• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1268 months ago

    Well, Columbus himself didn’t conquer much. He established a few settlement, but the real conquering was done by others.

    More accurate comparison would be:

    Describe Hernan Cortez in one word.

    (GPT-4) Conquistador

    • candyman337
      link
      fedilink
      618 months ago

      Columbus and his men killed a lot of people brutally. He wasn’t really a conqueror, more a murderer and a monster

    • @voodooattackOP
      link
      19
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Yet they both committed atrocities (torture, murder, rape and god knows what else) and only one is being hailed as “explorer”.

      Edit: I’m not saying we should hail Genghis Khan as an explorer, I’m saying that Christopher Columbus should be deplored as a murderer and a marauder, not praised as an explorer.

      • @TheControlled
        link
        368 months ago

        Being a murderer and explorer are not mutually exclusive. If ChatGPT said “Murderer” one might presume that he was simply a local killer, captured by the law, and convicted a la Ted Bundy. Explorer is a more appropriate title for Columbus, like “Dictator” is likely more appropriate than “Murderer” for Hitler. Murderer, sadly, is too commonplace for people of their evil.

      • LinkOpensChest.wav
        link
        fedilink
        188 months ago

        For real. Name the worst serial killer you know, and Columbus was probably worse than that. It sickens me to read about it.

      • @june
        link
        English
        38 months ago

        Why do we assume ‘explorer’ has a positive moral implication?

        To me, looking through all of history, exploration has largely been a net negative to humanity. Modern day exploration isn’t terribly far off. The more we explore the ocean the more we strip it of resources. The more we explore space the more we look to exploit it for wealth.

        Explorers are enablers of worse people at best.