preschool.

So how do you know that your sense of morality is better? Most, likely, you think you’re a good person. And you probably are. But what makes you good? Is it staying true to your own spectrum of morality or is it staying true to some absolute scale of goodness? And are you held accountable for doing things you didn’t know were bad? Are the civil war surgeons in hell for killing thousands of people, carrying blood from one wounded soldier to the next?

In my personal opinion, Columbus isn’t evil. Certainly he did evil things. But he didn’t find them evil, and his mother wouldn’t have found them evil. So he wasn’t choosing to be evil.  Being evil is knowing and doing anyway. Columbus just unfortunately inherited the crappy morality of his era.

So, to sum up.

It’s complicated.