I will not discuss politics because this site is not about that. As a historian, my overriding principle when examining an historical period, is the context of the times. It can be historically unfair (and even dishonest) to judge a time period with today's standards for political reasons (especially). For instance:
When the Nazi's systematically attempted complete genocide of European Jewry, it was diabolically horrible in the 1940's in that time, as well as today. It is not revisionist history (which is dishonest) to say that it was horrific then as it is now.
In contrast, I had to overcome my own revisionist historical impulse to condemn the Aztecs for their culture before first contact in 1492. Aztecs did mass human sacrifices in the hope to influence the "gods". Aztecs would mostly use captured enemy soldiers to be sacrificed by the thousands atop a pyramid temple to encourage the Sun to continue its journey across the sky. One temple was dedicated with 20,000+ victims, with their hearts being carved out with obsidian knives, one after the other.
The Aztec rain god Tlaloc required the sacrifice of children to ensure sufficient rainfall for crops every year. The children were abused so that they cried on the way to their death (whipped, scratched, hurt), believing that the more they cried, the more Tlaloc would be pleased. The terrified children were sacrificed, with their little hearts being carved out. Yeah, I have told history professors that I didn't give a shyte what happened to the Aztecs and the Incas because of this (Incas had similar rituals) because they were barbaric. I was not wrong to feel the horror concerning this culture with distaste, but I was wrong in not overcoming the disgust to see the context of the time and place. The other great empire in South America, the Incas, did similar sacrifices for similar reasons. The Americas were hermetically sealed from the rest of the World for hundreds of years (maybe thousands of years), so they did these things outside of the norms of Europe/Asia/Africa in those years. Yet, many of the lesser tribes/peoples from which came the sacrificial victims, were the key. Cortes drew from these subjugated peoples for allies and along with biological ally of European disease (diseases of which Natives were totally subject), conquered the Aztecs.
To be fair, the civilized Europeans, would work enslaved natives to death by the millions (greatly aided by disease and sorrowful depression). It is good to be as objective as possible when considering historical events in their context and not judge from our vantage point using only our cultural POV, which is true when considering the founders of the United States. I could describe these things, but won't because it would get the thread locked via the discussion. CONTEXT, grasshoppers! CONTEXT!
